4 ms·

my previous 2c : http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=2324723 http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=2324723 Read more about Chernobyl and nuclear technology and y

my previous 2c : http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=2324723 http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=2324723 Read more about Chernobyl and nuclear technology and you'd be able to see yourself where similarity is and where isn't.

mseebach 16y ago
At Fukushima, the core reaction is shut down, all activity since seconds after the quake are secondary. This is bad enough, but it's fundamentally different from Chernobyl, where the core melted down with the control rods only 1/3 inserted.
- marshray 16y ago
  It's fundamentally different to a nuclear engineer, but we still face an uncertain potential of fire, explosion, and radioactive contamination. To any of the thousands who are evacuating, especially farmers, it probably seems like a distinction without a difference at this point.
  - mseebach 16y ago
    And striving for accuracy and consulting domain experts is a bad thing since when? And if significant technological differences doesn't interest you, here's a political one: People have actually been evacuated, even though the Japanese government claimed no risk at the time of doing so. Even if these people lose their homes and farms, and no-one can return to the region for 50 years, they still have their lives and health.
    - marshray 16y ago
      Don't be ridiculous, I never said either accuracy or experts were a bad thing. I've been watching the translated coverage on NHK World from their site and ustream since the beginning. This coverage seems be 30 minutes or more ahead of other English media. The Japanese government has warned since the early hours of the possibility of the release of "radioactive gases" from the pressure release. The elements in that gas were said to have very short half-lives and not pose a risk to population. On the other hand, it blew up the reactor building. (According to Wikipedia they tried to hold it in the building to let it decay before releasing it to the atmosphere.) Since then the officials have been warning about possibility of release of "radioactive substances".

mseebach 16y ago

At Fukushima, the core reaction is shut down, all activity since seconds after the quake are secondary. This is bad enough, but it's fundamentally different from Chernobyl, where the core melted down with the control rods only 1/3 inserted.

marshray 16y ago
It's fundamentally different to a nuclear engineer, but we still face an uncertain potential of fire, explosion, and radioactive contamination. To any of the thousands who are evacuating, especially farmers, it probably seems like a distinction without a difference at this point.
- mseebach 16y ago
  And striving for accuracy and consulting domain experts is a bad thing since when? And if significant technological differences doesn't interest you, here's a political one: People have actually been evacuated, even though the Japanese government claimed no risk at the time of doing so. Even if these people lose their homes and farms, and no-one can return to the region for 50 years, they still have their lives and health.
  - marshray 16y ago
    Don't be ridiculous, I never said either accuracy or experts were a bad thing. I've been watching the translated coverage on NHK World from their site and ustream since the beginning. This coverage seems be 30 minutes or more ahead of other English media. The Japanese government has warned since the early hours of the possibility of the release of "radioactive gases" from the pressure release. The elements in that gas were said to have very short half-lives and not pose a risk to population. On the other hand, it blew up the reactor building. (According to Wikipedia they tried to hold it in the building to let it decay before releasing it to the atmosphere.) Since then the officials have been warning about possibility of release of "radioactive substances".