Looks like Bechtel and Co are designing in a very nice profit margin with this concept. One thing that isn't stated or shown is how they plan on disassembling those components that they so effortlessly pluck from their mounted installations. I wonder if they plan on using more "Bio-Robots"?
@pioneerz450 Let's hope not for the Japanese sake and the rest of the world as well. If the reactors in Japan are contained any time in the next 10 years it would amaze me. The US military might have to reach deep into it's black bag of black budget tricks and pull out some of that undisclosed black technology it possesses to bring the situation under control. But that would tip their hand so isn't likely to happen. So who wants to volunteer to be a Bio-Robot?
@rosskrem No, because if it colapses, and it definetly will at some moment (thanks to corrosion, rust etc.) that will trigger an even more devastating blast than that from 1986.
@XGuytar Because it was never designed to be air tight. Far from it. There are holes you could drive a car through in it. It's been decades and not one fuck was given by world leaders. The lid of the core could fall at any time and throw tons of dust. Also, the lava (core infused with sand) and if water gets in there..kaboom...
Whats more insane is that the plant has been open since 2000. The workers at the plant continued to work despite the botched sarcophagus job. Insane.
@AgentxAnonymous The holes have long-since been patched. Also the sand-infused fuel you mentioned has soaked up a huge amount of water but it is unlikely to reach criticality. The biggest danger is the 2000-ton lid which is resting at the top of the reaction chamber on rusting debris. 2000 tons! When it falls all the way to the bottom, the radioactive dust kicked up will be immense. Also, they had no choice but to operate the other units until 2000 - that 2GW had to come from somewhere.
The question Why dismantle the old sarcophagus, If it collapses more radioactive dust, water and other particles will get out. Its not known if it can still start an chain reaction, but it seems that is possible. So making a bigger one on top of the other (with build in cranes) is a good idea. This is what is being build. Gently removing material is the only smart choice. Any movement can still start a chain reaction, wich could result in another meltdown. Not a fine thing to happen
What baffled me was that the other reactors were still used up to December of the year 2000. Even with all that radiation people still worked there. I even saw a picture of a still oparational control room of reactor 3 in 1996 its the same thing as the abandoned one of reactor 4. That was kinda scary. One reactor even had a fire in 1991. I think I other countries the whole thing would have been shut down. And better cleaned up. The cleaning up is not impossible it's just dangerous.
@qwerty10445 Hi , they want to remove all the radioactive materials inside. not sure if that information is correct , just read in the newspaper(germany) few days ago but i never trust those informations so therefore i'm not sure
@Hogasofa Because the Main reason is to get rid of the old one. Its falling apart and will soon crash down. The main problem is that Radioactive dust will fly into the atmosphere if it collapses. So, there replacing it basicaly. If you kept it up with the new one and if it was to collapse, It could destroy both of them, and probably release the same amount of Radioactive dust.
@Yenaboi But the main point is to get rid of the old one. If it collapsed with the new one around it, it could cuase the ground to shake and possibly make it fail at stress points. Even if it doesnt, you still wouldnt want a nuclear reactor to collapse on itself, just think about it for a bit. Even know its already damaged, it could still release dust or possibly cause a radiation burst by revealing some of the multen reactor that was previously hidden by the rubble.
@FlashProduktions I do realize that..but my idea was after removing the remains of the old one.. along with the arch on top now....for a bit of extra they could build a new one in place of the old..that is more sturdy and made to last
@Hogasofa i was thinking the same thing but i guess if the old one collapses it could take the new one with it....plus then it would be even harder to take apart...atleast now most of it is where it should be.
its alot less work to cut through screws and bolts than it is through wreckage.
@completlylegend1990 oh reallY? where is the prrof that the whole of europe would be wiped out if the roof collapsed? europe was not wiped out when the bloody thing exploded so why would it be wiped out by the roof of the sarcophagus collapsing? stop commenting bull, get ur facts right, go to school and then post some comments which wont get u shot down in flames
@svedishbiker Europe wasn't wiped out because only a relitively small amount of the radioactive material escaped from the reactor. The rest is still down there - I would assume that if the shelter collapsed onto the remaining fuel, then it would disrupt it, and likely either create another, bigger explosion, or dislodge alot of the material and create another cloud.
people are still born with cancer from living somewhat close to the area.
i was diagnosed with it with chernobyl as the main reason as to why it hapenned.
it wouldnt wipe out europe but your little skull cant fit in the notion that the old sarcophagus is a shell thats falling apart...and all the radiation that is in there has been BUILDING UP for the past 20 years and if it collapses its 20 times worst than it was to begin with.
@alextheromanian link me with some hard facts please? i am well aware that there are radiation leaks, and that there has been a significant rise in cancers around the area.i dnt even get your point anyway?ur agreeing with me that it wouldnt wipe out europe?!?it wouldnt be 20 times worse, my teacher who is a NUCLEAR physician and has BEEN to chernobyl 2 years ago has told our class all about the dangers;a problem with the roof falling down is that there would be radioactive dust,thats it.
@alextheromanian i fucking hate it when people actively try and argue with some1 who is actually studying this subject...just assuming the absolute fucking worst! YES radiation is extremely dangerous and kills people in very bad ways. but chernobyl could have been ALOT worse.i kno it has caused many cancers in that area,but i also know alot about radioactive decay so i know for a fact that its not that bad becuae people can be only 5km from the site of the explosion without suits on and not die.
