Radioactive timebomb in Russian nuclear dump that could threaten Europe?

AI Thread Summary
The discussion centers on concerns regarding 20,000 discarded uranium fuel rods stored in the Arctic Circle, which are reportedly corroding and could potentially lead to a catastrophic event similar to the Chernobyl disaster. The article referenced claims that a hydrogen explosion could occur, although it admits that an actual detonation is unlikely. The environmental implications of a leak are highlighted, suggesting that it would create an uninhabitable area akin to Chernobyl. However, skepticism is expressed about the accuracy of casualty figures related to Chernobyl, with references to a 2005 report from the IAEA and WHO that attributes fewer than 50 direct deaths to the disaster and estimates around 4,000 potential cancer deaths among the most exposed individuals. The discussion emphasizes the need to address the environmental hazards posed by old Soviet nuclear waste while maintaining a balanced perspective on the associated risks.
Shukie
Messages
91
Reaction score
0
I just read the following article, from 2007:

20,000 discarded uranium fuel rods stored in the Arctic Circle are corroding. The possible result? Detonation of a massive radioactive bomb experts say could rival the 1986 Chernobyl disaster.

Read more: http://www.belfasttelegraph.co.uk/n...-threatens-europe-14465525.html#ixzz0l1Oedn5S

I find that pretty worrying, but oddly enough, there is hardly any other information to be found on this subject. The only other articles I can find link back to this one, so I wonder, is this just sensationalist reporting or is there some truth to this?
 
Physics news on Phys.org
It can't explode (the article admits this after the headline), the are talking about a hydrogen explosion, from metal which is corroded enough to allow seawater in but is apparently strong enough to allow massive amounts of high pressure hydrogen and oxygen to form.

The environmental effects, which most the article are about, are the exact opposite - a leak of radionuclides would create a massive environmental reserve where nobody wanted to hunt or fish - just like Chernobyl.
 
Also, I'm pretty sure the scientific consensus does not include the conclusion that Chernobyl killed 100,000 people.
The 2005 report prepared by the Chernobyl Forum, led by the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) and World Health Organization (WHO), attributed "fewer than 50" direct deaths (including nine children with thyroid cancer) and estimated that there may be 4,000 additional cancer deaths over time among the approximately 600,000 most highly exposed people.[1][5]
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chernobyl_disaster

The relecs of the old Soviet Union really are an environmental disaster and need to be dealt with, but we should keep the risk in perspective.
 
russ_watters said:
Also, I'm pretty sure the scientific consensus does not include the conclusion that Chernobyl killed 100,000 people
These sort of figures are always suspect, they are extending an outdoors smoking ban here to include beaches and wilderness - the justification is the claim passive smoking is the second biggest killer. The reasoning being that all cancers in non-smokers must be due to second-hand smoke!
 
In other news; Russians are evil, and Al Gore has claimed he invented the toaster oven.
 
In Soviet Russia, nuclear bomb explodes you.
 
One word: Telegraph.
 
The hundreds of thousands deaths in Chernobyl meme (and variations) came from taking the total number of deaths in Kiev Oblast for some number of years after the disaster and attributing all of it to Chernobyl.
 

Hot Threads

Recent Insights

Back
Top