#INSAG-7

[teeth--thief]

Hopefully not flooding your inbox too much, yes? I intend to read the INSAG-7, whether online or in incremental printings. Notes? Thoughts? Forewarnings? Thank you.

-R

Hi R! Sure, let's get into INSAG-7! And don't you worry about flooding my inbox - it gives me a purpose :D and I get to look more into things (because I'd rather chop off my left hand than half-ass a reply, in case it's incorrect)! And I can finally be like all those popular people when I'm on the bus. Except they're texting their many friends and I'm typing up Chernobyl related posts... hmm...

Obviously, it is the "updated" version of the report made by IAEA - INSAG-1 (the newer one is called INSAG-7 because it was released 7 years later. Or at least that's why I think it's called that). It certainly got a WHOLE LOT better, lacking the needlessly harsh and untrue criticisms of the operators as well as most of the official government narrative the first one was mainly based on. That said, it's certainly not without its faults.

The thing is, some of these faults are faults because we just don't quite know everything. It's pretty odd, you'd think stuff like this could be possible to figure out and then... and then you don't know. And quite possibly will never know. There are certain assumptions made by the authors of INSAG-7, same as in any other scientific writing about the disaster.

There is an article written back in 1995 by A.S. Dyatlov himself (am I starting a Dyatlov cult? Why do I ALWAYS mention him?) this report available here. Now, you can think whatever you want about him but he was an expert in the field and he stood firm with his defence of the workers when so many others failed to do so. All in all, I'd consider him a credible source.

If you'd like to see a bit more of INSAG-7 "in practice", then I'd recommend the more technical videos from That Chernobyl Guy, such as this one about the control rods and this one about the coefficients. He references certain parts of INSAG-7 in both (and in many other videos), either as a source to back up a certain claim or to say that this or that may actually be wrong.

#asker: r anon #file: special interest: chernobyl #INSAG-7 #chornobyl #26th april 1986 #nuclear disaster #чернобыль #chernobyl #nuclear energy #file: ask!

[peacefulatom]

Hi.  This is a  side blog  for @atomshchik; not that this one will be used less (actually, the opposite), but that this one is not at all similar. A parallel, or adjacent  blog,  if  you  would.   As  always,  you  can call me  Rodion or Byrd, and the pronouns are he and him.  This  blog  will be used for commentary on my life,  what I’m reading,  as well as anything else  worthy  of  reporting.   Dog   photos   might  be posted  as  well.   Maybe   humor,   if   you’re   lucky…

As for asks: please feel free! Especially if about Chernobyl or RBMK-1000 type reactors. Please.

   ━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━

To obtain. >75%. Read. Reading. <50%. In hand.

The Russians.   Midnight in Chernobyl.   INSAG-7. INSAG-1.            Foma   Gordeyev.          The   Manchurian Candidate.    More, if I remember to add them all.

#Updated: #April 9th 2024.

[sciencetalker]

The Chernobyl nuclear accident took place on April 26, 1986, at reactor no. 4 of the Chernobyl Nuclear Power Plant of the Soviet Union, which is currently located in the territory of Ukraine. Within four months, radiation and heat burns killed 28 firefighters who rushed to the scene of the accident and an additional 19 deaths were reported by 2004. In addition, the health of hundreds of thousands of people is estimated to have been affected by the radioactive environment. . Cancer rates increased by more than 15% in the exposed populations, with thousands of cancer and leukemia deaths linked to the accident.

The Chernobyl accident was caused by a series of unforeseen manipulations and errors, and is largely due to design defects in the RBMK-1000 reactor used by the plant.

According to the International Atomic Energy Agency reassessment of the accident in 1992 (INSAG-7), the following factors may have caused the Chernobyl Nuclear Accident:

The reactor had a dangerously large positive vacuum factor. The vacuum coefficient expresses the way the reactor behaves when steam bubbles form in the cooling water inside. Most reactors have a negative vacuum factor, but toner reactors - like the Chernobyl one - have a positive one.