According to Igor Gramotkin, Director-General of the Chernobyl Nuclear Power Plant, facility administration hopes completion of the facility's New Safe Confinement structure will occur in 2013. Design delays have pushed back the structure's expected completion date.The cost of the NSC object is currently estimated at 1.6 billion euros, over twice the original estimate of 758 million euros. Gramotkin did not rule out the possibility that the final construction cost will be higher.
Both the state of Ukraine and the Chernobyl Plant administration are looking for the most reliable equipment to avoid future operational risks for the NSC, which is being designed to be functional for at least 100 years. Thus, the Chernobyl Plant administration is not prepared to necessarily accept the cheapest system available.
@Jonathon2kia8 my guess is, that the components have sucked up so much radiation, that theyre actually doing more harm than good...in other words have become a new sorce of radiation...
@miked9372 The old sarchophagus is wearing away due to natural rain and erosion the actuall structure was temporelily to last 20-40 years by then the MEDCs will have build a stronger and better resistanrt structure the reason why the 1st one needs to be deconstructed that if it collapsed cloud of radiation will go across scandanavia and mainland europe ( British Isles will be ok) The US , UK and Russia are the main contributors to this set by the IAEA and Hans Blix, Good Luck God Bless it
I'm interested and curious about this whole Chernobyl thing and I have been self-studying for a while now. Can someone help me answer one question; If there really is a possibility for another even larger catastrophe which would make the Europe or at least half of it inhabitable, why aren't other countries across Europe doing anything or helping Ukraine? If the threat really is that millions of people would get radiation and other shit on them, why isn't anyone doing anything?! :/
The reason why they are concerned is that due to environmental effects and the fact that the support beams to the current sarcophagus rest on the wall that was fractured in the initial blast puts the entire facility at a serious risk of collapse. If it collapses, the radioactive particles would be re-released into the atmosphere. This would put the nearby river and water supply that feeds into Kiev at serious risk and cause serious environmental damage to Ukraine and Belarus.
I hate that everyone think this Chernobyl disaster is so "cool" and people can make "cool" videos out of it. What's most important is/was the working and brave people who went in the sarchophagus and had taken the risk, in order to get more info, and to realize what has really happened and what is happening and what will happen. After all at least for another hundred thousand years it will still be irradiation coming out...
of course I am not. I am referring to the younger people's videos who make that and upload them. This video instead is a very good documentary, people should learn from this.
Ok, so they are taking it down because it could fall and potentially stir up or upset the remaining plutonium. i wonder how high of a dose of radiation the workers will get. man that is so scary.
It will probably be introduced into the current workers duties, 3'000 of which still work in the Powerplant to date - Taking notes on any damage caused from environmental causes.
I'm sure the workers will be very safe and know exactly what they're doing :D
The old section must be removed because the nuclear fuel below that has solidified is gradually turning into highly radioactive dust. If the original sarcophagus falls into the reactor then this could be projected into the air. Although as the new one is air tight then it shouldn't matter. The sight is littered with radioactive scrap metal blown out of the reactor, this needs to be sealed and buried before construction. However the west has provide the Billions needed and it hasn't happened yet
is it the wests responsibility to provide money? western europe and america that is. i am asking this question objectively to see what people think. i am not trying to make a statement.
they have to replace the old protection because as it breaks apart the dust gos into the air and prevnts the growth of functional life in the chernobyl area.
It's not stable. It wasn't welded or mortared as far as I know; they just kind of piled it up. So it threatens to fall down if there's even a minor earthquake.
In a weird kind of twist...when this is completed (and i hope it does) Will remove a landmark that so many of us have grown up loving to hate....To a certain extent I'll be sad to see it gone. But it is for a good reason though.
I need some help here. Radiation passes through almost everything. So how will they block the whole 4th reactor corridor? Some of it is partially not covered. Say the stack. That has to emit rad? Secondly the original structure is encased in steal and concrete? How is this arch with the cranes going to hold itself up as it lifts loads. It looks like a gym roof. Not to be mean someone must know more just curious.
It depends on what you mean 'radiation'. Quarks can go through about anything, even if you would have a solid block of lead for thousands of miles. However, if you are talking about Alpha, Bèta and Gamma particles it's a whole different story. Alpha particles can be blocked by a simple sheet of paper, if I remember it well.
Radiation doesn't go through everything. Alpha and beta particles don't go very far, what people are afraid of is emitted gamma rays which can be shielded by lead, concrete, any insulating material. Even without, gamma rays can't travel very far. The problem with reactor 4 is the radioactive dust which if disrupted by the old sarcophagus collapsing, can re-enter the atmosphere repeating the 1986 disaster. The idea is long-term containment and that's all that's needed.
The misinformation in these comments is astounding. The old sarcophagus was indeed in bad shape. Many dollars and years have been spent to stablize it and ensure it won't fall before the new confinement is built. Work is ongoing on the new confinement. Expected completion is 2013. Then the sarcophagus and old reactor will be demolished and all fuel containing material removed. Leaving this FCM inplace would be stupid. The longer lived isotopes have half lives measure in millenia.
Finally, an intelligent person posting a comment! I agree with you ! However...how will they remove the radioactive material and where will they put the waste?? Glad to hear the new sarcophagus will be completed in 2013! Have you been to the zone?
