How long can our infrastructure (water, electricity, etc) last in a zombie apocalypse?

[heng]

There has been a very good book about that (or at least similar) topic:

The World Without Us by Alan Weisman

He follows what we know about our world, if suddenly all of humanity is removed.

From short term (flooded subways) to long term (what will be the last remaining relics of humanity?).

If you are interested in this kind of stuff, this book is highly recommended.

[AngelLestat]

That said, one of the best places to be during a zombie apocalypse would probably be a power plant, especially a nuclear one. Multiple redundant sources of power, access to water, food on site, usually far from civilisation, and those places are fortresses. You're not getting anywhere near one if the people inside don't want you there..

heh, how in the hell you plan to manage a nuclear plant by you own?

First you need electricity to manage a nuclear plant. Even with its backup supply, it would be impossible to manage all that.. also you need to produce the amount of power that you will consume, because if you dont.. you overload the powerlines and all the system.

The most probably is that mostly all nuclear plants (with some exceptions of new designs) would end with a meltdown few days after power loss.

Workers would not stay in the power plants when their families need help. Also with so many systems failing in the cities, it will be pointless.

Water would last only for 1 day after power loss (similar to natural gas), tanks might look big, but they are quite small compared with consumption, the main objective of gravity tanks, is to balance the consumption rate with the power of the pumps. Also not all towns and cities use gravity tanks, some use pressurized systems from ground which cost less.

The best location that I would choose to stay is in a self-sustaining house, those very far from cities.

Cities without power are completely pointless, they are a deathtrap.

Edited July 6, 2015 by AngelLestat

[peadar1987]

heh, how in the hell you plan to manage a nuclear plant by you own?

You don't. Once you lose grid connection, the reactor is shut down, and the backup diesels kick in to run the gas circulators, as they are designed to do.

First you need electricity to manage a nuclear plant. Even with its backup supply, it would be impossible to manage all that.. also you need to produce the amount of power that you will consume, because if you dont.. you overload the powerlines and all the system.

Which is exactly why there are several weeks worth of fuel for the backup diesels on-site.

The most probably is that mostly all nuclear plants (with some exceptions of new designs) would end with a meltdown few days after power loss.

Workers would not stay in the power plants when their families need help. Also with so many systems failing in the cities, it will be pointless.

You don't even need workers. The reactor trips, the diesels kick in automatically, keeping all plant systems running for weeks until the decay heat from the reactor has died away. Meanwhile, everyone inside the compound is protected by two barbed wire fences, strong walls, and the Civilian Nuclear Constabulary, armed with assault weapons.

Water would last only for 1 day after power loss (similar to natural gas), tanks might look big, but they are quite small compared with consumption, the main objective of gravity tanks, is to balance the consumption rate with the power of the pumps. Also not all towns and cities use gravity tanks, some use pressurized systems from ground which cost less.

In the UK, and much of Europe, water reservoirs are large lakes above the level of the population. If Glasgow was abandoned tomorrow, the water would keep flowing until the water pipe from Loch Katrine to Milngavie corroded through, many years from now.

To be honest, there is a huge number of buildings designed to keep people out. Even people with fully-functioning brains. My local supermarket could just put down the shutters over the front windows and wait for the zombies to starve to death. They're not going to get past steel shutters, they probably can't even operate a door handle properly (it's not as though they're velociraptors or something!)

[Moar Boosters]

heh, how in the hell you plan to manage a nuclear plant by you own?

First you need electricity to manage a nuclear plant. Even with its backup supply, it would be impossible to manage all that.. also you need to produce the amount of power that you will consume, because if you dont.. you overload the powerlines and all the system.

The most probably is that mostly all nuclear plants (with some exceptions of new designs) would end with a meltdown few days after power loss.

Workers would not stay in the power plants when their families need help. Also with so many systems failing in the cities, it will be pointless.

Water would last only for 1 day after power loss (similar to natural gas), tanks might look big, but they are quite small compared with consumption, the main objective of gravity tanks, is to balance the consumption rate with the power of the pumps. Also not all towns and cities use gravity tanks, some use pressurized systems from ground which cost less.

The best location that I would choose to stay is in a self-sustaining house, those very far from cities.

Cities without power are completely pointless, they are a deathtrap.

Even if the power plant keeps pumping out power without problems (eg geothermal, or hydroelectric) eventually a blown component in a substation, or a branch falling on a line would escalate into a city-wide conflagration. A city without power is a death-trap all-right, but a city with power and no engineers is even worse.

[Laie]

Soo the concensus is about days for electricity, but months for water?

Probably not. While a lot of electricity can be produced with little human intervention, the distribution is a different matter. Without anyone to look after it, all kind of safety switches will pretty much shut down the grid in very short time. Like minutes or -at best- hours.

Most water supplies will effectively cease working as soon as there is no power. Same for gas. For both, I can conceive of setups and/or scenarios that will keep working until the supply runs out or the pipes break down, but presume those to be the exception, not the rule. Anything that still works on day three will probably work "indefinitely".

