3 ms·
> “short-term increase in radiation” Guess they are lying like in 1986.
by paulcarroty 7y ago
> “short-term increase in radiation”
Guess they are lying like in 1986.
- Grazester 7y ago"...local authorities in Severodvinsk released a statement Thursday that said there was a radiation spike following the blast. That statement has since been deleted from the official website." https://www.cnn.com/2019/08/10/europe/russia-jet-propulsion-blast-radiation-intl/index.html https://www.cnn.com/2019/08/10/europe/russia-jet-propulsion-... They are already trying cover it up.
- cjblomqvist 7y agoWell, the big difference now is that there aren't lots of radiation from external readings, so I doubt there's a big disaster such as Chernobyl. We also have better instruments nowadays. Of course, different winds could mean it won't be picked up by Northern Europe like last time.
- SECProto 7y agoFor comparison, here [1] is a wiki article on a different recent radioactive release from Russia (of Ruthenium-106). International parties detected it very quickly, but it took a fair time to trace it back to it's probable source at the Mayak facility. This current event seems in some ways more serious, in other ways less, but a bit better in terms of the transparency in the Russian governmental response (they've at least acknowledged it). [2] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Airborne_radioactivity_increase_in_Europe_in_autumn_2017 https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Airborne_radioactivity_increas...