The sarcophagus is currently in a very poor state, and in danger of collapsing. Designers (at the time it was built) did not consider it to be a permanent solution to closing the breach. In fact, the sarcophagus was designed to last 30 years, at which time a more permanent cover could be designed for the safe removal of whats left of the core & the escaped fuel.
Over the years the sarcophagus has been significantly weakened by weather, and the inaccessibility for maintenance personnel.
The new sarcophagus will be a major improvement. It is calculated that if the sarcophagus (as it is today) should collapse, that tons of extremely radioactive dust will be sent into the atmosphere. Much of this dust is the remnants of the nuclear fuel combined with lead & sand that existed in a glassified form. But these structures are deteriorating, and some of them actually contain rather large pieces of fuel. Which if water were to contact.... boom
Great video Thanks. Lets hope it works seen as the 97% of the radioactive material is still there and if it leeks out then it will destroy Europe 8-) so it better had work
Taking apart the original sarcophagus is a useless idea. If it does fall down inside the new container, the radiation will stay contained just like usual. Taking apart the sarcophagus will only expose workers to extra rads.
:D You obviously have not understood the purpose of the building - the plan is to remove not only old steel structure, but also all of the destroyed reactor, all debris and molten fuel - it is nuclear waste, it would be madness to leave it in nature...
Oh, I didn't realize they were going to remove the debris. I though they were just going to cover it up again with a more stable structure. But what will happen to it after they take it out? You can't just make it vanish like magic. Unless they plan on shooting it into space, all they will be doing is sending the stuff someplace else.
The debris, fuel remnants and highly irradiated parts of the reactor will be treated as well as spent fuel, but probably new containers is needed to design for them. After that they will be placed in some kind of deep geological repository which is BELIEVED to be safe.
this is great idea though i dont know why are they removing old sarcofag after building new one... but again i think that old chernobyl reactor shoud be removed and all radioactive materials locked up in storage so keep pu the good work!
seemingly this radioactive material can't be incinerated though if one of the other reactors is left active it could power a laser to free radioactive material and cut it into smaller workable pieces and dredged out,possibility a focused beam microwave incinerator,microwaveing water with incinerating blasts / carbon & charcoal may absorb radioactive material, movie sahara
è fastastico! cosa aspettano a iniziare i lavori? sicuramente l'altro scoppio dovuto al cedimento delle fondamenta ;) sti bastardi! i soldi dove li buttano? politici del cazzo!
You kids obviously don't know the capabilities of Gamma-rays...around 3-4 meters of solid concrete are required to successfully absorb gamma-rays. Thank god they're using 18 meters- safer for everybody.
You can't "get rid" of it. It's never going to go away. The best we can do is trap it and let the walls absorb it. If you just removed the walls, it would spread near-endlessly and, well, to put it blunt, kill a lot of people.
do you think it's so simple? do you think it's so easy to just get rid of the powerplant? Do you know what will happen if they just get rid of the powerplant?First, if they destroy the powerplant, all the reactors would explode, plus all the radiation will go into the air, and destroy 1 or 2 continents, please think before talking
lol! I never thought anyone would take my extremely sarcastic comment serious. Do you really think that I thought the best way to get rid of a fucked up powerplant, is to nuke it? lol
This comment has received too many negative votesshow
Reactors 1,2, and 3 were shut down within days of reactor 4 exploding. they were dismantled relatively soon afterwards, as soon as it was physically possible to do so.
not exactly one operated until 1991 two-1996 and was operated until 2000 ^^ this is so cool but there should have more explanation come on even my history teacher wouldn't shut up about it
because the radiation that was there before will still be there, plus the additional radiation from the weapon you use on it. Nuking it wont do ANY good.
42 times he said erection
mrbing70 1 month ago
ERECTION ERECTION ERECTION ERECTION ERECTION ERECTION ERECTION ERECTION ERECTION ERECTION ERECTION ERECTION ERECTION ERECTION ERECTION ERECTION ERECTION ERECTION ERECTION ERECTION ERECTION ERECTION ERECTION ERECTION ERECTION ERECTION ERECTION ERECTION
masterchiefboy11 2 months ago
why the hell would they dismantle it? they should add more metal to it instead!!
isurfu2ube 4 months ago
Good idea, but Im afraid it will collapse together whith the new one..
DeadHandsome25 6 months ago
Good grief, that 3D model is wrong in so many details. There are better ones on Google Earth.
EssieP 6 months ago
GET OUT OF HERE STALKER
kadrendo 7 months ago 4
my erection extends towards unit 4....
tomb1272 7 months ago
Looks like Bechtel and Co are designing in a very nice profit margin with this concept. One thing that isn't stated or shown is how they plan on disassembling those components that they so effortlessly pluck from their mounted installations. I wonder if they plan on using more "Bio-Robots"?
iamjackalope 8 months ago
@iamjackalope Well the biorobots arent so neccesary anymore...
pioneerz450 8 months ago
@pioneerz450 Let's hope not for the Japanese sake and the rest of the world as well. If the reactors in Japan are contained any time in the next 10 years it would amaze me. The US military might have to reach deep into it's black bag of black budget tricks and pull out some of that undisclosed black technology it possesses to bring the situation under control. But that would tip their hand so isn't likely to happen. So who wants to volunteer to be a Bio-Robot?
iamjackalope 8 months ago
The cost isnt the problem here, the problem is the radioactivity spilling out and destroying all of Europe.