[benzman]

There has been a very good book about that (or at least similar) topic:

The World Without Us by Alan Weisman

He follows what we know about our world, if suddenly all of humanity is removed.

From short term (flooded subways) to long term (what will be the last remaining relics of humanity?).

If you are interested in this kind of stuff, this book is highly recommended.

Agreed.

[peadar1987]

Probably not. While a lot of electricity can be produced with little human intervention, the distribution is a different matter. Without anyone to look after it, all kind of safety switches will pretty much shut down the grid in very short time. Like minutes or -at best- hours.

Most water supplies will effectively cease working as soon as there is no power. Same for gas. For both, I can conceive of setups and/or scenarios that will keep working until the supply runs out or the pipes break down, but presume those to be the exception, not the rule. Anything that still works on day three will probably work "indefinitely".

Although conversely, as long as somebody is looking after the distribution, the power grid is pretty resilient. So long as the controllers themselves aren't among the first killed or infected, the grid will probably stay on. Things like wind turbines don't need constant supervision, and large power plants aren't the sort of places the walking dead can just shuffle into, seeing as they are quite effectively stopped by things like fences and strong doors.

[Laie]

So long as the controllers themselves aren't among the first killed or infected

And feel no desire to look after their relatives... If everybody would do the sane thing, there probably wouldn't be much of an apocalypse to begin with.

For practical purposes, any house with PV on the roof will probably go a long way. It's not as if you'd have much use for electricity anyways. Or do you expect to roast a turkey a day?

[Stargate525]

For practical purposes, any house with PV on the roof will probably go a long way. It's not as if you'd have much use for electricity anyways. Or do you expect to roast a turkey a day?

A single PV on the roof will probably be just enough to keep your fridge going. Maybe. You want to run a sump pump to keep your basement dry? Power tools? floodlights? It adds up quickly.

[peadar1987]

And feel no desire to look after their relatives... If everybody would do the sane thing, there probably wouldn't be much of an apocalypse to begin with.

They're in a secure, easily-defended location. If anything, the sane and compassionate thing to do would be to call their relatives, and get them to bring food there and ride the whole thing out.

[Laie]

A single PV on the roof will probably be just enough to keep your fridge going. Maybe. You want to run a sump pump to keep your basement dry? Power tools? floodlights? It adds up quickly.

What kind of operation do you expect to run? Where do you get perishable food for the fridge, what do you want to do with power tools? Besides, you get a lot of motion out of a little electricity. Or radio reception and even transmission. Or laptop playtime. Heat is what's truly expensive (the winter will be fun on solar power).

I see no purpose in running floodlights. There's plenty of light through the day, and if you're confined to your shelter, the days will be looong. A nightlight will only attract critters.

[AngelLestat]

You don't. Once you lose grid connection, the reactor is shut down, and the backup diesels kick in to run the gas circulators, as they are designed to do.

Which is exactly why there are several weeks worth of fuel for the backup diesels on-site.

I know.. but you know what is all that fuel for? To keep the reactor cool after shutdown...

And it would not last much with that chaos everywhere.

Why? Because nuclear plants (with very few exceptions) were only designed to survive local failures, not a full system by several days. Because if that things happens, very unlikely would be a justice system searching people to blame after that.

A zombie apocalypse seems unlikely, but a strong solar flare or EMP that overload the grid is not.

Some nuclear plants might have safety shutdown mechanism or enoght fuel if there is people to control it, but they would last few months, not sure if it would be enoght to reach the cold shutdown.

In the UK, and much of Europe, water reservoirs are large lakes above the level of the population. If Glasgow was abandoned tomorrow, the water would keep flowing until the water pipe from Loch Katrine to Milngavie corroded through, many years from now.

Well, in that case yeah.. they will keep the water.. but water is the most easy to get.. You just need to collect it when it rains.

To be honest, there is a huge number of buildings designed to keep people out. Even people with fully-functioning brains. My local supermarket could just put down the shutters over the front windows and wait for the zombies to starve to death. They're not going to get past steel shutters, they probably can't even operate a door handle properly (it's not as though they're velociraptors or something!)

You have much faith in the human race. The real problem if you are in a supermarket with full supplies, it will be the other humans who need those supplies and they will kill for them.

Even if the power plant keeps pumping out power without problems (eg geothermal, or hydroelectric) eventually a blown component in a substation, or a branch falling on a line would escalate into a city-wide conflagration. A city without power is a death-trap all-right, but a city with power and no engineers is even worse.

Yeah but that last cant happen, the systems that keeps the grid loads on control are very complex, in some cases a reverse energy flow can blow up the same energy sources.

Although conversely, as long as somebody is looking after the distribution, the power grid is pretty resilient. So long as the controllers themselves aren't among the first killed or infected, the grid will probably stay on. Things like wind turbines don't need constant supervision, and large power plants aren't the sort of places the walking dead can just shuffle into, seeing as they are quite effectively stopped by things like fences and strong doors.

The same that I said up there.. You should read more about load balance techniques and power distribution with demand.

