Last Nuclear Reactor Stopped at Ukraine's Zaporizhzhia Plant (apnews.com) 150
"Europe's largest nuclear plant has been reconnected to Ukraine's electricity grid," the Associated Press just reported. But that only means that engineers can now "shut down its last operational reactor in an attempt to avoid a radiation disaster as fighting rages in the area."
The six-reactor Zaporizhzhia plant lost its outside source of power a week ago after all its power lines were disconnected as a result of shelling. It was operating in "island mode" for several days, generating electricity for crucial cooling systems from its only remaining operational reactor.
Nuclear operator Energoatom said one of those power lines was restored "to its operational capacity" late Saturday, making it possible to run the plant's safety and other systems on electricity from the power system of Ukraine. "Therefore, a decision was made to shut down power unit No. 6 and transfer it to the safest state — cold shutdown," the company said in a statement.
Energoatom said the risk remains high that outside power is cut again, in which case the plant would have to fire up emergency diesel generators to keep the reactors cool and prevent a nuclear meltdown. The company's chief told The Associated Press on Thursday that the plant only has diesel fuel for 10 days.
Today NPR reminded readers that nuclear reactors "are more like charcoal grills than gas stoves. Even after they're shut off, they remain hot for a long period of time. Water must still circulate in the cores to prevent a meltdown."
Here's a chart showing exactly how "released thermal power" drops quickly — but does not stop. And it also notes that "Cooling failures after an emergency shutdown of a reactor were the first cause of serious accidents... evidenced by the accidents at Three Mile Island in 1986 and at Fukushima in 2011."
"The first led to the loss of one reactor, the second to the loss of 3 reactors and releases of radioactivity into the environment."
Nuclear operator Energoatom said one of those power lines was restored "to its operational capacity" late Saturday, making it possible to run the plant's safety and other systems on electricity from the power system of Ukraine. "Therefore, a decision was made to shut down power unit No. 6 and transfer it to the safest state — cold shutdown," the company said in a statement.
Energoatom said the risk remains high that outside power is cut again, in which case the plant would have to fire up emergency diesel generators to keep the reactors cool and prevent a nuclear meltdown. The company's chief told The Associated Press on Thursday that the plant only has diesel fuel for 10 days.
Today NPR reminded readers that nuclear reactors "are more like charcoal grills than gas stoves. Even after they're shut off, they remain hot for a long period of time. Water must still circulate in the cores to prevent a meltdown."
Here's a chart showing exactly how "released thermal power" drops quickly — but does not stop. And it also notes that "Cooling failures after an emergency shutdown of a reactor were the first cause of serious accidents... evidenced by the accidents at Three Mile Island in 1986 and at Fukushima in 2011."
"The first led to the loss of one reactor, the second to the loss of 3 reactors and releases of radioactivity into the environment."
Stupid Russians (Score:2, Interesting)
Of all the targets and of all the weapons at Russia's disposal, this is what they target? Do they want to piss everyone off at the same time?
So exactly how long will it take before another country enters the war? Is everyone scared of some drunk Russians?
I would rather my tax money go to the military than NASA anyway. It's time we spread the American disease again.
Re:Stupid Russians (Score:5, Insightful)
The reason is very likely that Europe is currently a bit power starved, as you might have heard. Taking the largest nuclear reactor offline means that less power is available to Europe, which increases Europe's dependency on Russian gas.
Russia is trying to wage an economic war against Europe. Maybe they didn't notice that their GDP is around 1.5 bUSD, the EU's is around 17bUSD. Russia is currently pumping a considerable portion of their GDP into this war, which is by no means sustainable, their economy is suffering badly, and not just because of the sanctions, they simply had to shift a lot of resources into this war.
Europe is going to face a pretty cold Winter. That's true, too. It's gonna be a wakeup call for those that thought it's a spiffy idea to get dependent on countries you cannot depend on. It may well mean that we get to see a lot of manufacturing return to domestic or at least friendly soil, not only in Europe but also in the US. And that would only be beneficial in the long run, since it will employ more people again, which is only beneficial to the economy in general.