24Rorschach 9 months ago
The construction date is just like the release date of Duke Nukem Forever
jtfunkymojo 9 months ago
$1 Billion needed, who's paying for nuclear now?
wredgum 9 months ago
i like how the crane just magically attaches to the pieces like magnets and just evaporate into thin air.must be pretty high tech
Scottthefish 9 months ago
Japan will need one of that. What an irony.
UrbanCyprusSociety 10 months ago
why not leave the old structure there? Wouldent it be better to have a double barrier?
rosskrem 10 months ago
@rosskrem No, because if it colapses, and it definetly will at some moment (thanks to corrosion, rust etc.) that will trigger an even more devastating blast than that from 1986.
Kokorba6iqta 10 months ago
cost please....
chena3 10 months ago
@chena3 around 781 million usd
spiker84 9 months ago
@spiker84
could be billions ...
big project
cost overruns ..
chena3 9 months ago
Why does the other "old" sarcophagus need to be dismantled?
XGuytar 10 months ago
@XGuytar Cos it might crumble
HelderP1337 10 months ago
@XGuytar Because it was never designed to be air tight. Far from it. There are holes you could drive a car through in it. It's been decades and not one fuck was given by world leaders. The lid of the core could fall at any time and throw tons of dust. Also, the lava (core infused with sand) and if water gets in there..kaboom...
Whats more insane is that the plant has been open since 2000. The workers at the plant continued to work despite the botched sarcophagus job. Insane.
AgentxAnonymous 10 months ago
@AgentxAnonymous The holes have long-since been patched. Also the sand-infused fuel you mentioned has soaked up a huge amount of water but it is unlikely to reach criticality. The biggest danger is the 2000-ton lid which is resting at the top of the reaction chamber on rusting debris. 2000 tons! When it falls all the way to the bottom, the radioactive dust kicked up will be immense. Also, they had no choice but to operate the other units until 2000 - that 2GW had to come from somewhere.
Danny77uk 10 months ago
@XGuytar meant to say plant was open until 2000. Not since.
AgentxAnonymous 10 months ago
@XGuytar its made of concrete and steel, it isnt sealed. in the roof there are holes about the size of a car
spiker84 9 months ago
Murphy's Laws are much more powerful than Newtons, any day...
machinationu 10 months ago
i wanna see some stuff on this sucker being built!
mrbrenton182 10 months ago
its all a fucking lie
Hardcorechica7x 11 months ago
This will never be built, it will but it will take too long.
TheMrGjokaj 11 months ago
@TheMrGjokaj= At least they're doing something. You got any better ideas?
vigo894 10 months ago
@TheMrGjokaj Well even if it takes 10 years to build radiation in that area will last over 20,000 years, so no rush.
kukovrein 10 months ago
What is the purpose of dismantling the building?
happyidiottalk 11 months ago
@happyidiottalk it is falling apart. the clay bricks used in the original contaminate are literally dissinegrating. forgive my spelling.
boraboy4ever 10 months ago
That's a weird 3D model, what's that structure where Reactors 1 & 2 should be? the models on Google Earth are more accurate than this.
EssieP 1 year ago
That's a weird 3D model, what's that structure where Reactors 1 & 2 should be? the models on Google Earth are more accurate than this.
EssieP 1 year ago
The question Why dismantle the old sarcophagus, If it collapses more radioactive dust, water and other particles will get out. Its not known if it can still start an chain reaction, but it seems that is possible. So making a bigger one on top of the other (with build in cranes) is a good idea. This is what is being build. Gently removing material is the only smart choice. Any movement can still start a chain reaction, wich could result in another meltdown. Not a fine thing to happen
MrSpacelyy 1 year ago
What baffled me was that the other reactors were still used up to December of the year 2000. Even with all that radiation people still worked there. I even saw a picture of a still oparational control room of reactor 3 in 1996 its the same thing as the abandoned one of reactor 4. That was kinda scary. One reactor even had a fire in 1991. I think I other countries the whole thing would have been shut down. And better cleaned up. The cleaning up is not impossible it's just dangerous.
MrSpacelyy 1 year ago
Why would you dismantle the old sarcophagus?
qwerty10445 1 year ago
@qwerty10445 Hi , they want to remove all the radioactive materials inside. not sure if that information is correct , just read in the newspaper(germany) few days ago but i never trust those informations so therefore i'm not sure
Powniiiiii 1 year ago
Why are they dismanteling the old sarcophagus?
GtaGekkerd 1 year ago
@GtaGekkerd
So it doesn't collapse and make it impossible to enter the reactor
snedie69er 1 year ago
I`m going to miss the old structure instead of this hangar which is definitely better but it wont be the way I remember it.
TomozukiII 1 year ago
couldn't they just undercut the earth below and allow it to fall into the mantle?
izlude2 1 year ago
@izlude2
Wow that sounds really smart man. The radiation would be gone. You should suggest that to the government!
Peekachoo2 1 year ago
@Peekachoo2 its as radioactive as ever dumbass....why would it be gone?
there are still about 84000 years before the radiation is gone.
alextheromanian 1 year ago
idk how they could afford this since the ukarainian gov is nearly bankrupt
MrNeaNea 1 year ago
did anybody count how many times he said erection?
sparkyflame22 1 year ago 24
@sparkyflame22 by my calculations:7
Lifeofhalf 1 year ago
@sparkyflame22 maybe what he was trying to say is that
radiation can also be used instead of viagra
MjrDario 1 year ago
@sparkyflame22 ,You have a filthy mind.Your parents should have raised you better.