The most important mistake is to use toner at the end of the control bars. With this design, when the rods are lowered from the maximum possible position, their reactor power increases for a few seconds. Reactor operators were unaware of this behavior

The design of the RBMK-1000 reactors had other shortcomings and defects, and did not comply with acceptable safety standards for nuclear reactors.The Chernobyl Nuclear Power Plant is located in the now-abandoned town of Pripyat (Ukrainian: При́п'ять) in Ukraine. (Also referred to as Ghost Town)

#chernobyl #history

[informarbem]

O acidente aconteceu durante a realização de um teste de segurança ao reator nuclear da unidade 4 da central de energia de Chernobyl. Duas explosões deixaram o núcleo a céu aberto, em chamas e a emitir radioatividade durante dias. Recorde o que aconteceu a 26 de abril de 1986.

Há 35 anos, duas explosões destruíram o núcleo da unidade 4 da central de energia nuclear de Chernobyl, situada perto da fronteira norte da Ucrânia. O acidente aconteceu à 01:24 do dia 26 de abril de 1986. A combinação entre falhas no design do núcleo, uma política de segurança deficitária e a falta de conhecimento sobre o reator culminaram naquele que ainda hoje é considerado o maior acidente da história da energia nuclear.

Para contar a história desde o início, temos de recuar à madrugada do dia anterior. Na agenda do dia 25 de abril de 1986 estava marcada uma paragem para manutenção da unidade 4 da central de energia nuclear de Chernobyl. Ao mesmo tempo, e aproveitando a diminuição da potência do núcleo que iria acontecer nesse dia, estava também prevista a realização de um teste de segurança ao sistema de refrigeração de emergência do reator.

Sabe-se agora que o modelo do reator nuclear utilizado na central de Chernobyl, os reatores RBMK, apresentava um conjunto limitações no seu design. Na altura já tinham sido identificadas algumas, como é o caso de uma falha no funcionamento do sistema de refrigeração de emergência: as bombas que expeliam água para o núcleo eram alimentadas com a energia proveniente de geradores a combustível, que demoravam cerca de 1 minuto a atingir a potência necessária para que estas começassem a trabalhar. Ou seja, durante esse minuto, a contar da desativação do processo, o núcleo continuava a emitir calor.

Para preencher essa lacuna de tempo, os especialistas da época teorizaram que a eletricidade produzida pelo movimento da turbina até à paragem total poderia substituir os geradores durante o período em falta. Embora houvesse fundamento teórico, a prática não apresentava bons resultados: foram realizados três testes anteriormente e todos falharam. O teste agendado para o dia do acidente seria o quarto.

O exercício de segurança estava marcado para as 14:15 e teria acontecido durante o turno do dia, onde os operadores tinham sido instruídos e preparados para o que se iria passar. No entanto, aconteceu um imprevisto. A central elétrica de Kiev, capital da Ucrânia, pediu a Chernobyl que adiasse a paragem do reator, porque tinha havido um problema numa outra central elétrica e era preciso garantir eletricidade às populações no início da noite. Este adiamento é crucial na história de Chernobyl.

A permissão da central elétrica de Kiev para prosseguir só chegou às 23:04 e o teste só foi iniciado à 1:23, precisamente 1 minuto antes das explosões. É importante lembrar que, durante todo o dia, a unidade 4 da central elétrica esteve a funcionar com o reator a 50% da sua capacidade.

Na hora de realizar o teste, estava a operar o turno da noite, que não tinha recebido qualquer formação para o que iria acontecer. Na sala de operações estavam Anatoly Dyatlov, engenheiro-chefe da central de Chernobyl, Aleksandr Akimov, chefe do turno da noite, e Leonid Toptunov, operador responsável pelo reator. Akimov e Toptunov morreram alguns dias depois do acidente.

A origem das explosões tem vindo a ser analisada ao longo dos anos e, ainda hoje, não se sabe com certeza o que causou a destruição do núcleo da central de Chernobyl. O relatório INSAG-7 (sigla para International Nuclear Safety Advisor Group), considera que o acidente ocorreu devido à conjugação de “características físicas específicas do reator; recursos específicos do design dos elementos do controlo do reator; e ao facto do reator ter sido levado para um estado não especificado pelos procedimentos ou investigado por uma organização independente de segurança”.

As conclusões deste relatório são aceites pelas principais organizações mundiais de energia nuclear, no entanto Dylatov continua a contestá-las e a considerá-las erróneas. O engenheiro-chefe chegou a ser julgado e condenado a uma pena de prisão pelo acidente de Chernobyl.

