5 ms·

It's unfortunate that people still point to Chernobyl as why we should never go back to nuclear power ever again.

pvaldes 7y ago
Taking in mind that the human population living in the area has sinked, and that Prypiat has been a ghost town eating money for 33 years, I can understand the general lack of enthusiasm for repeating the Chernobyl experience at home.
- dkarl 7y ago
  How many Chernobyls would it take to equal the damage that is already inevitable from global warming? That's a serious question. It can be answered by comparing number of deaths, number of people displaced, or economic and political disruption, but no matter how you calculate the answer, the result is that Chernobyl is a tiny event by comparison.
- TeMPOraL 7y ago
  Given the extent of tourism into the exclusion zone (myself visiting Prypiat in 2017), I wouldn't be surprised if the town itself actually made money and if (excluding opportunity cost and the costs of Sarcophagus) the whole Zone was net-profitable now.
  - pvaldes 7y ago
    Well, If you exclude costs in your formula, all is benefit. This is true. Lets talk about the costs. The economic damage caused by Chernobyl in 30 years is estimated in 235 Billion of dollars. Source Belarus Foreign Ministry: http://chernobyl.undp.org/russian/docs/belarus_23_anniversary.pdf http://chernobyl.undp.org/russian/docs/belarus_23_anniversar... This includes destroying trust in Ukrainian agriculture for 30 years and removing also a good chunk of lands suitable for agriculture in a country previously called "The Breadbasket of Europe (and soviet countries)". I would expect also huge maintenance bills for a long time. The cost of the new sarcophagous and auxiliary buildings is estimated in 2.3 Billion dollars extra. Plus increase of health services and cancer surveillance checks in nations affected by the disaster (like Ukranie, Belarus or Russia, but also Polland or Germany). Belarus registered a x40 increase in children's thyroid cancers since the accident. Ukraine and Belarus still need to spend more than 5% of its annual budget in benefit payments to compensate 7 million people for the accident. In whole, Belarus pays around $1 million at day for Chernobyl Plus the cost of vigillance of the restricted area to avoid garbage collectors (if not, mafias could load trucks with free metal scraps and sell it in Moscow, Berlin or Paris for example), or keeping unauthorized adventurers from doing stupid things. Plus the cost of the damaged nuclear central itself that lose a quarter of its planned energy production for 15 years and is not producing any energy since the year 2000; only debts. Taking all of this in mind, As thematic park and bussiness, Chernobyl is a ruinous one. Is a nice continental nature park, the first in the world, but apart of that is a ruinous adventure.

Taking in mind that the human population living in the area has sinked, and that Prypiat has been a ghost town eating money for 33 years, I can understand the general lack of enthusiasm for repeating the Chernobyl experience at home.

dkarl 7y ago
How many Chernobyls would it take to equal the damage that is already inevitable from global warming? That's a serious question. It can be answered by comparing number of deaths, number of people displaced, or economic and political disruption, but no matter how you calculate the answer, the result is that Chernobyl is a tiny event by comparison.
TeMPOraL 7y ago
Given the extent of tourism into the exclusion zone (myself visiting Prypiat in 2017), I wouldn't be surprised if the town itself actually made money and if (excluding opportunity cost and the costs of Sarcophagus) the whole Zone was net-profitable now.
- pvaldes 7y ago
  Well, If you exclude costs in your formula, all is benefit. This is true. Lets talk about the costs. The economic damage caused by Chernobyl in 30 years is estimated in 235 Billion of dollars. Source Belarus Foreign Ministry: http://chernobyl.undp.org/russian/docs/belarus_23_anniversary.pdf http://chernobyl.undp.org/russian/docs/belarus_23_anniversar... This includes destroying trust in Ukrainian agriculture for 30 years and removing also a good chunk of lands suitable for agriculture in a country previously called "The Breadbasket of Europe (and soviet countries)". I would expect also huge maintenance bills for a long time. The cost of the new sarcophagous and auxiliary buildings is estimated in 2.3 Billion dollars extra. Plus increase of health services and cancer surveillance checks in nations affected by the disaster (like Ukranie, Belarus or Russia, but also Polland or Germany). Belarus registered a x40 increase in children's thyroid cancers since the accident. Ukraine and Belarus still need to spend more than 5% of its annual budget in benefit payments to compensate 7 million people for the accident. In whole, Belarus pays around $1 million at day for Chernobyl Plus the cost of vigillance of the restricted area to avoid garbage collectors (if not, mafias could load trucks with free metal scraps and sell it in Moscow, Berlin or Paris for example), or keeping unauthorized adventurers from doing stupid things. Plus the cost of the damaged nuclear central itself that lose a quarter of its planned energy production for 15 years and is not producing any energy since the year 2000; only debts. Taking all of this in mind, As thematic park and bussiness, Chernobyl is a ruinous one. Is a nice continental nature park, the first in the world, but apart of that is a ruinous adventure.