Comments on: Chernobyl wildlife sanctuary? http://www.environmentalgraffiti.com/ecology/chernobyl-wildlife-sanctuary/199 for environmentalists who don't take themselves too seriously Wed, 17 Mar 2010 16:31:59 -0400 http://wordpress.org/?v=2.8.6 hourly 1 By: Glenn Beard http://www.environmentalgraffiti.com/ecology/chernobyl-wildlife-sanctuary/199/comment-page-1#comment-375314 Glenn Beard Mon, 15 Mar 2010 03:36:44 +0000 http://www.environmentalgraffiti.com/?p=199#comment-375314 In order to really calculate the effects of radiation on the species, you would have to know the insect and bird diversity and count before the Chernobyl accident. The authors of the articles talked about a decline compared with other sites, but the question is how comparable those sites were with the Chernobyl area. If they are using areas that still have humans, that would affect the results. Some species, birds like pigeons in particular, do well with humans, and can actually increase in number. If you are comparing a true wilderness area that was never heavily settled by humans with Chernobyl, which has only been reverting to wilderness for the last 25 years, might account for the species diversity. Depending on which sites you use for comparison can affect the results. What is not in dispute is that larger mammals seem to be have greately benefitted from the Chernobyl, due to the removal of people from the area. Many of these mammals are rare. I can't help but thinking that anyone from the Piere and Marie Curie Institute is not going to be totally objective with regards to things nuclear. In order to really calculate the effects of radiation on the species, you would have to know the insect and bird diversity and count before the Chernobyl accident. The authors of the articles talked about a decline compared with other sites, but the question is how comparable those sites were with the Chernobyl area. If they are using areas that still have humans, that would affect the results. Some species, birds like pigeons in particular, do well with humans, and can actually increase in number. If you are comparing a true wilderness area that was never heavily settled by humans with Chernobyl, which has only been reverting to wilderness for the last 25 years, might account for the species diversity. Depending on which sites you use for comparison can affect the results.

What is not in dispute is that larger mammals seem to be have greately benefitted from the Chernobyl, due to the removal of people from the area. Many of these mammals are rare. I can’t help but thinking that anyone from the Piere and Marie Curie Institute is not going to be totally objective with regards to things nuclear.

]]> By: David http://www.environmentalgraffiti.com/ecology/chernobyl-wildlife-sanctuary/199/comment-page-1#comment-267199 David Fri, 25 Sep 2009 02:15:44 +0000 http://www.environmentalgraffiti.com/?p=199#comment-267199 Moller's (2005 & 2007) was only talking about one bird species, the 60% reduction refers to a 28% v's 40% seasonal return rate of Barn Swallow in the Chernobyl exclusion zone and a control area 250 km to the south east. It is not appropriate to extrapolate the breeding success of just Barn Swallows to judge the whole ecosystem there. Chernobyl is now the largest nature reserve in Europe, it has Lynx, Bear, European Bison, Przewalski's horse and Eagle Ow. The sad fact revealed by the Chernobyl disaster is, humans are more destructive than radiation. Moller’s (2005 & 2007) was only talking about one bird species, the 60% reduction refers to a 28% v’s 40% seasonal return rate of Barn Swallow in the Chernobyl exclusion zone and a control area 250 km to the south east. It is not appropriate to extrapolate the breeding success of just Barn Swallows to judge the whole ecosystem there. Chernobyl is now the largest nature reserve in Europe, it has Lynx, Bear, European Bison, Przewalski’s horse and Eagle Ow. The sad fact revealed by the Chernobyl disaster is, humans are more destructive than radiation.