There are very complex mechanism responsible to keep all working, even with that you have big voltage changes at some hours, but they are very susceptibles to fail on accidents or natural disasters. When pieces start to fall, all fall. That is why the best thing to do is to start shutdown all the power.

For practical purposes, any house with PV on the roof will probably go a long way. It's not as if you'd have much use for electricity anyways. Or do you expect to roast a turkey a day?

That is another task.. to think in good uses for electricity after an apocalyse. Edited July 6, 2015 by AngelLestat

[peadar1987]

I know.. but you know what is all that fuel for? To keep the reactor cool after shutdown...

I have worked in a nuclear power plant as a fuel route engineer, I know why we need post-trip cooling!

And it would not last much with that chaos everywhere.

Why? Because nuclear plants (with very few exceptions) were only designed to survive local failures, not a full system by several days. Because if that things happens, very unlikely would be a justice system searching people to blame after that.

A zombie apocalypse seems unlikely, but a strong solar flare or EMP that overload the grid is not.

Some nuclear plants might have safety shutdown mechanism or enoght fuel if there is people to control it, but they would last few months, not sure if it would be enoght to reach the cold shutdown.

The industry standard is enough fuel to run the diesels at full load for 30 days. By that time, an AGR will have cooled enough not to cause a core meltdown of breach of primary containment (although it will most likely still heat up enough to thoroughly wreck the reactor core and ensure it will probably never be started up again)

Many boiling or pressurised water designs can drive post-trip cooling systems via their own decay heat. The CANDU is a good example (and a good example of many other things as well, it's a wonderful reactor)

You have much faith in the human race. The real problem if you are in a supermarket with full supplies, it will be the other humans who need those supplies and they will kill for them.

Good luck to them getting in as well. It's not easy to break into places, even if you're an angry mob.

Besides, my point was more that there are plenty of places that are hard to get into, and for the first week or so, people are going to just hunker down, and live on what supplies they have available to them.

Among those places are military bases and government buildings (as well as most apartment blocks, and any houses that don't have ground-floor windows) so the apparatus of the state will be more than capable of functioning. Resupply drops will be organised, the army will move in, the infestation will be cleared, and the outbreak will be over quickly.

Yeah but that last cant happen, the systems that keeps the grid loads on control are very complex, in some cases a reverse energy flow can blow up the same energy sources.

The same that I said up there.. You should read more about load balance techniques and power distribution with demand.

There are very complex mechanism responsible to keep all working, even with that you have big voltage changes at some hours, but they are very susceptibles to fail on accidents or natural disasters. When pieces start to fall, all fall. That is why the best thing to do is to start shutdown all the power.

Yes, if you start losing generation capacity you begin introducing rolling brownouts and other load-shedding. I have taken university-level courses in power electronics, so I know it's not easy to balance load and generation capacity, however, it can be done, particularly if most of the power stations are still running, as I imagine they probably would be.

[Geschosskopf]

In the unlikely case of a zombie apocalypse, how long can we realistically expect things like water and electricity and perhaps even the internet to last without people around to take care of them?

Given that most utilities are government projects, that all government functionaries are already zombies, and that zombies keep on doing their jobs mechanically, I imagine that what we can continue to count on in the zombie apocalypse is the power grid, the gas, and the water. The internet, however, is only kept alive by the constant attention of real people so will immediately cease to exist.

(spoken by a zombified firefighter)

[AngelLestat]

I have worked in a nuclear power plant as a fuel route engineer, I know why we need post-trip cooling!

Nice... what a fuel route engineer does? Also, I imagine that you actually knew, I just said it with irony

The industry standard is enough fuel to run the diesels at full load for 30 days. By that time, an AGR will have cooled enough not to cause a core meltdown of breach of primary containment (although it will most likely still heat up enough to thoroughly wreck the reactor core and ensure it will probably never be started up again)

Many boiling or pressurised water designs can drive post-trip cooling systems via their own decay heat. The CANDU is a good example (and a good example of many other things as well, it's a wonderful reactor)

Here I need to disagree, standards make work in the theoretical world, but in the real world that is rarely taken care. Unless you are in a very seriously country, as Canada.

Among those places are military bases and government buildings (as well as most apartment blocks, and any houses that don't have ground-floor windows) so the apparatus of the state will be more than capable of functioning. Resupply drops will be organised, the army will move in, the infestation will be cleared, and the outbreak will be over quickly.

So the solution is wait for help that you dont know if it will come?

Yeah, if you are close to a military base, and this military base was not compromised, and they dont kill you in your approach.. then yeah.. you might be secure, but if the chaos keeps spreading, then the military can not do much.

Yes, if you start losing generation capacity you begin introducing rolling brownouts and other load-shedding. I have taken university-level courses in power electronics, so I know it's not easy to balance load and generation capacity, however, it can be done, particularly if most of the power stations are still running, as I imagine they probably would be.

I am trying to explain something from my first post.. but without luck..

The problem is not just higher demand and low power generation, you also need to care to not produce more than the power demand or the grid will be several damaged, why you think that under huge demand lost almost all power stations shutdown automatically..