Para além de Akimov e Toptunov, morreram mais 28 pessoas em consequência direta do acidente, 22 trabalhadores da central e seis bombeiros. A exposição a elevados níveis de radioatividade foi a principal causa, levando as vítimas a desenvolver síndrome de aguda da radiação nos dias seguintes ao acidente. O número vítimas indiretas é difícil de calcular, mas as projeções estimam que o valor poderá estar na casa dos quatro mil mortos.

OPERAÇÃO DE LIMPEZA

Só passados dois dias das explosões é que o mundo teve conhecimento do acidente de Chernobyl. Foi identificada na central nuclear de Forsmark, na Suécia, a 1.000 quilómetros de distância, uma elevada concentração de radioatividade, o que levou o Governo sueco a questionar a URSS se tinha acontecido algum acidente em Chernobyl. Inicialmente a URSS negou, mas acabou anunciar publicamente o acidente a 28 de abril.

Colocadas as bombas de emergência de parte, foi desenvolvido um plano para despejar componentes absorventes de neutrões diretamente na cratera em chamas. Estes componentes iriam servir como moderadores da reação de fissão nuclear, ou seja iria diminuir a reação em cadeia, o que ajudaria a diminuir também a temperatura do núcleo.

A elevada emissão de elementos radioativos impedia que os helicópteros permanecessem durante muito tempo por cima do núcleo e, por isso, os componentes absorventes eram lançados com o helicóptero em andamento. Este processo começou no dia 28 de abril e foram depositadas cerca de 5.000 toneladas de material que incluía carboneto de boro, chumbo, areia, argila e dolomite. Hoje sabe-se que a grande parte dos componentes despejados falhou o alvo.

CONSTRUÇÃO DOS TÚNEIS E DO SARCÓFAGO

O incêndio do núcleo do reator esteve ativo durante nove dias, tendo sido controlado a 4 de maio de 1986. Mesmo sem as chamas, o núcleo do reator continuava muito quente e foi colocada em causa a capacidade da estrutura que existia por baixo do reator. O projeto foi iniciado dois dias depois e tinha como objetivo evitar que as altas temperaturas derretessem a estrutura previamente existente e que esta se tornasse permeável à radioatividade, correndo o risco de se espalhar pelo solo e contaminar lençóis de água.

Mais de 400 trabalhadores escavaram um túnel que passava por baixo da unidade 3 e conseguiram colocar uma placa de betão por baixo do núcleo destruído. Para além de reforçar a estrutura, a placa ajudou no arrefecimento do núcleo. Este projeto demorou 15 dias a estar concluído.

Com mais uma questão resolvida, chegou a hora de pensar como se poderia evitar a propagação dos componentes radioativos que continuavam a ser libertados do núcleo. A ação do vento, das aves ou da chuva era uma preocupação pois poderia arrastar os isótopos radioativos e espalhar ainda mais a radioatividade. Para isso, foi desenhada uma estrutura que envolve a área destruída da antiga unidade 4. Este projeto foi chamado de sarcófago e a sua construção foi realizada entre junho e novembro.

Um dos desafios identificado nesta fase do processo foi a existência de elementos radioativos nos telhados das três unidades da central. As autoridades soviéticas tentaram utilizar robots para remover estes fragmentos, mas a radioatividade era de tal forma elevada que os sistemas elétricos não aguentavam.

Foi necessário recorrer à mão de obra humana: praticamente todo o material foi removido por militares que foram expostos a elevados níveis de radiação. Para evitar a exposição a doses letais de radiação, cada um dos militares apenas poderia estar entre 40 e 90 segundos nos telhados. Mesmo assim, alguns dos homens que participaram nesta fase do processo de limpeza tiveram de fazer seis viagens aos telhados, quando apenas uma já representava um perigoso considerável para a saúde.

A EVACUAÇÃO DE PRIPYAT E A ÁREA DE SEGURANÇA

Mais de 36 horas depois do acidente, foi decretada, por parte das autoridades da URSS, a evacuação da cidade de Pripyat, a localidade mais próxima da central nuclear que tinha sido criada para alojar os trabalhadores e as suas famílias. Esta medida foi apresentada aos moradores como sendo temporária e a duração prevista era de apenas três dias. Os habitantes de Pripyat nunca mais regressaram às suas casas.