Looking at it that way, we might want to thank them for their Ukrainian blunder. It sure shook our policy makers into shape.
Re: (Score:2)
Vladimir Vladimirovich Putin is the greatest benefactor in Europe to avert Climate Change.
Re: (Score:2)
I sure hope he doesn't expect any accolades for it.
Re: (Score:2)
Vladimir Vladimirovich Putin is the greatest benefactor in Europe to avert Climate Change.
He's definitely driving the build up of renewable energy all over Europe but there's a bunch of other stuff going on. The war is burning lots of things; trees that everyone blows up; crops that the Russians set fire to in their attempt to starve people; fuel for the tanks running around killing people. Ammunition that Russia dumps in Ukraine and Ukrainians have to blow up.
Even this story is pretty clear. The nuclear power killed off by Putin's aggression in Ukraine will be substituted for by burning coal in
Re: (Score:3)
Re: (Score:2)
What you said, and what is an "MIC"???
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
MIC is probably My Idiotic Conspiracy but there's still no reason to feed the trolls. Or perhaps My Insane Conspiracy?
I used to think it would be interesting to know which ones were sincerely stupid, proudly ignorant, or just paid to fake it. But now I understand that nothing about the trolls is interesting. Just wasting everyone's time.
President Eisenhower made the "MIC" term famous (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Vladimir Vladimirovich Putin is the greatest benefactor in Europe to avert Climate Change.
That's a foolish thing to believe [wikipedia.org]. Since we stopped Keystone from being built to export Canadian oil to Europe, now they're going to use the energy to make hydrogen (inefficiently) and ship it to Germany. So this isn't going to improve emissions any time soon, just shift them to North America.
Re: (Score:2)
Yes, I forgot the XL, sorry. That shortcut makes substantial financial difference or it wouldn't have been bothered with (especially given all the opposition.) The cost of building it was about $8-9B.
Regardless, we need to be reducing and curtailing oil extraction and use, not promoting it. Our future literally depends on a rapid transition from fossil fuels. We should take it as seriously as we take a world war, and shift as much of our production and labor as feasible to the task of combating climate chan
Short sighted quick answers (Score:2)
Vladimir Vladimirovich Putin is the greatest benefactor in Europe to avert Climate Change.
Sadly, a lot of the European country are back into "headless poultry mode" (a.k.a. "reaction to COVID-19" mode), and making on the spot quick stupid decision.
Like bringing back most of their coal plant back online, and organizing additional gas supplies from other countries (e.g.: US methane by boat), instead giving it bit more thinking about how to decrease CO2 emissions while shifting away from Russian dependence.
Of course, there's no simple way to setup nuclear and renewable on-the-spot right now before
Re: (Score:2)
As an eastern european who has no love for Russia for obvious historical reasons, I would still say you read this wrong; you read it just like you are supposed to, but you still read it wrong.
Pretty much in the same way that your parent poster reads the power plant. Gee, the ruskies sure are stupid to try to blow up the very power plant they themselves are sitting on? I mean, incompetence is not unheard of in Russia, neither in their armed forces. But for someone to work systematically to fuck this up, head
Re:Stupid Russians (Score:5, Informative)
We're still looking at very different opponents in this war of economy. Hell, the Russian GDP doesn't even hold a candle to Germany's alone, let alone the whole of EU. Heavy industry doesn't play a relevant role in most of Europe, so even if that was shutting down, it wouldn't be as big a deal as you try to make it out to be.
Russia is currently hemorrhaging money, production capacity and manpower in this war. Three things that Europe certainly has no problem with, as of yet. At best, the situation for Europe could be described as a wee bit uncomfortable. The countries that will be hit by the Winter cold the most are either wealthy enough to easily deal with the cost or hate Russia with SUCH a passion that they'd probably rather freeze to death than give Putin one inch.