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Power_outage

"Protecting the power system from outages:

In power supply networks, the power generation and the electrical load (demand) must be very close to equal every second to avoid overloading of network components, which can severely damage them. Protective relays and fuses are used to automatically detect overloads and to disconnect circuits at risk of damage.

Under certain conditions, a network component shutting down can cause current fluctuations in neighboring segments of the network leading to a cascading failure of a larger section of the network. This may range from a building, to a block, to an entire city, to an entire electrical grid.

Modern power systems are designed to be resistant to this sort of cascading failure, but it may be unavoidable (see below). Moreover, since there is no short-term economic benefit to preventing rare large-scale failures, researchers have expressed concern that there is a tendency to erode the resilience of the network over time, which is only corrected after a major failure occurs. In a 2003 publication, Carreras and co-authors claimed that reducing the likelihood of small outages only increases the likelihood of larger ones.[1] In that case, the short-term economic benefit of keeping the individual customer happy increases the likelihood of large-scale blackouts."

Also military guards nuclear plants, to avoid anyone from outside enters... so is not a place where you can go to ask for help. They duty is to keep all in control, so the workers can try to avoid a meltdown.

[peadar1987]

Nice... what a fuel route engineer does? Also, I imagine that you actually knew, I just said it with irony

I was part of the Fuel Route team, so we were responsible for every aspect of the fuel when it was on plant, apart from when it was in the reactor. People on my team unpacked the fuel, built it into the stringers for the reactor, ran the fuelling machine, loaded the reactor, defuelled it when it was depleted, cut up the stringers, sent them to the fuel pond, loaded the fuel skips, decontaminated them, and sent them on their way. Every bit of equipment along this route was also our responsibility, so the fuelling machine, skip hoist, fuel pond cooling pumps, we maintained all of those. It was a big team! I was the best at using CAD in the team (as most of the other engineers were from pre-computerised days), so I ended up working on a lot of projects between the different areas. I'd get attached to a project whenever they needed CAD done, and then stay with them till the whole thing was finished.

Worst job was refurbishing the solenoids on the fuelling machine grab. The maintenance pit was underneath the Charge Hall floor, right next to the reactor. It was about 35 degrees, and screaming with radioactivity, wearing full contamination gear. I nearly boiled alive! And all your gear is considered contaminated, so you can't even wipe the sweat off your brow, you just have to let it run down into your eyes.

Here I need to disagree, standards make work in the theoretical world, but in the real world that is rarely taken care. Unless you are in a very seriously country, as Canada.

The nuclear industry is incredibly tightly regulated. If you don't stick to the industry standards, the Nuclear Regulator will shut you down. It's happened before. Sometimes the regulations are short-sighted, the sea wall at Fukushima for example, but once they're there, you obey them or you lose your site license.

So the solution is wait for help that you dont know if it will come?

Yeah, if you are close to a military base, and this military base was not compromised, and they dont kill you in your approach.. then yeah.. you might be secure, but if the chaos keeps spreading, then the military can not do much.

For the first few days at least, you'd be stupid not to. You have water, food, and security. If you've used up your food and there's no sign of rescue after a couple of days (and remember, you're still probably going to have power, which means TV, radio and internet are all still working), then you try and get out.

A zombie apocalypse wouldn't be an instantaneous thing. Let's say it broke out in Leeds, close to the very centre of the UK. Glasgow is 350km to the north. London is a similar distance to the south. Leeds would probably be in trouble, lots of people would get infected, but the rest of the country would be absolutely fine. It takes a long time to walk/shuffle 300km. It makes no sense for people to leave their homes when 99% of the country is still operational and probably gearing up to rescue them.

I am trying to explain something from my first post.. but without luck..

The problem is not just higher demand and low power generation, you also need to care to not produce more than the power demand or the grid will be several damaged, why you think that under huge demand lost almost all power stations shutdown automatically..

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Power_outage

"Protecting the power system from outages:

In power supply networks, the power generation and the electrical load (demand) must be very close to equal every second to avoid overloading of network components, which can severely damage them. Protective relays and fuses are used to automatically detect overloads and to disconnect circuits at risk of damage.

Under certain conditions, a network component shutting down can cause current fluctuations in neighboring segments of the network leading to a cascading failure of a larger section of the network. This may range from a building, to a block, to an entire city, to an entire electrical grid.

Modern power systems are designed to be resistant to this sort of cascading failure, but it may be unavoidable (see below). Moreover, since there is no short-term economic benefit to preventing rare large-scale failures, researchers have expressed concern that there is a tendency to erode the resilience of the network over time, which is only corrected after a major failure occurs. In a 2003 publication, Carreras and co-authors claimed that reducing the likelihood of small outages only increases the likelihood of larger ones.[1] In that case, the short-term economic benefit of keeping the individual customer happy increases the likelihood of large-scale blackouts."

You're dead right, and the controllers can do this quite simply by reducing the supply voltage (brownouts) or by cutting the supply entirely to certain areas of the grid (blackouts). To put this in perspective, in 2011, high winds brought down power lines connected to Hunterston B power station in Scotland. Scotland's average electrical power consumption is about 3.9GW. Hunterston is a 1.2GWe station, so in a matter of seconds, the Scottish grid lost 30% of its generating capacity. The grid was able to compensate without collapsing, or even large-scale blackouts.