Pelas 14:00 do dia 27 de abril, um autocarro chegava à cidade pronto para iniciar o transporte dos cerca de 53 mil habitantes. As autoridades instruíram os habitantes a levar apenas os bens pessoais essenciais e deixar os restantes pertences. A cidade tornou-se fantasma e os objetos pessoais das famílias ainda hoje permanecem onde foram deixados.

A chamada zona de exclusão da central nuclear de Chernobyl foi delineada no dia a seguir, e tinha inicialmente um raio de 10 quilómetros à volta da unidade. Dez dias depois do acidente, a extensão foi aumentada para 30 quilómetros. Estima-se que, inicialmente, 115 mil pessoas tenham sido forçadas a abandonar as suas casas devido ao acidente, um número que aumentou para 220 mil depois de 1986. Pouco mais de mil pessoas decidiram regressar, posteriormente, às suas antigas casas, localizadas dentro da área de exclusão, desobedecendo às ordens das autoridades.

As unidades 1, 2 e 3 foram temporariamente interrompidas para as operações de limpeza do acidente de Chernobyl. No entanto, voltaram à atividade pouco tempo depois e produziram energia elétrica durante vários anos. A unidade 2 foi encerrada em outubro de 1991 na sequência de um incêndio, a unidade 1 foi desativada em novembro de 1996 e o reator da unidade 3 foi encerrado em dezembro de 2000.

[harrywu-blog]

Chernobyl research

Why I choose to research this topic is because I just finished watching this TV series at the start of this term. I am quite interested in this topic, so I have a great passion to do this homework.

The Chernobyl disaster was a nuclear accident that occurred in 1986 at No.4 reactor in the Chernobyl Nuclear Power Plant, near the city of Pripyat in the north of Ukrainian SSR. It is considered the worst nuclear disaster in history.

I think there were two main reasons causing this famous worldwide devastating disaster. One was the human factor, the other was design flaws.

Design Flaws:

The accident started during the safety test on a reactor because operators and designers have found there might be a potential safety problem that could lead to the nuclear reactor core to overheat. They have done three tests since 1982, but all failed to provide a feasible solution.

According to the INSAG-7 Report, the chief reasons for the accident lie in the peculiarities of physics and in the construction of the reactor. There are two such reasons:

The reactor had a dangerously large positive void coefficient of reactivity.

A more significant flaw was in the design of the control rods that are inserted into the reactor to slow down the reaction.

Other contributing factors include:

The plant was not designed to safety standards in effect and incorporated unsafe features

"Inadequate safety analysis" was performed.

There was "insufficient attention to independent safety review".

"Operating procedures not founded satisfactorily in safety analysis".

Safety information not adequately and effectively communicated. between operators, and between operators and designers.

The operators did not adequately understand the safety aspects of the plant.

Operators did not sufficiently respect formal requirements of operational and test procedures.

The regulatory regime was insufficient to effectively counter pressures for production.

There was a "general lack of safety culture in nuclear matters at the national level as well as locally".

There was no exact reason that causing the disaster. However, I tend to believe what I say in my blog.

One reason there were such contradictory viewpoints and so much debate about the causes of the Chernobyl accident was that the primary data covering the disaster, as registered by the instruments and sensors, were not completely published in the official sources.

Human factors:

The human factor had to be considered as a major element in causing the accident.

The test was prepared to be conducted ten hours earlier than the time it was actually started. Because of this, the original operators shifted off. The test supervisor on that day failed to follow the procedure, creating unstable operating conditions combined with inherent reactor design flaws. He could choose to stop testing at that time, but he didn’t. Failing the test will lead to the loss of his opportunity of promotion to a higher office and also the related officer will get blames of the higher officer. Therefore, the test supervisor intentionally disabled several nuclear reactor safety systems, resulting in an uncontrolled nuclear chain reaction.

In addition, the impact of the disaster could have been less, but the related leaders of the reconstruction after the disaster chose to lie to the higher officer. They were afraid that if the world knew the serious impact of the disaster, the Soviet government will become a joke. After all, the Soviet was leading the world at that time, and they would lose their influence in the world if they told the truth. Even when they had to request for help to German at the end, they told the wrong and fake radiation level to German, which led to the robot that was designed to clean the radioactive contamination broke down immediately after the robot was turned on.

