3 ms·
I can't find a source for it now, but I remember reading about an incident at Ignalia-1 in Lithuania, that foresaw the design issues that caused the Chenobyl in
by lucaspiller 10y ago
I can't find a source for it now, but I remember reading about an incident at Ignalia-1 in Lithuania, that foresaw the design issues that caused the Chenobyl incident a few years before. Apparently it was reported, but the Soviet leadership decided not to do anything about it and keep it secret.
Even though Ignalia-2 had the most advanced safety features of any RBMK reactor, a condition of Lithuania's EU membership was the plant be shutdown. As such the Baltic states have been very dependant on Russia for energy since the shutdown.
Belarus is in the process of building a plant on the Lithuanian border. Although it's PWR and has many safety features RBMK didn't have, thanks to politics the lack of transparency over safety issues is rather concerning:
https://www.theguardian.com/world/2016/aug/09/belarus-under-fire-for-dangerous-errors-at-nuclear-plant https://www.theguardian.com/world/2016/aug/09/belarus-under-...
- m_mueller 10y agoSoviet administration is kind of hard to wrap my head around. You'd think that (1) no financial incentives (ideally) and (2) accountability based on 'see you in the Gulag' if something goes wrong, would lead to people being more transparent about risks - but it seems the opposite happened! Is it because those who have to bear the risks (e.g. RBMK on-site engineers) aren't the same who'd pass on information through the administrative chain? Was the main thing missing free information flow? Could communism work if all economic/infrastructure/administration units would just be forced to publish all their data in raw form, so other people could analyse it and make better decisions?