Russia is also not "flush with gas money" since they have a hard time selling it. Gas ain't something you can just pack into a container and ship it. They're currently deliberately waste-burning gas because they can neither store nor transport it. Yes, they'd love to sell the gas they produce down to India or China, but the infrastructure for that transport just isn't there, and the money to create that infrastructure is tied up in a ridiculous war.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
This is why the next thing after "winning" that war is to ensure that Russia gets reincluded into the fold of nations. We MUST NOT repeat Clemenceau's blunder after WW1 with Germany.
Make sure to remove Putin and his cronies from power, then rebuild the nation. Russia is a great country, with great people, they just never got a chance to actually experience a working democracy.
I wish we had an example of a working democracy that we could point at as an example of how it could be...
Re: (Score:3)
You'll find that Germany has quite a few power plants that have been dormant for the past couple years because they're too pollutant (mostly coal, especially lignite). Restarting them is currently in the works, so while yes, Germany is very dependent on fossile fuel for power, it is not exactly absolutely dependent on gas.
And yes, revenue from gas is up for Russia. For now. As you can imagine, with an increase in price, some deposits that were not economic to exploit so far suddenly become interesting again
Transcending left/right (Score:2)
Thanks for the interesting post about how the two main US political parties are much the same (essentially, supporting a corporatist plutocracy in practice, whatever the rhetoric or occasional dissident).
As my sig suggests, the biggest challenge of the 21st century is the irony of technologies of abundance in the hands of those still thinking in terms of scarcity.
Or in more detail:
https://pdfernhout.net/recogni... [pdfernhout.net]
"The big problem is that all these new war machines and the surrounding infrastructure are crea
Re: (Score:3)
This Winter is the deciding moment. We need to brave this one Winter.
Re:Stupid Russians (Score:5, Insightful)
Europe sanctioned Russia because the US told them so,
Yeah bullshit, vlad. Europe sanctioned Russia because Russia started a war in Europe.
Russia, meanwhile, is flush with gas money because of the high prices, and is creating jobs for their people in the war industry.
That's super credible, sure. Everyone knows waging wars is great for the economy, and the materiel and troops being shredded are going to somehow bring in money.
Meanwhile, Russia's military is not only moving backwards now but in the future too. Russia doesn't have the tech industrial base to fully equip modern units, and they don't even have the cash to fund their own most advanced stuff. They can't field T14 tanks and are now reduced to recommissioning antique tanks from deep storage, have lifted the age limits on the military.
If you were vaguely right, then the Russian economy would be in overdrive now and they would be fielding new, freshly made stuff, not burning through increasingly ancient reserves.
We already knew Russsa's Navy was a damp squib when it turned out their sole aircraft carrier had to be permanently accompanied with ocean going tugs for when not if it broke down. And of course they lost half of their cruisers too to a Ukrainian made missile.
What's become completely clear is that Russia's much vaunted land army is also a paper tiger build of bast quantities of substandard, old and unmaintained kit, and ill equipped, ill trained and ill informed soldiers. The Russian war machine cannot stand up to modern weapons like Javelins, NLAW, modern Stinger and Starstreak missiles and of course HIMARS. In the face of a modern MRLS even their tried and true grind forwards with artillery regardless of the cost isn't working.
Russia hasn't boosted it's economy with the war, it's proven that it has a weak military by publicly destroying what they had for everyone to see.
Europe will permanently lose a significant a significant chunk of it's manufacturing power, and the economy will permanently tank with it.
Yeah, Germany, say, to pick a random example has shown repeatedly to be completely incapable of rebuilding industry...
Re: (Score:2)
So, assuming that what you say about the state of the Russian army is true, or relevant in an actual war situation, surely it cannot be that Russia would slowly but surely be eating up Ukraine like it has been doing, all the while no one is able to do anything about it?