As in the previously released report INSAG-1, close attention is paid in report INSAG-7 to the inadequate (at the moment of the accident) "culture of safety" at all levels. Deficiency in the safety culture was inherent not only at the operational stage but also, and to no lesser extent, during activities at other stages in the lifetime of nuclear power plants (including design, engineering, construction, manufacture, and regulation). The poor quality of operating procedures and instructions and their conflicting character put a heavy burden on the operating crew, including the chief engineer. "The accident can be said to have flowed from a deficient safety culture, not only at the Chernobyl plant but throughout the Soviet design, operating and regulatory organizations for nuclear power that existed at that time."

Reference:https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chernobyl_disaster#INSAG-1_report,_1986

[teeth--thief]

Google Drive full of book PDFs about Chernobyl

Link to the Google Drive if you don't want to click the title: https://drive.google.com/drive/folders/1kscKFciW6almJA8p-0sUQPO3c0A4AQYe

Note: It will be updated regularly - for as long as I'll be able to find/get new things =) So far I've compiled 41 books in three languages.

Just to repeat what I said in the first post: I'm open to any requests or suggestions or even PDFs themselves, if someone wants to share theirs from their collection. Message me, send me an ask, throw a rock through my window - whatever you prefer, just please, do it yourself because I'm too scared to message anyone, thanks. No fiction - that's the only rule. Any language is welcome - if you want me to look for a certain book in the language of your choice, I'll do that. If you have a book in language other than English, I'd love to add it to the Drive! If you have a better version of whatever PDF I've already got, then I'd be more than happy to do a swap.

Now, some of my reasoning, if anyone's interested: first of all, I think it's important for everyone to be able to access stuff like this. Think of it as a library, minus the "give these back" part. Secondly, I get soooo mad when people are like haha, found this super rare, basically impossible to find, very expensive book! ...I shall now keep it exclusively to myself. Ma'am, you're ruining the vibe and stalling everyone's hobby research but I guess you do you...

List of all the books (under the cut):

In English:

Voices from Chernobyl - Alexievich S.

Chernobyl Reactor Accident - Source Term

Chernobyl - Insight from the Inside - Dr. Chernousenko V.M.

How It Was - Dyatlov A.S.

(ENG+RUS) Chernobyl Booklet

Chernobyl: The Devastation, Destruction and Consequences of the World’s Worst Radiation Accident - Fitzgerald I.

Final Warning. The Legacy of Chernobyl - Gale R.P.

Midnight in Chernobyl: The Untold Story of the World’s Greatest Nuclear Disaster - Higginbotham A.

INSAG-1

INSAG-7

Interesting Chernobyl - 100 Symbols

From Chernobyl To Fukushima - Karpan N.

Manual for Survival. A Chernobyl Guide to the Future - Kate Brown

Chernobyl. Confessions of a Reporter - Kostin I.

The Politics of Invisibility. Public Knowledge about Radiation Health Effects after Chernobyl - Kuchinskaya O.

Memories - Kupnyi A.

Chernobyl 01:23:40 - The Incredible True Story of the World’s Worst Nuclear Disaster - Leatherbarrow A.

Chernobyl Notebook - Medvedev G.

No Breathing Room - Medvedev G.

Chernobyl Record - The Definitive History of the Chernobyl Catastrophe - Mould R. F.

Wormwood Forest - A Natural History of Chernobyl - Mycio M.

Life Exposed: Biological Citizens After Chernobyl - Petryna A.

Chernobyl: History of a Tragedy - Plokhy S.

Ablaze - Story of Chernobyl - Read P.P.

Producing Power: The Pre-Chernobyl History of the Soviet Nuclear Industry - Schmid S. D.

Chernobyl: A Documentary Story - Shcherbak I.

The Vienna Report

Chernobyl - Crime Without Punishment - Yaroshinskaya A.A.

In Russian:

Chernobyl: Kak eto bylo. Preduprezhdeni - Kopchinsky, Steinberg

Chernobyl. Tak eto bylo. Vzglyad Iznutri - Voznyak Ya. Troitskiy N.

Лучевая болезнь человека (очерки) - Гуськова А.К., Байсоголов Г.Д.

Чернобыль. Как это было - Дятлов А.С.