Also military guards nuclear plants, to avoid anyone from outside enters... so is not a place where you can go to ask for help. They duty is to keep all in control, so the workers can try to avoid a meltdown.

My original point was that a power plant would be a good place to be, not a good place to go looking for help. I once had to wait for over an hour before being allowed to leave site, because my access card didn't register that I had left the reactor building when I swiped it. I was clearly who I said I was, and was obviously not still in the reactor building, but policy was that in the slightest case of something not being quite right, I was essentially thrown in a cell until the security team were satisfied nothing suspicious was going on. Security is very tight!

Edited July 7, 2015 by peadar1987

[AngelLestat]

I was part of the Fuel Route team, so we were responsible for every aspect of the fuel when it was on plant

Worst job was refurbishing the solenoids on the fuelling machine grab. The maintenance pit was underneath the Charge Hall floor, right next to the reactor. It was about 35 degrees, and screaming with radioactivity, wearing full contamination gear. I nearly boiled alive! And all your gear is considered contaminated, so you can't even wipe the sweat off your brow, you just have to let it run down into your eyes.

Heh scary. So you cant even touch the inside side of the plastic from the gear? So you need cloth between, and what happens with that cloth?

Because the gears are just to not let enter atmosphere particles which you can breath or they can stick to your body.

But the inside from the suit should be equal safe than the interior (by safe I mean discarding all the penetrating

radiation we receive) Or I missing something?

The nuclear industry is incredibly tightly regulated. If you don't stick to the industry standards, the Nuclear Regulator will shut you down. It's happened before. Sometimes the regulations are short-sighted, the sea wall at Fukushima for example, but once they're there, you obey them or you lose your site license.

Maybe in the UK, Canada and Germany.. But I would not so sure on other places, inspections can be bribed, many countries have their own sovereignty and those standards may be taken as recomendations for them... I really doubt that my country nuclear plants fulfill all safety standards.

For the first few days at least, you'd be stupid not to. You have water, food, and security. If you've used up your food and there's no sign of rescue after a couple of days (and remember, you're still probably going to have power, which means TV, radio and internet are all still working), then you try and get out.

Yeah.. that might be true in the UK or USA. But not all other countries had military bases every 100 km.

In fact, military in some coutries is just a force to deal with some minor disasters, because they never go to war, they dont need it.

Here in Argentina if someone goes to a military base, it will be to help them, not otherwise

A zombie apocalypse wouldn't be an instantaneous thing. Let's say it broke out in Leeds, close to the very centre of the UK. Glasgow is 350km to the north. London is a similar distance to the south. Leeds would probably be in trouble, lots of people would get infected, but the rest of the country would be absolutely fine. It takes a long time to walk/shuffle 300km. It makes no sense for people to leave their homes when 99% of the country is still operational and probably gearing up to rescue them.

My first estimation that I did depends on how fast it will spread. So yeah, I dont have a real number. And it would vary depending the movie we watch, if is world war Z, it will be pretty fast.

You're dead right, and the controllers can do this quite simply by reducing the supply voltage (brownouts) or by cutting the supply entirely to certain areas of the grid (blackouts). To put this in perspective, in 2011, high winds brought down power lines connected to Hunterston B power station in Scotland. Scotland's average electrical power consumption is about 3.9GW. Hunterston is a 1.2GWe station, so in a matter of seconds, the Scottish grid lost 30% of its generating capacity. The grid was able to compensate without collapsing, or even large-scale blackouts.

Another factor to have into account is CHAOS. Our systems and cities can deal with just a certain amount of chaos, but if that increase all changes.

Even if a zombie invasion dint reach your city, only with the news you will have total chaos, people assaulting supermarkets, getting arms, trying to leave the city, cars crashing against services infrastructure, it will all collapse in matter of hours.

If you are in a big group of people, just 1 that is bitten, it will compromise all the others.

In chaos scenaries, even without zombies, people is the most threatening to our survival. So we need far away all we can from the danger.

So even if we find people in those locations, we may have more chances, because it would not be under high stress or frenesi moments.

By last, if you survive in your city shelter, but you are rouning out of resources, so you need to move on.. I prefer leave a shelter in the middle of nowhere than in the city..

It all depends on the magnitud of the chaos.

[peadar1987]

Heh scary. So you cant even touch the inside side of the plastic from the gear? So you need cloth between, and what happens with that cloth?

Because the gears are just to not let enter atmosphere particles which you can breath or they can stick to your body.

But the inside from the suit should be equal safe than the interior (by safe I mean discarding all the penetrating

radiation we receive) Or I missing something?

Basically you've got two types of exposure in the plant, radiation and contamination. Radiation isn't so bad really, you wear a dose meter the whole time, and if your dose goes above a certain limit, an alarm goes off and you can get clear. The alarms are always set at a level far below what would be hazardous to your health.