Do not be mistaken, I'm not at all unamused by the total bardak that Russia is and probably always will be. Even more so, one of my favourite jokes about Russia goes like this: Name one thing in Russia that is not shit? Piss. But you need to
Re: (Score:2)
surely it cannot be that Russia would slowly but surely be eating up Ukraine like it has been doing, all the while no one is able to do anything about it?
Ukraine seems to be doing quite a lot about it. They've been quite a lot about it especially for the past few days.
As long as Russia keeps moving forward
But they're not moving forward.
even bargaining a HIMARS with a shitload of ammo to the Russians
Whatever you're smoking, just stop.
Re: (Score:2)
assuming that what you say about the state of the Russian army is true, or relevant in an actual war situation, surely it cannot be that Russia would slowly but surely be eating up Ukraine like it has been doing, all the while no one is able to do anything about it?
That's exactly the opposite of what's actually happening. Which bigger, smarter troll did you pop out of?
Re:Stupid Russians (Score:4, Insightful)
So, assuming that what you say about the state of the Russian army is true
It is. Plenty of pictures of Russia deploying ancient T62s
https://www.businessinsider.co... [businessinsider.com]
or relevant in an actual war situation,
You mean apart from the actual war situation which Russia is in right now?
surely it cannot be that Russia would slowly but surely be eating up Ukraine like it has been doing, all the while no one is able to do anything about it?
Indeed it cannot be said.
As long as Russia keeps moving forward,
They're not though. They made significant gains in Northern Ukraine initially, and have now been completely pushed back from there. They recently got pushed back from Kharkiv.
even bargaining a HIMARS with a shitload of ammo to the Russians ffs.
And then everybody clapped?
Thing is it didn't happen. Ukraine has a paltry 16 HIMARS and another 10 M270, and they have basically halted the Russian grind forward and allowed Ukraine to recapture areas.
There is no one to like here, and you are justified to hate whomever you want here, but I welcome you to at least try to honestly figure out who is getting results in this clusterfuck.
It does not surprise me that you view the world only through the lens of hate.
Re: Stupid Russians (Score:3)
Why do you keep saying they are moving forward? They have already proven that they can't extend beyond a certain distance of their rail lines. And they aren't building up longterm supply chain and logistical routes in the areas they occupied for months.
Their economy just isn't geared to build infrastructure that fast. Recently they are showing that they haven't even setup defensive nor fallback infrastructure. Which is really weird and a huge misstep. Now they need to deal with long range stuff and bui
Re: Stupid Russians (Score:5, Funny)
Why do you keep saying they are moving forward?
They're advancing to the rear...
Re: (Score:2)
If you want to get a sense of how Russia "works"
Re: (Score:3)
Pretty much in the same way that your parent poster reads the power plant. Gee, the ruskies sure are stupid to try to blow up the very power plant they themselves are sitting on? I mean, incompetence is not unheard of in Russia, neither in their armed forces. But for someone to work systematically to fuck this up, heads would roll.
Yes, they are *that* stupid. If you thought people in the US military were not epitomes of intelligence, you clearly haven't experienced former Warsaw Pact militaries yet. Imagine how stupid these people can be on average, as hard as you can, then triple your estimate. If your conscripts are from Siberian villages with no toilets and your officers are political picks, you're not exactly getting a lot of smart cookies.
is not Russia who is waging the economic war. Who put up the sanctions? Europe sanctioned Russia because the US told them so
Oh you think that sanctions came first and then Russia started tying the West to Russian ga
Re: Stupid Russians (Score:1)
Re: (Score:2)
The Ukraine war is essentially a Russian civil war - Russians fighting Russians.
Now go say that in a Ukrainian pub, loudly.
Re: (Score:2)
Russia has nothing to win from this plant going sour, but for Zelensky this whole ordeal has been a massive boost of international support, and would be even more so if actually blown up.
Russia has nothing to gain from bombing civilians, but still does it.
Zelenskyy would not blow up the power plant for the reason that it would be Ukrainian land that would get fucked up because of it. Even if he managed to do it and convince everyone it was the Russians and got some more weapons, it would not be worth it, since apparently, Ukraine is doing pretty well now and Lend-Lease is going to start soon.