]]> By: Justin Allison http://www.environmentalgraffiti.com/ecology/chernobyl-wildlife-sanctuary/199/comment-page-1#comment-261506 Justin Allison Tue, 01 Sep 2009 21:43:38 +0000 http://www.environmentalgraffiti.com/?p=199#comment-261506 Yeah... that image is a fake, I saw it in an American newspaper. What I think the other Justin is saying, is that there is no "safe" form of high energy output. The meltdown of reactor building #4 is the only nuclear event to ever reach a 7 on the nuclear disaster scale. It had a meltdown due to is design. The cooling rods actually raised the temperature of the reactor initially. What happened is that the reactor kept getting hotter, so they inserted more cooling rods, and because of the design, raised the temperature even more, causing them to melt, and no more could be inserted. Then, the main steam valve burst, and it all went downhill from there. Yeah… that image is a fake, I saw it in an American newspaper. What I think the other Justin is saying, is that there is no “safe” form of high energy output. The meltdown of reactor building #4 is the only nuclear event to ever reach a 7 on the nuclear disaster scale. It had a meltdown due to is design. The cooling rods actually raised the temperature of the reactor initially. What happened is that the reactor kept getting hotter, so they inserted more cooling rods, and because of the design, raised the temperature even more, causing them to melt, and no more could be inserted. Then, the main steam valve burst, and it all went downhill from there.

]]> By: Justin http://www.environmentalgraffiti.com/ecology/chernobyl-wildlife-sanctuary/199/comment-page-1#comment-245733 Justin Fri, 10 Jul 2009 17:16:57 +0000 http://www.environmentalgraffiti.com/?p=199#comment-245733 Photoshopped for purposes of fear mongering. Look at the pixelation of the photo. Poor quality + large pixels = easy to photoshop. That is merely 3 frogs stacked on each other to look as though it were a 3 headed frog. Look closely and you can see all of their hind legs. God environmentalist zealots are gullible :p "No more pollution! No more coal! No more fossil fuels!" Ok, how about nuclear energy that is far safer than all of the above, the most efficient, and almost no waste(the radioactive waste is recyclable...you can run it back through the plant over and over again until there is nothing left but H2O. But I didn't suspect the leftists would tell ya that). "No! It's a time bomb!" Blah blah blah. Like wind turbines won't fall on people and kill hundreds in suburban areas, like hydro-electric dams haven't failed on killed thousands...and Nuclear sites have only killed a few people if any at all? Hmm...makes ya wonder. But if the environmentalists had their way, all people would just die off to leave the earth to mother nature. Photoshopped for purposes of fear mongering. Look at the pixelation of the photo. Poor quality + large pixels = easy to photoshop. That is merely 3 frogs stacked on each other to look as though it were a 3 headed frog. Look closely and you can see all of their hind legs. God environmentalist zealots are gullible :p
“No more pollution! No more coal! No more fossil fuels!” Ok, how about nuclear energy that is far safer than all of the above, the most efficient, and almost no waste(the radioactive waste is recyclable…you can run it back through the plant over and over again until there is nothing left but H2O. But I didn’t suspect the leftists would tell ya that). “No! It’s a time bomb!” Blah blah blah. Like wind turbines won’t fall on people and kill hundreds in suburban areas, like hydro-electric dams haven’t failed on killed thousands…and Nuclear sites have only killed a few people if any at all? Hmm…makes ya wonder. But if the environmentalists had their way, all people would just die off to leave the earth to mother nature.

]]> By: rob robertson http://www.environmentalgraffiti.com/ecology/chernobyl-wildlife-sanctuary/199/comment-page-1#comment-237102 rob robertson Sun, 14 Jun 2009 02:36:18 +0000 http://www.environmentalgraffiti.com/?p=199#comment-237102 You enlightened a serious reality, it is a reminder that a nuclear timebomb can occur at a energy plant, if not proplerly maintained. You enlightened a serious reality, it is a reminder that a nuclear timebomb can occur at a energy plant, if not proplerly maintained.

]]> By: Anton http://www.environmentalgraffiti.com/ecology/chernobyl-wildlife-sanctuary/199/comment-page-1#comment-303 Anton Wed, 15 Aug 2007 15:45:30 +0000 http://www.environmentalgraffiti.com/?p=199#comment-303 That frog sure gets around. He was seen in the UK back in 2004 at a nursery school. http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/england/somerset/3534361.stm That frog sure gets around. He was seen in the UK back in 2004 at a nursery school.
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/england/somerset/3534361.stm

]]>