8 ms·

Suddenly increased Gamma radiation in Ukraine?

79 points by okl 5y ago

BeefWellington 5y ago
Possibly related to reports that artillery shells hit nuclear waste storage: A Ukrainian official said Russian shelling hit a radioactive waste repository and an increase in radiation levels was reported. The official spoke on condition of anonymity to discuss the sensitive matter. [1]: https://journalrecord.com/2022/02/24/ukraine-loses-control-of-chernobyl-site-increase-in-radiation-detected/ https://journalrecord.com/2022/02/24/ukraine-loses-control-o...
- skim_milk 5y ago
  Any fighting or driving around in the area could also stir up the topsoil around Chernobyl as well.
  - contingencies 5y ago
    They literally invaded through Chernobyl.
Rd6n6 5y ago
I don’t know how to read that chart. How do we know the levels increased? What did they used to be? who operates that site? What are safe levels?
- CommieBobDole 5y ago
  Each of the detectors has a detail graph of radiation over time if you click on it - a lot of them show a many-fold increase in radiation in the last few hours. Particularly concerning are some near the reactor building itself that went to a fairly high reading very quickly (65500 nSv/h in one case, which is likely offscale high) and then stopped reporting at 21:50 local time (it's currently 03:30). 65500 nSv/h is definitely not 'you're going to die right now' radiation levels, but it's definitely getting into the territory of stuff you don't want stand around in for too long. If I've done the math right, I think that's about three times the allowed annual exposure for radiation workers every hour. Edit: I think I didn't do the math right and am off by 1000x. 65500 nSv/h is like three chest x-rays an hour. Which is still not good, but would take quite a bit longer to get really dangerous.
  - freemint 5y ago
    Note that 65500 = round(typemax(UInt16)/100)*100 and no higher value exists on the map it might actually be worse how much we can't tell though.
    - hirenj 5y ago
      What a grim coincidence if this type of saturation error pops up again in relation to Chernobyl.
      - dTal 5y ago
        Is it a coincidence? Or are dosimeters commonly calibrated for a maximum reading of "not great, not terrible" for best sensitivity in the range they're likely to be needed for? This maximum reading is 50 times less than the famous "3.6 Roentgens".
    - dTal 5y ago
      Nice use of Julia to communicate with humans. However, since you've chosen to communicate through code, strictly speaking it ought to be '==' :p
      - freemint 5y ago
        Yes, I write Julia but I didn't use Julia on purpose. It just feels natural syntax, which I guess is an compliment to Julia.
  - Rd6n6 5y ago
    Very helpful, thanks!
  - deleted 5y ago
    [deleted]
- Thetawaves 5y ago
  Click on one of the sensors to see the trend.
- Pinegulf 5y ago
  Safe when it comes to radiation is tricky question. Since potential damage is random you might get cancer from first gamma-ray or you might survive nuclear fallout. (www.en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Daigo_Fukury%C5%AB_Maru) However, in practice yearly 'safe' limit for civilian population is 20 mSv (ref: https://www.stuklex.fi/en/ohje/ST7-2 https://www.stuklex.fi/en/ohje/ST7-2) The map is nSv /h. Lets take dot with 2000 nSv/h. In order to obtain yearly limit you need to hang around for 10 hours. Whereas 65000 area would be around ~20 minutes. Please bear in mind that this is gross simplification.
  - rkwasny 5y ago
    You are off by 1000x: 2000 nSv/h * 10 hours = 20 μSv (microsieverts) = 0.02 mSv (millisieverts)
simne 5y ago
Looks like information war. Russians does not have enough military to win war with Ukraine, so trying to convince Ukrainians, that something terrible happen. And sure, for this they captured Chernobyl site and cut communications, so now could simulate anything. At the moment, those attacks have only one real win - mobile networks where overloaded, so become unusable, and nothing more.
- freemint 5y ago
  Well it would be odd the an Ukrainian ministry would relay such information then https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=30461491 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=30461491
  - deleted 5y ago
    [deleted]
  - marginalia_nu 5y ago
    To be fair, you really shouldn't trust any information coming out of a warzone, from any source.
rurban 5y ago
So our German news had an expert, explaining that the sarcophagus is not damaged. Just that the heavy rolling tanks in the neighborhood stirred up that much contaminated soil, that the sensors fluctuated for some short time. Just a short local peak.