On the other hand, while it would be bad for Russians to actually blow up the power plant, they enga
Re: (Score:2)
As an eastern european who has no love for Russia for obvious historical reasons,
- so where are you from, Bulgaria? Hungary? Serbia?
Russia has nothing to win from this plant going sour, but for Zelensky this whole ordeal has been a massive boost of international support, and would be even more so if actually blown up.
- you are insisting that you have 'no love for russia', so I am curious, who do you have love for? You don't have love for the truth, obviously. Nobody in Ukraine would ever shell a nuclear power plant, this is the country where a large part of it is contaminated with the fallout from the Chernobyl disaster, nobody in Ukraine would do anything even close to what you are suggesting, which may cause another nuclear disaster. So AFAIC you are just another
Re: (Score:2)
Russia, meanwhile, is flush with gas money because of the high prices, and is creating jobs for their people in the war industry.
Importing munitions from Iran and North Korea rather smacks of desperation. It seems Russia's "war industry" can't build much of anything.
Putin has the support of the whole world except the West behind him
It doesn't show.
https://www.euractiv.com/secti... [euractiv.com]
Re:Stupid Russians (Score:5, Insightful)
The reason is very likely that Europe is currently a bit power starved, as you might have heard. Taking the largest nuclear reactor offline means that less power is available to Europe, which increases Europe's dependency on Russian gas.
Russia is trying to wage an economic war against Europe. Maybe they didn't notice that their GDP is around 1.5 bUSD, the EU's is around 17bUSD. Russia is currently pumping a considerable portion of their GDP into this war, which is by no means sustainable, their economy is suffering badly, and not just because of the sanctions, they simply had to shift a lot of resources into this war.
Europe is going to face a pretty cold Winter. That's true, too. It's gonna be a wakeup call for those that thought it's a spiffy idea to get dependent on countries you cannot depend on. It may well mean that we get to see a lot of manufacturing return to domestic or at least friendly soil, not only in Europe but also in the US. And that would only be beneficial in the long run, since it will employ more people again, which is only beneficial to the economy in general.
Looking at it that way, we might want to thank them for their Ukrainian blunder. It sure shook our policy makers into shape.
Big as it is the Zaporizhzhia nuclear plant (6 Gw) it is a rounding error compared to the total installed EU capacity (around 1 Tw). On top of that Ukraine only recently began to export electrical energy through an interconnection with Romania. https://www.energy.gov/article... [energy.gov]. The loss of 100 Mw of energy is not going to cause the lights in the EU to go out any times soon. Even the loss of Russian gas is going to be a massive inconvenience to the EU at best (from Moscow's point of view). With all that flatland Ukraine has the ability to install levels of renewable generation capacity that would be significant on an EU wide level if they chose to export that energy but any expansion of Ukraine's installed electrical generation capacity won't be happening while this war is raging.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:1)
Re: (Score:2)
Same reason capitalism does anything: It was profitable.
Re:Stupid Russians (Score:4, Interesting)
> The reason is very likely that Europe is currently a bit power starved, as you might have heard.
The problem with this thesis is that even with a fully operational Zaporizhzhia plant, Ukraine was more an importer of power from the EU than an exporter.
In fact just before Russia invaded, Ukraine had disconnected from Russia's grid as a test to see if they could manage without external connections. It was planned to have Ukraine connect to the larger EU system some time next year, but since the war started they had to expedite because they needed the power. They managed to complete the interconnect back in April IIRC. Zaporizhzhia being offline does not necessarily increase the load on the EU's grid since the interconnect can only carry so much power into the country. Once that interconnect is maxed out, no amount of reducing Ukraine's native capacity is going to strain EU's grid further.
So here's an alternate motive: Russia is being a dick and targeting civilian infrastructure because they can't fight on military clout alone. I suppose once you've committed war crimes you might as well go all in, 'cause if you lose it's not like the reprisal will be any less just because you only did a little atrocity...