TheUSA1945 9 months ago
@sparkyflame22 8 times.
spiker84 9 months ago
@spiker84 LOL
sparkyflame22 9 months ago
why don't they just leave the old structure alone and just put that arch thing on top of it so it is even safer
Hogasofa 1 year ago
@Hogasofa Because the Main reason is to get rid of the old one. Its falling apart and will soon crash down. The main problem is that Radioactive dust will fly into the atmosphere if it collapses. So, there replacing it basicaly. If you kept it up with the new one and if it was to collapse, It could destroy both of them, and probably release the same amount of Radioactive dust.
FlashProduktions 1 year ago
@FlashProduktions if they wanted to they could try building a new one over it inplace of the old one..along with the arch ontop
Yenaboi 1 year ago
@Yenaboi But the main point is to get rid of the old one. If it collapsed with the new one around it, it could cuase the ground to shake and possibly make it fail at stress points. Even if it doesnt, you still wouldnt want a nuclear reactor to collapse on itself, just think about it for a bit. Even know its already damaged, it could still release dust or possibly cause a radiation burst by revealing some of the multen reactor that was previously hidden by the rubble.
FlashProduktions 1 year ago
@FlashProduktions I do realize that..but my idea was after removing the remains of the old one.. along with the arch on top now....for a bit of extra they could build a new one in place of the old..that is more sturdy and made to last
Yenaboi 1 year ago
@Yenaboi So basically, use the new one as a cover so that they can add another one like the first again, but more sturdy?
FlashProduktions 1 year ago
@FlashProduktions
sort of like that
but keeping the arch cover with it o:
like a double layer :)
Yenaboi 1 year ago
@Hogasofa i was thinking the same thing but i guess if the old one collapses it could take the new one with it....plus then it would be even harder to take apart...atleast now most of it is where it should be.
its alot less work to cut through screws and bolts than it is through wreckage.
alextheromanian 1 year ago
are they making this now
EazZiB 1 year ago
Safe the vent stack!
chernobylworker 1 year ago
no such thing as safe when radiation is concerned!!!
weldon0m 1 year ago
how can they not do this??? if it collapses the whole or europe could be wiped out
completlylegend1990 1 year ago
@completlylegend1990 oh reallY? where is the prrof that the whole of europe would be wiped out if the roof collapsed? europe was not wiped out when the bloody thing exploded so why would it be wiped out by the roof of the sarcophagus collapsing? stop commenting bull, get ur facts right, go to school and then post some comments which wont get u shot down in flames
svedishbiker 1 year ago
@svedishbiker Europe wasn't wiped out because only a relitively small amount of the radioactive material escaped from the reactor. The rest is still down there - I would assume that if the shelter collapsed onto the remaining fuel, then it would disrupt it, and likely either create another, bigger explosion, or dislodge alot of the material and create another cloud.
Bexby 1 year ago
@svedishbiker youre ind of an idiot.
people are still born with cancer from living somewhat close to the area.
i was diagnosed with it with chernobyl as the main reason as to why it hapenned.
it wouldnt wipe out europe but your little skull cant fit in the notion that the old sarcophagus is a shell thats falling apart...and all the radiation that is in there has been BUILDING UP for the past 20 years and if it collapses its 20 times worst than it was to begin with.
alextheromanian 1 year ago
@alextheromanian link me with some hard facts please? i am well aware that there are radiation leaks, and that there has been a significant rise in cancers around the area.i dnt even get your point anyway?ur agreeing with me that it wouldnt wipe out europe?!?it wouldnt be 20 times worse, my teacher who is a NUCLEAR physician and has BEEN to chernobyl 2 years ago has told our class all about the dangers;a problem with the roof falling down is that there would be radioactive dust,thats it.
svedishbiker 1 year ago
@alextheromanian i fucking hate it when people actively try and argue with some1 who is actually studying this subject...just assuming the absolute fucking worst! YES radiation is extremely dangerous and kills people in very bad ways. but chernobyl could have been ALOT worse.i kno it has caused many cancers in that area,but i also know alot about radioactive decay so i know for a fact that its not that bad becuae people can be only 5km from the site of the explosion without suits on and not die.
svedishbiker 1 year ago
feckin arse music
eddieoxford 1 year ago
whtat did they do with reactor core?did they filled it in with sum or just left it opened with that large shield next to it??
MarxMuru 1 year ago
@MarxMuru left it open just coverd it and their bulding another case over it
WhiteStr08 1 year ago
2007 - 2012
NiNNNtech 1 year ago
Excellent, now all we have to do is wait for bureaucracy to act, though God only knows how long that will take.
TheBoomViper 1 year ago
According to Igor Gramotkin, Director-General of the Chernobyl Nuclear Power Plant, facility administration hopes completion of the facility's New Safe Confinement structure will occur in 2013. Design delays have pushed back the structure's expected completion date.The cost of the NSC object is currently estimated at 1.6 billion euros, over twice the original estimate of 758 million euros. Gramotkin did not rule out the possibility that the final construction cost will be higher.
miked9372 1 year ago
Both the state of Ukraine and the Chernobyl Plant administration are looking for the most reliable equipment to avoid future operational risks for the NSC, which is being designed to be functional for at least 100 years. Thus, the Chernobyl Plant administration is not prepared to necessarily accept the cheapest system available.
miked9372 1 year ago
@Jonathon2kia8 my guess is, that the components have sucked up so much radiation, that theyre actually doing more harm than good...in other words have become a new sorce of radiation...
