12 ms·
Live stream from plant: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fYUT36YGOh8 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fYUT36YGOh8 Automated Radiation Monitoring system: https://
by Gustomaximus 5y ago
Live stream from plant: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fYUT36YGOh8 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fYUT36YGOh8
Automated Radiation Monitoring system: https://www.npp.zp.ua/en/safety/arms https://www.npp.zp.ua/en/safety/arms
- jtbayly 5y agoThanks. So what’s the historical norm on those numbers?
- yuliyp 5y agoMost recent wayback machine sample I could find https://web.archive.org/web/20220226013028/https://www.npp.zp.ua/en/safety/arms https://web.archive.org/web/20220226013028/https://www.npp.z... shows comparable to right now
- Gare 5y ago0.1 microsieverts (uSv) per hour is normal background radiation rate. Right now in my apartment (far from Ukraine) the dose rate is 0.12 uSv/h.
- heavyset_go 5y agoIs there a map service you're using to find the radiation levels at your apartment?
- Gare 5y agoNope, it's from Geiger counter on my desk.
- dylan604 5y agoGood lord, I love the understatedness of this comment.
- ClumsyPilot 5y agoThe seem to be like £100 on amazon.
- kortilla 5y ago? It’s a Geiger counter. It’s cheaper than having an oscilloscope, which wouldn’t be “understated” either.
- deleted 5y ago[deleted]
- slimsag 5y agoCan't say historical, but 1,000 μsv/year is the annual limit / point at which increase cancer risk exists. Fukushima disaster levels were 400,000 μSv/h at peak. Short term dose of 10,000 μSv causes radiation sickness but probably not death. Beyond that it gets worse.
- mianos 5y agoI can say historically, background is 1,000-3,000 μsv a year depending where you live.
- isomel 5y agoAccording to the Linear-no-threshold model [1], any level of radiation, no matter how small, causes cancer. According to this model, the 1,000 μsv/year of normal background radiation already cause cancer for 1% of people. And any additional dose increase the risk further. [1] https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Linear_no-threshold_model https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Linear_no-threshold_model However this model is contested. And the analysis on the cancers incidence in Hiroshima and Nagasaki and Chernobyl seems to indicate that this model is flawed. The exact model is difficult to estimate because of the low number of extra cancer is lost in the noise.
- robkop 5y agoDoesn't look like radiation levels are going up at the moment, do you know how often this page is updated?
- beatthatflight 5y agocurrently says 03/04/2022 - 03:06, so putting this here for reference Edit: Then saw an update at 03:10 so it is updating
- Gare 5y agoIt's past 3 AM in Ukraine. Every couple minutes, it seems.
- ammo1662 5y agoThis type of the nuclear power plant seems to be much more safe than the type of chernobyl. Maybe it is not leaking anything now.
- SomewhatLikely 5y agoThe radiation numbers look similar to Feb 26 based on Wayback machine's last crawl.
- lumost 5y agoThe best containment domes won't survive persistent shelling. I can't conceive of a valid reason for shelling a nuclear power plant.
- hadlock 5y agoIt's an awfully effective way to distract people from focusing on defending the perimeter of whatever city they're trying to defend
- dgemm 5y agoIf they were to spring a leak then it would be impossible to hide their activity from the population at home, so my guess is that's something they would try to avoid.
- wlll 5y agoThat almost seems irellevant, even if Putin cared what people think (I don't think he does for the most part), he controls almost all of the media in the country. He can just tell people "Ukraine did it" and they can believe him or not, it doesn't really matter.
- lumost 5y agoA large ecological disaster from an open air uncontrolled nuclear power plant fire would be a European wide concern. The results could be considered a WMD.
- JumpCrisscross 5y ago> results could be considered a WMD What rubbish. This looks like Putin found a way to tactically deploy dirty nukes within the West’s red lines.
- Eduard 5y agoYeah, and here's the current meteorological data: Air temperature 0 ℃ Wind N Wind speed 0 m/s Relative humidity 0 % Atmospheric pressure 0 mm Hg ... I hope that low pressure isn't from a vacuum bomb. with the HN meme of AWS status pages reporting everything fine while AWS is down, here we have good evidence we cannot rely on this website reporting reliable data. Here is the European Commission Radiation Map: https://remap.jrc.ec.europa.eu/ https://remap.jrc.ec.europa.eu/ And here a volunteer map from Geiger counter manufacturer GQ Electronics: https://www.gmcmap.com/ https://www.gmcmap.com/
- jtsuken 5y agoThe monitoring system has been shot down on 1 Sep. Here is the statement from the Nuclear Agency in Ukraine: On March 1, 2022 at 11:40 as a result of rocket impact, the communication network of Zaporizhzhya NPP was damaged. As a result, the Automated Radiation Monitoring System (ARMS) of the Zaporizhzhya Nuclear Power Plant lost its full functionality and stopped the transmission of data to the international radiation monitoring network IRMIS. IAEA has been informed about the incident. https://www.facebook.com/people/Державна-інспекція-ядерного-регулювання-України/100064837892613/ https://www.facebook.com/people/Державна-інспекція-ядерного-...
- themodelplumber 5y ago> low pressure isn't from a vacuum bomb Do you know if these really show a significantly different pressure effect from conventional bombs? I saw a chart showing a fatter tail on the shockwave, but it wasn't really that dramatic. I'm curious because I can imagine all kinds of vacuum effects in my mind's eye, but this is also informed by a _lot_ of the now-doubtful PR-style efforts on selling these things in years past.
- arbuge 5y agoCNN's homepage currently has video of the Russian shells impacting the plant, shot from the same camera doing that live stream. Extremely unsettling.
- sobriquet9 5y agoThose look like flares, not shells. Still a fire hazard, but less destructive.
- jjtheblunt 5y agoflares? not tracer rounds mixed in with regular rounds?
- jtsuken 5y agoJust realised that the point I've made in response to a comment probably should be a level higher: Don't trust the radiation monitoring system, the actual monitoring system has been destroyed by a rocket impact three days ago. The monitoring system has been shot down on 1 Sep. Here is the statement from the Nuclear Agency in Ukraine: On March 1, 2022 at 11:40 as a result of rocket impact, the communication network of Zaporizhzhya NPP was damaged. As a result, the Automated Radiation Monitoring System (ARMS) of the Zaporizhzhya Nuclear Power Plant lost its full functionality and stopped the transmission of data to the international radiation monitoring network IRMIS. IAEA has been informed about the incident. https://www.facebook.com/people/Державна-інспекція-ядерного-регулювання-України/100064837892613/ https://www.facebook.com/people/Державна-інспекція-ядерного-...
- Nextgrid 5y agoThe link doesn't load right now (HN overload?) but I wonder, if the comms are down, shouldn't the system report "no data" as opposed to "all clear"? Why should there be an explicit warning about not trusting it when the system itself should easily be able to tell whether it's getting fresh data?
- ethbr0 5y agoMaybe they forked AWS' status page.
- Aeolun 5y agoDamn, maybe one of the sides should consider fixing that before they proceed with shooting at each other.
- ruined 5y agoshooting is one of those things that you just gotta do first. hard to deprioritize
- eyelidlessness 5y agoI can’t speak to why you’ve been downvoted, but it might be worth considering the incentives to fight aren’t the same between the “sides”. One is fighting to survive an attack by the other. It’s difficult to maintain safety measures while people are trying to kill you.