You are viewing a single comment's thread.

view the rest of the comments →

0
2

[–] Kannibal [S] 0 points 2 points (+2|-0) ago 

well, considering the abundance of Wildlife around Chernobyl, I suspect life might continue just fine, although in a highly mutated form.

I am not particularly a big fan of this.

0
0

[–] CrustyBeaver52 ago 

There are some life forms - certain types of bacteria, for example, that do thrive in highly radioactive environments. We, however, will go the way of the dinosaurs, as will the vast majority of our ecosystem.

The Chernobyl leak was contained and eventually entombed - and even so was massively devastating - 100 plus unentombed reactors with giant nuclear fuel storage pools to feed ongoing radiation releases is of an entirely different magnitude, millions if not billions of times greater than Chernobyl or even the partially contained Fukushima. Very few life forms could survive exposure to that kind of radiation - so long as life is based on DNA, RNA and cellular building blocks.

I suspect they don't talk about this subject, because if people knew it was really like this, they might then move to have this dismantled, and well they should.

0
1

[–] Kannibal [S] 0 points 1 point (+1|-0) ago 

It's good to get a decent understanding of orders of magnitude.

https://blog.xkcd.com/2011/03/19/radiation-chart/

but point taken.

It would certainly depend greatly on weather patterns, etc. Northern vs southern Hemisphere, for example.

I suspect that sea life would far better. but even so.

I would have to check numbers on Fukishima, Chernobyl, etc.because the conclusion does not feel right, but it is not outrageous either