SlovakJuri 1 year ago
@SlovakJuri did some research....they have to put it apart, because if it falls...it would rise a radioactive cloud...
SlovakJuri 1 year ago
why are they deconstruction it?
miked9372 1 year ago
@miked9372 The old sarchophagus is wearing away due to natural rain and erosion the actuall structure was temporelily to last 20-40 years by then the MEDCs will have build a stronger and better resistanrt structure the reason why the 1st one needs to be deconstructed that if it collapsed cloud of radiation will go across scandanavia and mainland europe ( British Isles will be ok) The US , UK and Russia are the main contributors to this set by the IAEA and Hans Blix, Good Luck God Bless it
eddieoxford 1 year ago
second Sarcophagus is already supposed to be completed but it s not and it won t be,becouse chernobyl now has a tourism many people come to visit.
martyn347 1 year ago
can enyone tell them "less talk, more work" Wikipedia sad that it originaly would finish in 2008. we are in 2010 now and nothing has hapend -.-
NEEDCARS 1 year ago
have they started on this yet??
jep0rox 1 year ago
I'm interested and curious about this whole Chernobyl thing and I have been self-studying for a while now. Can someone help me answer one question; If there really is a possibility for another even larger catastrophe which would make the Europe or at least half of it inhabitable, why aren't other countries across Europe doing anything or helping Ukraine? If the threat really is that millions of people would get radiation and other shit on them, why isn't anyone doing anything?! :/
kajis 1 year ago
they dont see it as a problem now...
those dumbasses
NEEDCARS 1 year ago
@kajis
The reason why they are concerned is that due to environmental effects and the fact that the support beams to the current sarcophagus rest on the wall that was fractured in the initial blast puts the entire facility at a serious risk of collapse. If it collapses, the radioactive particles would be re-released into the atmosphere. This would put the nearby river and water supply that feeds into Kiev at serious risk and cause serious environmental damage to Ukraine and Belarus.
DarkFilmDirector 1 year ago
they just thinking about it but who knows does they do it or not . This stupid americans wont do something.
z0mger999 1 year ago
so wat do they do with the left overs of the radio active scraps?
fabartist7 1 year ago 4
@fabartist7 they didn't say, but they have a waste pit that they store them, treating them with lead
DempseyBloom 4 months ago
Comment removed
fabartist7 1 year ago
Comment removed
fabartist7 1 year ago
I hate that everyone think this Chernobyl disaster is so "cool" and people can make "cool" videos out of it. What's most important is/was the working and brave people who went in the sarchophagus and had taken the risk, in order to get more info, and to realize what has really happened and what is happening and what will happen. After all at least for another hundred thousand years it will still be irradiation coming out...
Daniel0889 1 year ago
I honestly wish you're not referring to this video.
TheLinkku 1 year ago
of course I am not. I am referring to the younger people's videos who make that and upload them. This video instead is a very good documentary, people should learn from this.
Daniel0889 1 year ago
LOL!!! Erection
10squishybananas 1 year ago
haha "erection work"!
ckmacboy 1 year ago
@ckmacboy ha ha ha erection :)
completlylegend1990 1 year ago
why must the old one be removed? wouldnt that just unnecessarily prolong exposure to workers?
CoonBabble 2 years ago 2
@CoonBabble
Because it's colapsing and is very unstable. It was put up hastily to stop any more Nuclear Fallout (Radiation escaping into atmosphere).
Lynx251 2 years ago
@Lynx251
Ok, so they are taking it down because it could fall and potentially stir up or upset the remaining plutonium. i wonder how high of a dose of radiation the workers will get. man that is so scary.
CoonBabble 2 years ago
@CoonBabble
It will probably be introduced into the current workers duties, 3'000 of which still work in the Powerplant to date - Taking notes on any damage caused from environmental causes.
I'm sure the workers will be very safe and know exactly what they're doing :D
Lynx251 2 years ago 8
@Lynx251 Yeah when you are a working you,re going not for fun inside the dangerous zone xD
GtaGekkerd 1 year ago
The old section must be removed because the nuclear fuel below that has solidified is gradually turning into highly radioactive dust. If the original sarcophagus falls into the reactor then this could be projected into the air. Although as the new one is air tight then it shouldn't matter. The sight is littered with radioactive scrap metal blown out of the reactor, this needs to be sealed and buried before construction. However the west has provide the Billions needed and it hasn't happened yet
anindale91 2 years ago
is it the wests responsibility to provide money? western europe and america that is. i am asking this question objectively to see what people think. i am not trying to make a statement.
CoonBabble 2 years ago
@CoonBabble because it is in danger of falling.
NEEDCARS 1 year ago
@CoonBabble i agree, just leave the old one underneath, double protection, if one fails, you will still have the second one.
ostapslobodian 1 year ago
@ostapslobodian true but if the old one collapses the second one might be destroyed in the impact.
runawayfreak 1 year ago
they have to replace the old protection because as it breaks apart the dust gos into the air and prevnts the growth of functional life in the chernobyl area.
devotedyoungster2 2 years ago
If they would;ve just made reactor 4 like the normal hyperboloid models you usually see then this incident would've probably never happened.
guitarblazer4 2 years ago
How to grow crystal in chernobyl reactor
blackle4ps3 2 years ago
why are they removing the old sarcophagus?? why don't they just leave it on under the new one?