79 points by okl 5y ago

Possibly related to reports that artillery shells hit nuclear waste storage: A Ukrainian official said Russian shelling hit a radioactive waste repository and an increase in radiation levels was reported. The official spoke on condition of anonymity to discuss the sensitive matter. [1]: https://journalrecord.com/2022/02/24/ukraine-loses-control-of-chernobyl-site-increase-in-radiation-detected/ https://journalrecord.com/2022/02/24/ukraine-loses-control-o...

skim_milk 5y ago
Any fighting or driving around in the area could also stir up the topsoil around Chernobyl as well.
- contingencies 5y ago
  They literally invaded through Chernobyl.

Rd6n6 5y ago

I don’t know how to read that chart. How do we know the levels increased? What did they used to be? who operates that site? What are safe levels?

CommieBobDole 5y ago
Each of the detectors has a detail graph of radiation over time if you click on it - a lot of them show a many-fold increase in radiation in the last few hours. Particularly concerning are some near the reactor building itself that went to a fairly high reading very quickly (65500 nSv/h in one case, which is likely offscale high) and then stopped reporting at 21:50 local time (it's currently 03:30). 65500 nSv/h is definitely not 'you're going to die right now' radiation levels, but it's definitely getting into the territory of stuff you don't want stand around in for too long. If I've done the math right, I think that's about three times the allowed annual exposure for radiation workers every hour. Edit: I think I didn't do the math right and am off by 1000x. 65500 nSv/h is like three chest x-rays an hour. Which is still not good, but would take quite a bit longer to get really dangerous.
- freemint 5y ago
  Note that 65500 = round(typemax(UInt16)/100)*100 and no higher value exists on the map it might actually be worse how much we can't tell though.
  - hirenj 5y ago
    What a grim coincidence if this type of saturation error pops up again in relation to Chernobyl.
    - dTal 5y ago
      Is it a coincidence? Or are dosimeters commonly calibrated for a maximum reading of "not great, not terrible" for best sensitivity in the range they're likely to be needed for? This maximum reading is 50 times less than the famous "3.6 Roentgens".
  - dTal 5y ago
    Nice use of Julia to communicate with humans. However, since you've chosen to communicate through code, strictly speaking it ought to be '==' :p
    - freemint 5y ago
      Yes, I write Julia but I didn't use Julia on purpose. It just feels natural syntax, which I guess is an compliment to Julia.
- Rd6n6 5y ago
  Very helpful, thanks!
- deleted 5y ago
  [deleted]
Thetawaves 5y ago
Click on one of the sensors to see the trend.
Pinegulf 5y ago
Safe when it comes to radiation is tricky question. Since potential damage is random you might get cancer from first gamma-ray or you might survive nuclear fallout. (www.en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Daigo_Fukury%C5%AB_Maru) However, in practice yearly 'safe' limit for civilian population is 20 mSv (ref: https://www.stuklex.fi/en/ohje/ST7-2 https://www.stuklex.fi/en/ohje/ST7-2) The map is nSv /h. Lets take dot with 2000 nSv/h. In order to obtain yearly limit you need to hang around for 10 hours. Whereas 65000 area would be around ~20 minutes. Please bear in mind that this is gross simplification.
- rkwasny 5y ago
  You are off by 1000x: 2000 nSv/h * 10 hours = 20 μSv (microsieverts) = 0.02 mSv (millisieverts)

simne 5y ago

Looks like information war. Russians does not have enough military to win war with Ukraine, so trying to convince Ukrainians, that something terrible happen. And sure, for this they captured Chernobyl site and cut communications, so now could simulate anything. At the moment, those attacks have only one real win - mobile networks where overloaded, so become unusable, and nothing more.

freemint 5y ago
Well it would be odd the an Ukrainian ministry would relay such information then https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=30461491 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=30461491
- deleted 5y ago
  [deleted]
- marginalia_nu 5y ago
  To be fair, you really shouldn't trust any information coming out of a warzone, from any source.

rurban 5y ago

So our German news had an expert, explaining that the sarcophagus is not damaged. Just that the heavy rolling tanks in the neighborhood stirred up that much contaminated soil, that the sensors fluctuated for some short time. Just a short local peak.