Contamination is essentially small bits of radioactive dirt, grease, metal filings, or whatever. Not only does it emit radiation, it has a tendency to stick to anything that touches it. If you are in a contaminated area without protective gear, you will get contamination all over you, then track it all over the station, wherever you go, which means that the radiation is no longer contained to the areas you expect it to be. Also, if you get contamination inside your body, it will continue to irradiate you for a very long time, and you cant avoid it by just leaving the room.

The gear we have offers pretty much no protection against radiation. It would have to be incredibly heavy, and you couldn't get any work done. The main thing the protective gear is for is to stop contamination.

We had cloth overalls, rubber gloves, a hairnet, and big yellow overshoes so no contamination got on our clothes underneath:

(This guy is actually doing it wrong, as he has a "clean" shoe down on the "contaminated" side of the line. Not likely to cause any major problems in practice, but it will still get you shouted at!)

We also had a small mask covering our mouths and noses, so we didn't breathe in any radioactive dust. Your face apart from your mouth and nose is uncovered, but your hands are considered contaminated, so you're not allowed to touch your face (so naturally you instantly develop an itch as soon as you put on the gear!)

The idea is that you can get as much contamination and rubbish on the outside of your protective overalls as you want, then when you leave the area, you take them off, taking care not to touch your "clean" hands or clothes to the "dirty" outside of the contamination gear. Contaminated stuff goes into a box, which gets taken to the "active laundry" to have all the contamination washed out of the gear so it can be re-used (another part of our job was managing the Active Effluent Treatment Plant, which took all liquid waste streams like the one from the Active Laundry, it separates everything out into clean water, and some particularly horrible, foul-smelling radioactive sludge).

The main problem on the fuelling machine grab job wasn't the radiation or contamination as such, it was the fact that it was a contaminated area, so we had to wear normal office clothes as a base layer, work overalls on top of that to protect against sharp objects, etc, then contamination overalls over them, all in 30 degrees.

That wasn't the worst, though. A guy I was working with on a similar job had a terrible cold, and his nose wouldn't stop running. He wasn't able to touch his face with anything contaminated to blow his nose, so pretty much everything nearby, including his hands, were out. He ended up having to grab the outside of his overalls (dirty) with his hand, pulling them up over his face, and blowing his nose into the (clean) inside of his overalls. Eew!

All this stuff relates to "C2" areas.

"C1" is anywhere inside the reactor building. You don't need a special suit or anything as it's not anticipated there's any contamination. You do have to have a radiation scan on the way out of the C1 area, just to make sure though. I never saw anybody fail one of these.

(This is one of the scanners)

"C2" is specially designated areas where there is probably solid contamination, dust, grease, metal filings etc. You have to wear the gear I talked about earlier, and get a separate scan when you leave. A friend of mine failed a scan on the way out of one of these. He chose gloves that were too small, and they split while he was working. Health Physics came and scrubbed half his skin off until they were happy all the contamination was gone.

"C3" is liquid contamination, and "C4" is radioactive gases. I wasn't allowed anywhere near those. You have full waterproof rubber suits that take ages to put on, a "Tornado Hood", and your own separate breathing supply.

Maybe in the UK, Canada and Germany.. But I would not so sure on other places, inspections can be bribed, many countries have their own sovereignty and those standards may be taken as recomendations for them... I really doubt that my country nuclear plants fulfill all safety standards.

All of my own experience is with a French-owned company in the UK, so I can only speak with any authority about the UK and France, but the regulators don't mess around. They will give out big fines for noncompliance. And they're international, so are unlikely to be bribed as easily as smaller national regulators might be.

Yeah.. that might be true in the UK or USA. But not all other countries had military bases every 100 km.

In fact, military in some coutries is just a force to deal with some minor disasters, because they never go to war, they dont need it.

Here in Argentina if someone goes to a military base, it will be to help them, not otherwise

Haha. Well even for the most rudimentary of militaries, a zombie isn't much of a threat. It's slow-moving, has no intelligence or guile at all, and is pretty much completely predictable. Most people will get somewhere secure, and be completely safe, only the very slow and the stupid will be infected. I mean, if the disease is spread by bites, it's unlikely to get past the first few people. Somebody goes crazy in a crowded area and starts trying to bite folk, they're most probably going to be arrested by the police within a matter of minutes, having only bitten a couple of people, if that.

My first estimation that I did depends on how fast it will spread. So yeah, I dont have a real number. And it would vary depending the movie we watch, if is world war Z, it will be pretty fast.

Another factor to have into account is CHAOS. Our systems and cities can deal with just a certain amount of chaos, but if that increase all changes.

Even if a zombie invasion dint reach your city, only with the news you will have total chaos, people assaulting supermarkets, getting arms, trying to leave the city, cars crashing against services infrastructure, it will all collapse in matter of hours.

If you are in a big group of people, just 1 that is bitten, it will compromise all the others.

In chaos scenaries, even without zombies, people is the most threatening to our survival. So we need far away all we can from the danger.

So even if we find people in those locations, we may have more chances, because it would not be under high stress or frenesi moments.

