are the effects of said detonation on the inhabitants, flora and fauna still studied for long term effects?
2007-01-15 08:41:34 · 12 answers · asked by riceboy 2 in Environment
An atomic weapon contains less than 100 kg of radioactive material, and when it detonates it spreads over a wide area. The radioactivity is horrendous, but it does subside with time.
At Chernobyl, there were many tons of radioactive material, all concentrated in a large block. It will be a very, very long time before it is safe.
2007-01-15 08:46:13 · answer #1 · answered by Keith P 7 · 1⤊ 1⤋
They were different types of nuclear emissions. The atomic bombs in Japan released relatively more energy than long-lasting radiation. Chernobyl was a very 'dirty' explosion and fire that produced much more lasting radioactive material.
The area around Chernobyl is still being studied, albeit not as intensely or openly as some would like. I'd suspect that Hiroshima and Nagasaki are still under study, but haven't seen recent data.
2007-01-15 08:50:27 · answer #2 · answered by dukefenton 7 · 0⤊ 1⤋
i live in stranraer which has a high rate of cancer deaths due to the chernobyl disaster,we suffered due to the fall out which was carried by the wind.
this has been known for years yet we still have to travel 75 miles for cancer screening and the new hospital that has been built doesnt even have an ultra sound scanner.farmers where not compansated when live stock died of radioactive poisoning.THE MOD do tests all year round here and still no goverment compansation for families affected...
do a seach and find out your self how southwest scotland and dumfries and galloway was affected..
2007-01-15 09:33:08 · answer #3 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
well for one chernobyl was never completely c losed the power out put from a plant is much more than the small bombs we used to end the war
2007-01-15 08:46:08 · answer #4 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
The reactor was restricted. However the *atmosphere* and *water table* were impossible to restrict, and radioactive junk got carried near and far from the site of the accident.
2007-01-15 08:46:15 · answer #5 · answered by Jerry P 6 · 0⤊ 1⤋
Because Russia can afford to give up Chernobyl.
2007-01-15 08:44:32 · answer #6 · answered by my alias 4 · 0⤊ 1⤋
further you go from the site less radiation there is. Chenobyl was obviously the closest while the cities, while getting some effects from the radiation were and are less effected.
2007-01-15 08:47:52 · answer #7 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 1⤋
Yes, cancer rates are higher in hiroshima and nagasaki. You'll have to look up statistics on the internet for more details though.
2007-01-15 08:46:11 · answer #8 · answered by 006 6 · 0⤊ 1⤋
because it is to dangerous for the people to leave as the radiation could spread even further plus it may sound stupid but some of the people may have adapted to the radiation and taking them out could kill them.
2007-01-15 08:51:22 · answer #9 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 1⤋
there was less radioactive materials in the bomb, and japanses cleaned up the place by removing all irradiated soil & bricks.
2007-01-15 08:45:53 · answer #10 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 1⤋