Shades90 2 years ago
It's not stable. It wasn't welded or mortared as far as I know; they just kind of piled it up. So it threatens to fall down if there's even a minor earthquake.
eritain 2 years ago
In a weird kind of twist...when this is completed (and i hope it does) Will remove a landmark that so many of us have grown up loving to hate....To a certain extent I'll be sad to see it gone. But it is for a good reason though.
lookinsideyourart 2 years ago 2
can this actually be done ?I thought the radiation levels would be way to high to carry out a job like this ?
03jameslo 2 years ago
if i worked there id want 2million a year atleast. lol.
LordEthan2 2 years ago 3
Yeah and then spend them all at chemiotherapies xD
justnobody5192 2 years ago 3
I need some help here. Radiation passes through almost everything. So how will they block the whole 4th reactor corridor? Some of it is partially not covered. Say the stack. That has to emit rad? Secondly the original structure is encased in steal and concrete? How is this arch with the cranes going to hold itself up as it lifts loads. It looks like a gym roof. Not to be mean someone must know more just curious.
Autovomatic 2 years ago
well first radiation cant pass through led and verious others things like that , soooooooooo yeah just sayin
damed2live 2 years ago
Comment removed
eaglecreek123 2 years ago
It depends on what you mean 'radiation'. Quarks can go through about anything, even if you would have a solid block of lead for thousands of miles. However, if you are talking about Alpha, Bèta and Gamma particles it's a whole different story. Alpha particles can be blocked by a simple sheet of paper, if I remember it well.
eaglecreek123 2 years ago
yeah im honestly not sure im just sayin what im thinking im in matter in energy so im still trying to understand it ya know
damed2live 2 years ago
Radiatoion can pass through led, but it is just decreased
secondcompanyguy1 2 years ago
Radiation doesn't go through everything. Alpha and beta particles don't go very far, what people are afraid of is emitted gamma rays which can be shielded by lead, concrete, any insulating material. Even without, gamma rays can't travel very far. The problem with reactor 4 is the radioactive dust which if disrupted by the old sarcophagus collapsing, can re-enter the atmosphere repeating the 1986 disaster. The idea is long-term containment and that's all that's needed.
splur 2 years ago
The misinformation in these comments is astounding. The old sarcophagus was indeed in bad shape. Many dollars and years have been spent to stablize it and ensure it won't fall before the new confinement is built. Work is ongoing on the new confinement. Expected completion is 2013. Then the sarcophagus and old reactor will be demolished and all fuel containing material removed. Leaving this FCM inplace would be stupid. The longer lived isotopes have half lives measure in millenia.
donlkelly 2 years ago
Finally, an intelligent person posting a comment! I agree with you ! However...how will they remove the radioactive material and where will they put the waste?? Glad to hear the new sarcophagus will be completed in 2013! Have you been to the zone?
tinytoes409 2 years ago
This video along with the music, makes it seem like its safe & sane to do this, and to work there...
But as you can imagaine, its not...
TheVirusOddball 2 years ago 2
Impressive. It's a hard task, I hope they'll succeed.
MadSadHuman 2 years ago 2
This comment has received too many negative votes show
more safe ?
about what ?
radioactivity ? .... hahahahaha... wich radioactivity ? ... in portugal - or in sweden ?
what will be better ? than now ...
the shelter is a billion- dollar TAX - FAKE
13189mega 2 years ago
The sarcophagus is currently in a very poor state, and in danger of collapsing. Designers (at the time it was built) did not consider it to be a permanent solution to closing the breach. In fact, the sarcophagus was designed to last 30 years, at which time a more permanent cover could be designed for the safe removal of whats left of the core & the escaped fuel.
Over the years the sarcophagus has been significantly weakened by weather, and the inaccessibility for maintenance personnel.
Jimdangello 2 years ago
So, to answer your question 13189mega...
The new sarcophagus will be a major improvement. It is calculated that if the sarcophagus (as it is today) should collapse, that tons of extremely radioactive dust will be sent into the atmosphere. Much of this dust is the remnants of the nuclear fuel combined with lead & sand that existed in a glassified form. But these structures are deteriorating, and some of them actually contain rather large pieces of fuel. Which if water were to contact.... boom
Jimdangello 2 years ago
Great video Thanks. Lets hope it works seen as the 97% of the radioactive material is still there and if it leeks out then it will destroy Europe 8-) so it better had work
angelo198920 2 years ago
Taking apart the original sarcophagus is a useless idea. If it does fall down inside the new container, the radiation will stay contained just like usual. Taking apart the sarcophagus will only expose workers to extra rads.
EdikShepherd 2 years ago
:D You obviously have not understood the purpose of the building - the plan is to remove not only old steel structure, but also all of the destroyed reactor, all debris and molten fuel - it is nuclear waste, it would be madness to leave it in nature...
melkor6666 2 years ago
Oh, I didn't realize they were going to remove the debris. I though they were just going to cover it up again with a more stable structure. But what will happen to it after they take it out? You can't just make it vanish like magic. Unless they plan on shooting it into space, all they will be doing is sending the stuff someplace else.
EdikShepherd 2 years ago
The debris, fuel remnants and highly irradiated parts of the reactor will be treated as well as spent fuel, but probably new containers is needed to design for them. After that they will be placed in some kind of deep geological repository which is BELIEVED to be safe.
melkor6666 2 years ago
Repositories are as safe as it gets when it comes to radiation. At least it wont be leaking into the environment like it is now.