Чернобыль: 30 лет спустя - Кравчук Н.В.

Живы - Купный А.

Чернобыль - Щербак Ю.

(ONLY Pages 367-383) Чернобыль, 10 лет спустя. Неизбежность или случайность?

KGB files - pre and post accident (includes additional information in Ukrainian)

In Polish: 

Jak to było - Diatłov A.S.

Czarnobyl - Plokhy S.

Czarnobyl - Sekuła P.

Katastrofa w Czarnobylu - Sekuła P.

Czarnobyl. Od katastrofy do procesu - Siwiński W.

#chernobyl #26th april 1986 #nuclear power plant #chornobyl #nuclear disaster #chernobyl hbo #you wouldn't download a car #file: special interest: chernobyl #Чернобыль #pripyat #rbmk 1000 #radiation #free resources #free books

[teeth--thief]

I'm compiling a Google Drive full of book PDFs about Chernobyl.

It's not a lengthy list just yet and I'm open to any requests or suggestions or even PDFs themselves, if someone wants to share theirs from their collection. No fiction - that's the only rule. Any language is welcome - if you want me to look for a certain book in the language of your choice, I'll do that. If you have a book in language other than English, I'd also love to add it to the Drive =)

List of what I currently have under the cut:

In English:

Voices from Chernobyl - Alexievich S.

Chernobyl - Insight from the Inside - Dr. Chernousenko V.M.

How It Was - Dyatlov A.S.

Chernobyl: The Devastation, Destruction and Consequences of the World’s Worst Radiation Accident - Fitzgerald I. 

Midnight in Chernobyl: The Untold Story of the World’s Greatest Nuclear Disaster - Higginbotham A.

INSAG-7

From Chernobyl To Fukushima - Karpan N.

Manual for Survival. A Chernobyl Guide to the Future - Kate Brown

Chernobyl. Confessions of a Reporter - Kostin I.

The Politics of Invisibility. Public Knowledge about Radiation Health Effects after Chernobyl - Kuchinskaya O.

Chernobyl 01:23:40 - The Incredible True Story of the World’s Worst Nuclear Disaster - Leatherbarrow A.

Chernobyl Notebook - Medvedev G.

No Breathing Room - Medvedev G.

Chernobyl Record - The Definitive History of the Chernobyl Catastrophe - Mould R. F.

Chernobyl: History of a Tragedy - Plokhy S.

Ablaze - Story of Chernobyl - Read P.P.

Producing Power: The Pre-Chernobyl History of the Soviet Nuclear Industry - Schmid S. D.

Chernobyl: A Documentary Story - Shcherbak I.

In Russian:

Chernobyl: Kak eto bylo. Preduprezhdeni - Kopchinsky, Steinberg

Chernobyl. Tak eto bylo. Vzglyad Iznutri - Voznyak Ya. Troitskiy N.

Лучевая болезнь человека (очерки) - Гуськова А.К., Байсоголов Г.Д.

Чернобыль. Как это было - Дятлов А.С.

Чернобыль - Щербак Ю.

In Polish: 

Jak to było - Diatłov A.S.

#chernobyl #26th april 1986 #ugh fine #chernobyl hbo #nuclear disaster #nuclear power plant #file: special interest: Chernobyl #you wouldn't download a car #pripyat

[teeth--thief]

I am watching the Lost Tapes documentary. No questions this time, though the door is unlocked to your thoughts. Simply to update you on my work. Reading of the INSAG-7* has gone well, I am solidly through Annex II. Midnight in Chernobyl is near completion. How It Was is on the docket to be read, as with Legasov’s tapes (though those have been skimmed briefly). What else? Locations in Chernobyl has been looked through. Interviews watched.

* Printing this has made me look crazy I imagine! Carrying a stack of inch-thick papers on the bus. Pah.

- Rodka

Fun fact: despite the claims that it contains new video evidence and all that jazz, it contains nothing new 💀 They just enhanced some already available footage.

Not only that, but I'm pretty sure (that is: if that's THE documentary I heard/read this about) they deliberately altered one clip to claim it was recorded on a different day than in reality because you can hear them say the date in the video! 😍😍 We love honest film makers that definitely never make shit up! Never ever!! The lies told by some documentaries about Chernobyl are almost as ugly as my friend's last situationship, truly.