=Smidge=
Re: (Score:2)
There was the idea that only an idiot or madman would want to go to war, combined with the naive idea that Putin wasn't either, and that turned out wrong.
Re: (Score:2)
The reason is very likely that Europe is currently a bit power starved, as you might have heard. Taking the largest nuclear reactor offline means that less power is available to Europe, which increases Europe's dependency on Russian gas.
Europe produces 7.4TW on average. No one noticed one 5GW nuclear plant going offline. Heck a cloudy day in Germany has that effect. Heck the Netherlands changing the artificial cap on coal generation has had a bigger effect than that.
Europe does not have a power problem. It has a gas problem, and so much spare power generating capacity that it's able to fire up alternatives and let it's gas plants idle down.
And that would only be beneficial in the long run, since it will employ more people again, which is only beneficial to the economy in general.
There's nothing beneficial about nationalism. Beneficial would be if someone stabs Putin in the back,
Re: (Score:2)
Woopse math error, number too high by a factor of 7. Point still stands.
Re: (Score:3)
I doubt any other country will get involved, they will just continue to supply Ukraine. Nobody wants this to escalate into a conflict between Russia and NATO.
Re: (Score:3)
I doubt any other country will get involved, they will just continue to supply Ukraine. Nobody wants this to escalate into a conflict between Russia and NATO.
There's a number of pundits on Russian state TV that regularly argue for a 'de-nazification' of Warsaw. That's not going to happen but it goes to show that there are plenty of people in Russia who'd love to widen the war if they could. Personally I'd favour using the winter to train and equip several Ukrainian armoured divisions, building up their artillery, re-equipping their Air Force with F-16s and F-15s and then letting them loose on the Russians come spring. The only way this war is ever going to end i
Re: (Score:2)
Warsaw would be a huge escalation as Poland is a member of the EU.
Crossing an EU border would be declaring war against the EU itself, and some of those countries are also NATO members.
I don't think even Putin is mad enough to think he can get the whole USSR back, right up to Berlin.
Re: (Score:2)
Warsaw would be a huge escalation as Poland is a member of the EU.
Crossing an EU border would be declaring war against the EU itself, and some of those countries are also NATO members.
I don't think even Putin is mad enough to think he can get the whole USSR back, right up to Berlin.
Well I didn't say the pundits on Russian state TV opinion shows were rational ;-D
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
They have NATO intelligence, NATO training and NATO weapons. Their own people are highly motivated and apparently pretty proficient. That should be enough.
Re: (Score:2, Troll)
In the areas of the settlements of Kherson and Energodar, accurate strikes by our troops destroyed three enemy artillery systems, as well as an ammunition depot and up to a company of personnel.
That quote [facebook.com] comes from the General Staff of the Armed Forces of Ukraine in September 2, 2022.
It's Ukraine who is shelling the nuclear power plant. They said so themselves.
I'm pretty sure you are rooting for Ukraine and against Russia in this conflict, but that does not suddenly mean that Ukraine ain't doing this. There is also overwhelming proof of this.
Additionally the Pentagon also admits that it's likely that Ukraine is doing the shelling [defense.gov].
And I don't want to say that the Ukrainians haven't fired in that vicinity either because I think there's probably a likelihood that they have, but in good -- in a number of cases, it's returning fire of the Russians who are firing from those locations.
I mean, I guess the easy thing to say here too would be, you know, the Ukrainians are very aware of the potential impacts of striking the nuclear power plant and they're going out of their way not to do that. And they have had conversations with us about that too, that they are very aware of the criticality of that nuclear power plant.
Re: (Score:3)
Busy spreading Russian propaganda, I see.
Additionally the Pentagon also admits that it's likely that Ukraine is doing the shelling
You are a liar. Not even your out-of-context quote supports your bullshit lie.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Bullshit. They will likely lose these reactors now as you cannot simply shut them down. You need to actively cool them for a few years after shut-down and that takes quite a lot of energy. If you do not have that for a few days, all you have left is an extremely expensive cleanup-job and there is no way the Ukrainian leadership and military does not know that. At this time, they have Diesel for a reported 10 days. After that they maybe have a maximum of a few days before things break permanently.
