This was an extremely interesting read. I remember the story from when the detection were first made public. A Norwegian environmental organization wrote about a partial Russian admission to the...
This was an extremely interesting read.
I remember the story from when the detection were first made public.
To me this report by dozens of nuclear researchers essentially concludes the leak must come from a large and undeclared major nuclear release and that the isotopes when discovered in 2017 were around two years old (so the disaster happened in 2015?).
I readily admit I don't follow the science though, and that the scientific article probably buries the lead or may even have omitted it as "everyone" in the field may themselves manage to draw the right conclusion on where and what this apparent unknown nuclear accident is and where it took place.
This was an extremely interesting read.
I remember the story from when the detection were first made public.
A Norwegian environmental organization wrote about a partial Russian admission to the leak, although I can't find a more neutral source. The same organization speculated that this emission could be related to nuclear-powered missiles claimed by Putin a couple months later.
To me this report by dozens of nuclear researchers essentially concludes the leak must come from a large and undeclared major nuclear release and that the isotopes when discovered in 2017 were around two years old (so the disaster happened in 2015?).
I readily admit I don't follow the science though, and that the scientific article probably buries the lead or may even have omitted it as "everyone" in the field may themselves manage to draw the right conclusion on where and what this apparent unknown nuclear accident is and where it took place.