Phew! I got a little bitter there for a second... What was I actually going to say... ah. If you haven't checked out 3828 already then I'd recommend doing so! And this amazing interview with Aleksandr Agulov! There's tons of really great stuff out there, although some is not translated...

Congrats! Great job on working through your reading list! Just a heads up: How It Was has no official translation. The one I have in the Drive leaves a lot, and I mean A LOT, to be desired but it's the only completed version I could find in English. This one, although apparently incomplete and only in this format, is much more readable, though. I'd love to give credit where credit is due but I have no idea whose file this is, sadly :(

If it makes you feel any better about looking weird on the bus then when I bought the 1 meter long shark plushie from IKEA a few years ago, I had to get across the whole city to go home and so I sat with this huge shark in my arms for probably an hour, on the very back of the bus... World’s most humbling experience for world's most anxious man (or rather then - teen).

#file: special interest: chernobyl #file: ask! #asker: rodka #chernobyl

[teeth--thief]

I’ve likely flooded your inbox by now. Tell me about Medvedev?

-R, (Rodka).

Hi hi hello Rodka! Hell yeah, let's get into that mf-- man. I mean man.

He's the author of The Truth about Chernobyl aka Chernobyl Notebook and No Breathing Room (it takes a masochist to read that, which I am not. It's in the Drive regardless, just in case someone out there is). The general consensus goes that he was more or less a mouthpiece for the government, spreading their narrative further. The book, being one of the first ones about the disaster, was meant to ensure that the general public blames all the convenient people, overlooking the ones that truly mattered and were to blame in this story.

In the preface of very own his book, one S. Zalygin (I don't know who you are and do not care to find out) describes him as such:

The author is a nuclear power specialist who worked for a time at the Chernobyl AES and knows it well, just as he is personally acquainted with all the principal participants in the events. By virtue of his official position, he has attended many of the crucial conferences concerning nuclear power plant construction.

Worked for a time at Chernobyl AES is one way to put it. I mean... sure, he did. According to Steinberg at least, he even was the first Deputy Chief Engineer. For 6 months. In 1973. According to Dyatlov, Medvedev was in Chernobyl from 1972 until 1974 - whichever the case may be, that's either 5 or 3 years before the launch of the first unit. Now, time for a little conspiracy theory... Guess when Dyatlov, who was very well known for tolerating nothing but absolute professionalism and discipline, started working in Chernobyl? In 1973. And guess who the first author (if I'm not mistaken) to spread the narrative about Dyatlov basically being The Devil and so much more was? Medvedev. Listen, I'm not saying these two things are related... HOWEVER...

Nah, I'm kidding. If that was the case, A.S. Dyatlov would have mentioned so in How It Was, in which he does talk in length about Medvedev and his book, mainly in chapter 9. He is mean to him in the best, most professional way possible. Example being this bit:

“I arrived at the construction site of the nuclear power plant in the village of Pripyat directly from the Moscow clinic, where I was treated for radiation sickness. I still felt bad, but I could walk and decided that, working, I would get back to normal faster.”

I don’t know how he felt - bad or good, but according to the 6th hospital (A.K. Guskova and A.F. Shamardin), G. Medvedev did not have radiation sickness and the dose was minimal.

He really said I went to the idiot village (got the most important staff from the hospital in Moscow on record) and everybody there knew you (they said you were fine, you fucking liar).

I'm not too sure where I heard this (maybe from Kupnyi?), but the general opinion of the people in the nuclear field, people from ChNPP of Medvedev is that... well... they don't see him as a professional at all, really. He was deemed untrustworthy, a liar and first and foremost - someone lacking the technical knowledge he always presented himself as being in possession of.

Additionally, this is what Nikolai Steinberg - one of the people on the INSAG-7 commission, a ChNPP worker (a book of his is on the Drive, too, by the way) - had this to say about him in this incredibly long interview with not only him but quite a few other interesting people... like the one and only, Stolyarchuk: bless whoever clipped it so that I don't have to look for the right part in a 3 hour long video! (Yes, there are subtitles! And there's also part two) Safe to say - nobody in the professional field likes Medvedev :)

#file: special interest: chernobyl #my hatred towards anyone slandering the NPP staff is absurd (i will never stop) #file: ask! #asker: rodka #Chernobyl

[teeth--thief]

I'm becoming quite interested in Chernobyl myself. Your Drive folder will be read with much adoration and appreciation. If you want an excuse to infodump, or otherwise tell a (likely less educated) person about Chernobyl, please take this as such. I would love to learn more, even if simply anecdotally. I'm sure it will spur research of my own. Apologies for stilted English.

