4 ms·

The first-responders received severe and lethal doses. The surrounding population was exposed to large amounts of I-131, this resulted in an increase in thyroid

The first-responders received severe and lethal doses. The surrounding population was exposed to large amounts of I-131, this resulted in an increase in thyroid cancer. https://academic.oup.com/jcem/article/98/7/3039/2537246 https://academic.oup.com/jcem/article/98/7/3039/2537246 Estimates vary widely and are controversial but somewhere in the range of 4k deaths are believed to be a result of the disaster. That estimate is from esteemed professionals in the respective sciences of Radiobiology and Biostatistics. Other estimates from Green Peace, etc range from 25-250k for the most serious nuclear disaster, ever. Contrast this to WHO estimates of 3M deaths per year due to fossil fuels, seriously bananas.

notahacker 8y ago
The relatively low number of casualties owes a lot to sacrifices made in a cleanup operation which also abandoned an area of land the size of Luxembourg and resettled all the people who lived there. And the casualty numbers rise if you start using the noisier estimates used to estimate fuel fossil deaths. Of course, fossil fuels have killed more people, but if we used nuclear power with the same ubiquitousness and slapdash approach we've used fossil fuels, I'm not sure any of us would be alive today....
- sandwall 8y ago
  That's a very good point. We're discussing massive differences in the number of power plants. It would be beneficial to see the risk normalized.
- pard68 8y ago
  > fossil fuel From explosions? Drinking? Sitting near it? Got a source?
  - sandwall 8y ago
    From air pollution due to the burning of fossil fuels; World Health Organization (WHO): https://www.who.int/phe/health_topics/outdoorair/databases/en/ https://www.who.int/phe/health_topics/outdoorair/databases/e... To be fair, estimates are that only 80% of air pollution is due to the burning of fossil fuels. So, give or take a million, still pretty intense.
ams6110 8y ago
One thing I always wondered about is that the other reactor at Chernobyl was kept in operation for quite some time after this accident. How much radiation exposure did the operators and workers of that reactor receive?
- chupasaurus 8y ago
  Only 3rd and 5th (5 and 6 were at the last stage of construction but were cancelled) reactors had increased levels of radiation after the disaster. After contamination, 3rd was reactivated in 1987. 2nd block was stopped in 1991 after a case of fire, 1st block was stopped in 1996, 3rd was stopped in 2000.
- darkpuma 8y ago
  They totally stripped the topsoil in areas where workers for the other reactors would be. They certainly still got irradiated, but considering the nature of the circumstances it was pretty safe. The real hotspots in the region are the places they dumped that top soil and other debris.

notahacker 8y ago

The relatively low number of casualties owes a lot to sacrifices made in a cleanup operation which also abandoned an area of land the size of Luxembourg and resettled all the people who lived there. And the casualty numbers rise if you start using the noisier estimates used to estimate fuel fossil deaths. Of course, fossil fuels have killed more people, but if we used nuclear power with the same ubiquitousness and slapdash approach we've used fossil fuels, I'm not sure any of us would be alive today....

sandwall 8y ago
That's a very good point. We're discussing massive differences in the number of power plants. It would be beneficial to see the risk normalized.
pard68 8y ago
> fossil fuel From explosions? Drinking? Sitting near it? Got a source?
- sandwall 8y ago
  From air pollution due to the burning of fossil fuels; World Health Organization (WHO): https://www.who.int/phe/health_topics/outdoorair/databases/en/ https://www.who.int/phe/health_topics/outdoorair/databases/e... To be fair, estimates are that only 80% of air pollution is due to the burning of fossil fuels. So, give or take a million, still pretty intense.

ams6110 8y ago

One thing I always wondered about is that the other reactor at Chernobyl was kept in operation for quite some time after this accident. How much radiation exposure did the operators and workers of that reactor receive?

chupasaurus 8y ago
Only 3rd and 5th (5 and 6 were at the last stage of construction but were cancelled) reactors had increased levels of radiation after the disaster. After contamination, 3rd was reactivated in 1987. 2nd block was stopped in 1991 after a case of fire, 1st block was stopped in 1996, 3rd was stopped in 2000.
darkpuma 8y ago
They totally stripped the topsoil in areas where workers for the other reactors would be. They certainly still got irradiated, but considering the nature of the circumstances it was pretty safe. The real hotspots in the region are the places they dumped that top soil and other debris.