EdikShepherd 2 years ago
its always still in nature..only diff is they put it in barrols and put it underground >.>
damianson 2 years ago
i don't want them 2 but its more safe
ivantaylor119 2 years ago
this is great idea though i dont know why are they removing old sarcofag after building new one... but again i think that old chernobyl reactor shoud be removed and all radioactive materials locked up in storage so keep pu the good work!
tufnaman 2 years ago
why they want to remove the old sarcofag?
0770686157 2 years ago
I have been doing erection work for many many years
indyboom 2 years ago 2
seemingly this radioactive material can't be incinerated though if one of the other reactors is left active it could power a laser to free radioactive material and cut it into smaller workable pieces and dredged out,possibility a focused beam microwave incinerator,microwaveing water with incinerating blasts / carbon & charcoal may absorb radioactive material, movie sahara
blackle4ps3 2 years ago
is ground water contamination not a concern , new sarcophagus and remove contaminated material and river cleanup
blackle4ps3 2 years ago
why de construct the sarcophagus?
I like the idea in general.
Kirilltraceur 2 years ago 2
Comment removed
CPsgreat 2 years ago
wat's rain water incursion??
CodeMajic98 3 years ago
Rain water incursion is the rain water and snow melt leaking into reactor no. 4, through cracks and holes in the sarcophagus.
OrionSyndicate 2 years ago 9
And what happens to that water?
Is there a possibility to be used and infect people
justnobody5192 2 years ago
Radioactive water cannot infect you as it does not contain any bacteria or other living things...
melkor6666 2 years ago
but the radioactivity still ionizing your atoms
gkyy3c 2 years ago
I figure they want to use robots for the last steps. I would.
americanpolitic1 3 years ago
This comment has received too many negative votes show
why they dont use humans?
Halfback1990 3 years ago
Maybe they will use people, but I wouldn't if I could. Too much radiation. Even if the radiated topsoil gets removed.
americanpolitic1 3 years ago
Comment removed
Alpine01 3 years ago
i wonder when is this going to be finished if ever...
jednoucelovy 3 years ago
it is scheduled to be comleted by 2012
thomasarran 3 years ago 2
Are they working on it right now to this very day?
ethanswish123 2 years ago
does everyone agree we not ready for nuclear power?
swiftdragoness88 3 years ago
è fastastico! cosa aspettano a iniziare i lavori? sicuramente l'altro scoppio dovuto al cedimento delle fondamenta ;) sti bastardi! i soldi dove li buttano? politici del cazzo!
lucaeroteam 3 years ago
The have to do it fast because its a open targe for terorists... No guards and militery.
Easy target!
Vegas2Legend 3 years ago
huh???
thefullmonte03 3 years ago
You kids obviously don't know the capabilities of Gamma-rays...around 3-4 meters of solid concrete are required to successfully absorb gamma-rays. Thank god they're using 18 meters- safer for everybody.
You can't "get rid" of it. It's never going to go away. The best we can do is trap it and let the walls absorb it. If you just removed the walls, it would spread near-endlessly and, well, to put it blunt, kill a lot of people.
Kevooi 3 years ago
This has been flagged as spam show
fucking american crap why do som stupid plane hangar
tnad666 3 years ago
your a fucking idiot. this isnt in america, nor is it anywhere on the western half of the planet.
dairmoss 3 years ago
This comment has received too many negative votes show
Why make this new structure. Just get rid of the powerplant - nuke it!
nwLohmann 3 years ago
do you think it's so simple? do you think it's so easy to just get rid of the powerplant? Do you know what will happen if they just get rid of the powerplant?First, if they destroy the powerplant, all the reactors would explode, plus all the radiation will go into the air, and destroy 1 or 2 continents, please think before talking
scorpionthespike 3 years ago
lol! I never thought anyone would take my extremely sarcastic comment serious. Do you really think that I thought the best way to get rid of a fucked up powerplant, is to nuke it? lol
nwLohmann 3 years ago
ha ha :)
Asrakorn 3 years ago
This comment has received too many negative votes show
Reactors 1,2, and 3 were shut down within days of reactor 4 exploding. they were dismantled relatively soon afterwards, as soon as it was physically possible to do so.
dairmoss 3 years ago
Actually, reactors 1,2, and 3 were used long after the explosion.
Bllasae 3 years ago 14
not exactly one operated until 1991 two-1996 and was operated until 2000 ^^ this is so cool but there should have more explanation come on even my history teacher wouldn't shut up about it
swiftdragoness88 3 years ago 3
because the radiation that was there before will still be there, plus the additional radiation from the weapon you use on it. Nuking it wont do ANY good.
dairmoss 3 years ago
dude i was being sarcastic. Do u really think I would suggest to nuke(!) a nuclear power plant?
nwLohmann 3 years ago
how does this help?
how can this work?
how about destorying the hell on earth
oh right it has enough nuclear crap to blow up the rest of europe!
well you got to surrender somit you love for the safety of others.
and it wont really help it'll just make a bigger risk zone
Cozek2 3 years ago
Genius' to the rescue once again. Thanks
Blues353 3 years ago
screwhammer can go fuck a hammer you nutless bustared have fun fucking your bosch hammer
postman4005 3 years ago
the poor bastards that have to work on that thing....nausea, cellular destruction, cancer for the rest of your life. You couldn't pay someone enough.
technologic21 3 years ago 5