By last, if you survive in your city shelter, but you are rouning out of resources, so you need to move on.. I prefer leave a shelter in the middle of nowhere than in the city..

It all depends on the magnitud of the chaos.

Yeah, I agree with you on that one. Zombies aren't going to be the problem, if humans are rational, we can easily outlast them with even pretty limited supplies (I don't care about how they're portrayed, zombies will starve and die if they don't eat or drink. If they don't need to eat, they're creating energy from nothing, and if that's the case, the zombie apocalypse may well be a blessing in disguise. A couple of thousand people turned into zombies, in exchange for the secret of unlimited free energy. That's a trade-off that would make me at least pause for though!

[AngelLestat]

"C2" is specially designated areas where there is probably solid contamination, dust, grease, metal filings etc. You have to wear the gear I talked about earlier, and get a separate scan when you leave. A friend of mine failed a scan on the way out of one of these. He chose gloves that were too small, and they split while he was working. Health Physics came and scrubbed half his skin off until they were happy all the contamination was gone.

"C3" is liquid contamination, and "C4" is radioactive gases. I wasn't allowed anywhere near those. You have full waterproof rubber suits that take ages to put on, a "Tornado Hood", and your own separate breathing supply.

So the one that you was using is not full hermetic in the head?

I was imagine something like this:

So I thought.. why he can not touch or scratch from the outside with the nose exception (depending the type of mask).

But if you had parts of your heat at open, then I understand why you can not touch your face.

Yeah, I agree with you on that one. Zombies aren't going to be the problem, if humans are rational, we can easily outlast them with even pretty limited supplies (I don't care about how they're portrayed, zombies will starve and die if they don't eat or drink. If they don't need to eat, they're creating energy from nothing, and if that's the case, the zombie apocalypse may well be a blessing in disguise. A couple of thousand people turned into zombies, in exchange for the secret of unlimited free energy. That's a trade-off that would make me at least pause for though!

Yeah, of course that if something similar to "zombies" happens, we may discard the living dead and the thermodynamics violations that we see in the movies.

But a virus like rabies but much more stronger, is possible. There are some infections or paracities know, that when infect some animals (mostly insects) they trigger in the victim a special pattern of actions and behavior which may be seen as mental control by its complexity. Such actions helps to spread the paracite or virus.

Take a look to all these examples of the real world:

http://news.nationalgeographic.com/news/2014/10/141031-zombies-parasites-animals-science-halloween/

Of course, evolution takes time and is always in equilibrium, but this proff that might exist a designed toxin to produce similar effects to war world Z, an infected that the only thing he wants (but using its brain) is to damage others, the tricky part is how the toxin prevent infected fighting among themselves.

Edited July 8, 2015 by AngelLestat

[peadar1987]

So the one that you was using is not full hermetic in the head?

I was imagine something like this:

https://s-media-cache-ak0.pinimg.com/originals/95/eb/d7/95ebd7c95f707dbb356d0f7bcbe5230c.jpg

So I thought.. why he can not touch or scratch from the outside with the nose exception (depending the type of mask).

But if you had parts of your heat at open, then I understand why you can not touch your face.

Yep, that's C3/C4 gear (only ours was a lovely shade of muddy green).

Yeah, of course that if something similar to "zombies" happens, we may discard the living dead and the thermodynamics violations that we see in the movies.

But a virus like rabies but much more stronger, is possible. There are some infections or paracities know, that when infect some animals (mostly insects) they trigger in the victim a special pattern of actions and behavior which may be seen as mental control by its complexity. Such actions helps to spread the paracite or virus.

Take a look to all these examples of the real world:

http://news.nationalgeographic.com/news/2014/10/141031-zombies-parasites-animals-science-halloween/

Of course, evolution takes time and is always in equilibrium, but this proff that might exist a designed toxin to produce similar effects to war world Z, an infected that the only thing he wants (but using its brain) is to damage others, the tricky part is how the toxin prevent infected fighting among themselves.

Yeah, I'd always imagine it as being just a virus similar to rabies, not "the living dead". If corpses are rising from the graves, well that's just magic, and we might as well hope a dragon swoops in and saves us!

If it was a virus spread by biting, I'd avoid cities if possible, but if I was already in a city, I wouldn't risk myself by going outside unless absolutely necessary.

[Skyler4856]

I have a more or less autonomous bunker in the Canadian wilderness. Running water powered by a stream near by, Electricity powered by both solar and hydroelectric sources. Food from my garden, as well as what I can hunt. I have enough ammo to wage a small war, and have surveillance equipment wired up surrounding my . I also have plans to implement a complex tunnel system to allow me to quickly navigate my property.

I plan to travel to this area via my Cessna plane, which I have disguised using sky blue paint.

Edited July 9, 2015 by Skyler4856

[AngelLestat]

Lol, you are being serious skyler?

[InterCity]

Okay, let's think about this one in terms of timeline:

Day 0: First small outbreak of zombies

First zombies appear, and depending on their location (It's different if you have a pack of zombies somewhere in Siberia or downtown New York), people notice. A large spring of new tweets, facebook posts and forum discussions appear, putting a strain on the system but nothing too big. At this point, the zombies can be contained and eradicated (albeit it might take some bold decisions modern governments probably won't make, e.g. nuking down the affected city). Traffic in the affected zone will get a bit clogged, as many people will panic and try to get out. Definitely stay out of the highway today.

