Animation of the future construction of the arch that will encase Chernobyl.
Login to rate this video.
Embed this video
Send to a friend
Comments
18 comments posted so far. Expand all comments Login to add a comment.
16 
I can't help thinking that it would be much cheaper and cost-effective to build all nuclear power stations inside concrete bunkers in the first place. Then if and when they blow, just close the door and move on. Problem solved!
26
6. ValdeLevis 312 days ago
#2 That is one of the major problems in a nutshell, or with no shell actually. The Chernobyl power plant was built on the cheap, it had no containment vessel for the reactor core. There were other design flaws as well that contributed to the disaster. The arch should serve as a reminder of what doesn't work.
40
Can't help but think that it's a bit late for that. :s
And there will be no leak coming from the uncovered building side?
40
9. TarasFromLviv 312 days ago
#4 I don't think #3 saw it as a problem, it's just a rather impressive thing to see.
As a Ukrainian citizen (for now), I think it's a real pity that Chornobyl (the correct pronunciation) is our "brand", 8 out of 10 people ask me if I was born anywhere in its neighborhood, 5 do it in a really stupid, non-tolerant way.
Anyway, I am happy to see that this problem is being solved.
27
I'm no nuclear energy/waste expert at all, but i have a few douts
1. locking up the reactor wont help much since all the area is contaminated. ground, buildings etc...
2. concrete doesn't stop radiation, lead does.
3. concrete also decays because of radiation, so is this an expensive band aid for the half life of radioactive materials that will last hundreds of years?
12
Concrete won't stop gamma radiation unless there's lots of it. Won't the slabs they're using to protect the workers crack underneath the arches if there's nothing strong underneath them? Concrete doesn't perform well in tension...
16
#15. "Concrete doesn't perform well in tension..." Correct, and that's why steel is added to it, and steel performs extremely well in tension, while concrete performs very well in compression. Result? Reinforced concrete. Very, very strong.
Oh, and as far as stopping gamma radiation: "...gamma rays that require 1 cm (0.4 inches) of lead to reduce their intensity by 50% will also have their intensity reduced in half by 6 cm (2½ inches) of concrete or 9 cm (3½ inches) of packed dirt.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gamma_rays"
So I think concrete is a pretty good material to use.
22
17. Comment rated too low. Show this comment Nightcamo 310 days ago
What a lovely video. This shows how safe nuclear energy is, people!!!
Without nuclear energy they couldn't even build such a beautiful structure. Isn't it worth it? 
(93 votes)
+18
1. kashinthebin 312 days ago
if you have 10 spare min than watch this video