Chernobyl NPP visit radiation question

  • Context: Chernobyl 
  • Thread starter Thread starter girts
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Chernobyl Radiation
Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion revolves around the safety and radiation exposure associated with visiting the Chernobyl Nuclear Power Plant (NPP) for a dosimetry learning experience. Participants explore the risks of radiation, the necessity of protective equipment, and the general conditions of the site, including the status of radioactive isotopes.

Discussion Character

  • Exploratory
  • Technical explanation
  • Debate/contested

Main Points Raised

  • One participant expresses concern about the safety of entering the Chernobyl NPP, particularly regarding inhalation of dust that may contain alpha emitters, while suggesting that gamma radiation levels may not pose significant harm for short visits.
  • Another participant questions whether the visit is official and emphasizes the importance of guidance from plant representatives, noting that the area is still in use.
  • A participant clarifies that their visit is official and seeks scientific insight beyond what is provided by on-site personnel, acknowledging that while the workers are knowledgeable, they may not have specialized expertise in particle or nuclear physics.
  • One reply suggests that the site is divided into zones with specific safety rules, indicating that necessary precautions will be taken and that commonly accessed areas are well cleaned.
  • Concerns are raised about the potential for higher radiation exposure during travel to the site compared to the visit itself, with a suggestion to adhere to safety rules and seek clarification when needed.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants express differing views on the safety of visiting the Chernobyl NPP, with some emphasizing the need for caution and others suggesting that safety measures will adequately protect visitors. There is no consensus on the specific risks or the necessity of protective equipment.

Contextual Notes

The discussion highlights uncertainties regarding the levels of radiation exposure, the effectiveness of protective measures, and the current state of radioactive materials at the site. Participants acknowledge the complexity of the situation and the various factors that influence safety.

girts
Messages
185
Reaction score
22
Hi, this has been probably asked a few times here but let me do it again,Since I'm planning to go to Chernobyl NPP for a "hands on" dosimetry learning experience and also for some adventure, I was wondering how safe or should I rather say necessary it would be to go inside the plant itself? Ofcourse I don't mean the sealed off 4th reactor but into the remaining plant and in any of the other reactors that were shut down in a preplanned way.

As far as I talked with one retired engineer , with him we came to the conclusion that one should only be careful to avoid any dust that might contain alpha emitters from inhaling otherwise for a short while say a day or two the gamma background wouldn't do any harm even at the levels present both in the zone and the plant itself.
So because the plant is in a slow decommissioning process I guess we would be wise to wear respirators inside as the dismantling of stuff probably creates some dust that might not be good to breathe in correct?
As for the zone I assume respirators are not needed anymore in general because over the past 31 years rain and natural processes have probably buried most of the contaminated dust from the reactor inside the soil ?
Since Chernobyl (both the destroyed reactors and also the working ones) have ended active energy production for quite some years now I assume that most of the powerful short lived isotopes have already decayed to a negligible level and apart from inhaling dust the radioactivity coming from outside is mostly long lived isotope emitted gamma radiation , like that from CS137 (even though first half life is already over )
What about neutron radiation from decay, I sure don't know all the radioactive isotopes that still emit neutron radiation after a given amount of time but in general?

Oh just by the way, I realize that this question is very hard to answer due to the many variables involved but is there an approximate level of absorbed dose per given amount of time which a human can feel in terms of being tired or feeling a little weak or any other effects (excluding the placebo scare or other self induced feelings) , or do these effects only happen when life threatening levels of ionizing radiation are absorbed like in the case of the first responders of the 1986 accident?
 
Engineering news on Phys.org
girts said:
Since I'm planning to go to Chernobyl NPP for a "hands on" dosimetry learning experience and also for some adventure,
It is not clear that it'll be some private touristic adventure, or is it official plant visit?
As I know the area of the former NPPs is still in daily use, so if it is not official, then forget about visiting.
If it is official then you can ask for guidance from your contacts there: they should be able to give you adequate answer according to the planned tour.
 
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: russ_watters
Ofcourse it is official how else? Yes sure there are about 1500 something people working there on the deccomissioning etc daily, Yes I am doing the talks with the representatives etc, but i wanted a bit of scientific insight beyond what i already know , make no mistake the folks on site are not dumb but their also not particle or nuclear physicists atleast not most of them so before i meet one there i wanted to prepare
 
No real need to prepare. Such workplaces are usually divided to zones with rules specific to the zones. Everything necessary will be provided, according to the overprotective safety rules relevant to your visit plan.
On top of that, the usually accessed places are already well cleaned up.

You will get higher dose during your flight there than during your actual visit. Just keep the rules and ask if something is not clear.
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 20 ·
Replies
20
Views
3K
  • · Replies 23 ·
Replies
23
Views
5K
  • · Replies 55 ·
2
Replies
55
Views
344K
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 16 ·
Replies
16
Views
3K
  • · Replies 0 ·
Replies
0
Views
1K
  • · Replies 17 ·
Replies
17
Views
8K
  • · Replies 13 ·
Replies
13
Views
2K
  • · Replies 83 ·
3
Replies
83
Views
18K
  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
3K