Days 2-3-4-5: Zombie numbers soaring

At days 2 to 5, zombies will have already eaten 50% of the population in the concerned area (Again, it might differ whether it's a capital city or McRedneck's farm). Their numbers are too high to cope with locally, and the plague was likely carried out of the "red" zone, meaning multiple new outbreaks in nearby (and far) cities.

Major roads - and traffic network in general - will fail. Abandoned cars have piled up on highways and major streets, forming obstacles for people desperately trying to get away from the zombies.

At this point, no shipments will be coming to the area due to sheer fear of zombies, meaning there will be no fresh food in stores. Electricity, water and news will be still running, because so far, the problem is localized and power plants tend to cover a large area, and water pumping stations are largely autonomous or remote-controlled. Many fires will spring during this time (from stoves left on to malfunctioning electronics), and there will be no one to extinguish them. You'd better get your badS zombie survival team at this point if you want the cool factor (and chances of survival), because it will get more and more difficult.

Traffic Failed

Week 2-3: Complete overrrun

At this point, vast majority of those unfortunate enough to be caught in the outbreak area will be already zombified or dead for various other reasons. Nevertheless, assuming most zombies are dumb, relatively slow creatures, they are not the greatest concern of the surviving people: Rogue groups of thugs will roam the area, commiting atrocities never imagined before (let's say that you're lucky if they kill you on sight).

Fresh water is no longer running, and depending on the local power plant, there will be blackouts, since power plants will get abandoned. (as said before, this is less true for those countries using nuclear power. Those using coal will be in deep trouble). If you still have electricity and wired connection to see it, the internet is now a complete mess, with the largest of the largest sites just barely holding the stream of data, and smaller sites going offline for extended periods, ddosed by legitimate users. Most stores have already been looted, and unsupervised industrial plants are turning into timed bombs, filled with thousands of litres of dangerous chemicals.

Traffic grid failed

Water distribution failed

Food distribution failed

Security grid failed

Electrical grid failing

Week 4+: Afterlife

Pretty much like the weeks before, but these days, you'd better have a couple of solar panels on the roof or having your survival base in a small hydro power plant (Although being in the Hoover dam won't hurt). It's safe to assume that you can now forget about internet, since there will be no coverage as soon as the electricity fails (maybe sooner).

Early in the fourth week, you'll be greeted with spectacular fireworks show if you live near a chemical plant, because pressure valves will inevitably start releasing large quantities of gasses (ignited by existing fires). Even if there are no fires, get a hazmat suit, because the air is going to be toxic for the next couple of days (you can find one in that abandoned hardware store, fire station or factory - if you have enough balls to go straight to the source of the noxious fumes). The apocalypse is getting global, with isolated, undeveloped and/or island nations like North Korea, Greenland, and Papua new Guinea remaining the pinnacles of the civilization. Developed island nations, like Japan or England might survive as well, providing that the incubation time of the zombie virus is short enough to be detected before anyone infected can leave controlled areas - otherwise they won't fare much better than the continents. In the immediate first outbreak zone, everything left of the civilization will be buildings, most of them either looted or burnt to the ground. Good news is that there will be even less people every day, as the rogue groups exterminate each other.

Everything failed

[bitbucket]

We really should be far more concerned about solar flares and EMP attacks than zombies, in the event either one occurs the aftermath would look much the same, but the way we get there would be very different.

If there's a repeat of the 1859 Carrington event, that will knock out most of the world's power grids and fry most of our communication satellites. Almost immediately, industrialized civilization starts falling apart. Commerce grinds to a halt as most transactions are electronic, food distribution stops, communications cease, and water supplies that require pumps soon shut down. After 2-3 days the majority of the population who were completely unprepared for anything because they expect Mommy Government to come to the rescue might as well be zombies, as they'll start ransacking everything for food and water.

Depending on the time of the year of the event, mass dieoffs might start immediately from extreme heat and cold, or might not begin for up to a month as disease and starvation begins to take its toll.

The aftermath is highly variable depending on where you are in the world; in places like Europe and North America, 80-90% of the population might die within a year, in backwater undeveloped regions without ubiquitous access to electricity, there'd only be minor disruptions that most could easily cope with.

This could be entirely preventable, and the power grid could be hardened to withstand such a catastrophe, but governments and the energy industry can't seem to be bothered, because money, and effort, and lazy.

There are other things that might bring about a grid-down situation that would mean "game over" for industrial civilization, too, like an economic collapse that locks up most of the financial system. The world that most of us live in is far more fragile than we like to think, and the veneer of civilization is thinner than most of us suspect.

[RainDreamer]

In such a scenario, it is the infrastructure themselves that got attacked, which is different from the original question, which is more concerned about an attack to the human running the infrastructure instead, like a biological attack (which may contaminate water, but hey, we might still have use for electricity).