Hi hi hello!! First of all: I'm so glad you're enjoying my Google Drive! It's being compiled with a lot of love and care, I'm very happy it'll be of use to you ♡

If you ever have any questions about specific things related to Chernobyl - don't be afraid to ask! If I don't know something already, I'll make sure to educate myself and get back to you ☆

I would LOVE to use this opportunity to tell you all about my favourite operator but I'm not going to - not unless I'll get asked about him specifically (Lyonya Toptunov did nothing wrong in his life, ever - source: me. Not even the "punching his tutor in college" bit. And that's because it's not even true. He's my special boy, case closed). I am mostly interested in the human side of things though, and will always look at things from that angle. But let's go with something more useful and interesting for most and let's keep it short and sweet today:

1. Which few books in my folder are the most important/best and which you should be careful to believe! Not every book I have in there is a good book. But every book is a Chernobyl book.

2. A little (speculative) something about the area surrounding the ChNPP

Must reads:

INSAG-7 - while it contains some mistakes, certainly less than INSAG-1, it's THE thing to read if you want to learn about the technical stuff.

How It Was - Dyatlov A.S. - but but but Hunter 🥺 wasn't Dyatlov The Big Bad? No. I'm sorry that the HBO's show and Medvedev's book hurt you in this way. I can get more into Dyatlov if anyone's interested but all in all, it's a solid book.

Chernobyl: A Documentary Story - Shcherbak I. - the most important stuff? Not in the English version. The translation is missing hundreds of pages of absolutely crucial witness statements... best course of action if you don't know Russian? Look up words/names in the original regarding things that interest you and throw them into Google Translate. It's unfortunate, I know, but it's better than nothing.

Midnight in Chernobyl - Higginbotham A. - everyone's favourite. Contains some mistakes - don't trust the technical parts, cites Medvedev (cardinal sin) but overall makes a great case for humanising the workers.

Be wary when reading these:

Chernobyl Notebook (aka The Truth about Chernobyl) - Medvedev G. - nobody from the nuclear field respects this dude. IIRC he got fired after working for a few months in ChNPP before it even started operation but went around claiming he was a worker at the plant. Go figure. Just makes up stuff. Doesn't have the technical knowledge to make half the claims he makes. Follows the (false) official government narrative (hmmmm I WONDER WHY).

Voices from Chernobyl - Alexievich S - too busy chasing her own biases to care about the people she interviewed, claiming they said things they never did or forcing their stories to fit her narrative. Yes, I know, everyone LOVES this one but it's really not that good.

Manual for Survival - Kate Brown - it's a good read, albeit the author takes a pretty anti-nuclear stance, repeating various myths about the nuclear power and radiation overall, seemingly for the purpose of fear mongering.

There are so so many more books worth recommending but I wanted to mention the most popular and important ones.

According to Kate Brown and her book "Manual for Survival", the area of Prypiat Marshes and wetlands was already mildly radioactive before the nuclear power plant wad even built. Apparently "the Soviet army tested strategic nuclear weapons, the small battlefield variety, in the Pripyat bombing range" which meant that radiactive isotopes where already present in the atmosphere, long before the disaster struck Pripyat.

While her evidence and sources for that are shakey, at best (I'm not a fan of the he said, they said stuff - show me a signed document and I'll believe you), it would certainly be awfully convenient to built a NPP close enough to the slightly radiated areas and call it a day. You could always say it was the plant that caused the unusual radiation spike and definitely not the tests they ran there years before the power plant was even in the building stage... but alas. It might not even be true, I haven't seen it mentioned anywhere else, if I remember correctly.

A third fun fact I'll throw in for free - I'm currently in the process of making a Chernobyl inspired shirt =D Maybe I'll show you guys, who knows...

#file: special interest: chernobyl #chornobyl #26th april 1986 #pripyat #you wouldn't download a car #чернобыль #file: ask!