Re: (Score:2)
In the areas of the settlements of Kherson and Energodar, accurate strikes by our troops destroyed three enemy artillery systems, as well as an ammunition depot and up to a company of personnel.
That quote [facebook.com] comes from the General Staff of the Armed Forces of Ukraine in September 2, 2022.
It's Ukraine who is shelling the nuclear power plant. They said so themselves.
Slow down there, comrade. Remember that Kherson and Energodar are sizable cities. Saying that Ukraine is doing strikes in those cities is not the same as saying that they're doing strikes near the power plants.
Also, Ukraine is using NATO-made weapons that are basically pinpoint-accurate. They're not going to take out a feeder line to a nuclear power plant unless they're targeting it. The only side using weapons with piss-poor accuracy are the Russians. If someone is going to miss and accidentally damag
Re:Unintended Consequences (Score:5, Informative)
OK Ukrainians did the shelling.
No, they did not. From the propagandist's own link:
We also know with great confidence that the Russians are firing from the area around the nuclear power plant
I -- so what I know for sure is that the -- the Russians are firing from around the plant and, you know, I also know that there are rounds that have impacted near the plant. You know, the way that we're tracking the forces around the nuclear power plant -- it's not like there's a -- a constant -- it's hard to explain, I guess. It's not like there are forces in every square inch of the area around the plant. And so we also know that the Russians have fired in the vicinity of the plant.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Around, vicinity are weasel words. The Russians want the plant working -as its in their benefit. No ifs, no buts.
The best is the video of a Russian official trying to explain how a rocket didn't obviously come from Russia because it did a u-turn [twitter.com].
Re: (Score:3)
Of all the targets and of all the weapons at Russia's disposal, this is what they target? Do they want to piss everyone off at the same time?
It's not a target, it's a shield.
All along Russia has been using Ukrainian civilians as human [twitter.com] shields [bbc.com]. And ever since Ukraine got the HIMARs and the ability to strike Russians well behind the front lines it's gotten worse.
The Russian troops at Zaporizhzhia know they're safe as long as they stick close to the plant, the artillery crews know they can fire without being fired on in return, and their equipment and ammo is safe because Ukraine doesn't want to blow up an ammo dump next to a nuclear plant.
Right no
Re: (Score:2)
Of all the targets and of all the weapons at Russia's disposal, this is what they target? Do they want to piss everyone off at the same time?
Looks like it. Well, they are succeeding, especially as these reactors are not "down" in the sense another power-station can be brought down. After a few days without active cooling, the reactor cores get damaged and eventually melt. Sure, no nuclear explosions that way, but look at Fuckushima were a very modern industrialized society could not prevent several hydrogen explosions and melting of at least one core and a spend fuel rod basin exposed to the elements. With a cleanup time expected to be > 100
an attempt to avoid a radiation disaster (Score:3)
In parts of Europe we still have to throw away half of forest-picked mushrooms and half of the boars who eat them, because of the radiation from last time.
Re: (Score:2)
And in the parts that got away lightly, we are still recommending that you dip the mushrooms into simmering water 1 minute before draining & storage: to decrease the radiation amount.
Chernobyl is a hell of a drug.
You've got your disasters mixed up. (Score:3)
The Three Mile Island accident was in 1979
Chernobyl was 1986
Re: (Score:2)
Hard to tell if people here are too young to remember, or too old.
Copium abounds (Score:5, Insightful)
Reading some of the comments from folks who are clearly parroting the Russian line, it's hilarious to see the machinations and convoluted twists of logic they attempt to deflect blame from Russia. Everything from NATO's "aggression" to NAZIS!!!
The fact is none of this would be happening if Russia didn't decide to wage war on its neighbor. That's where things end. With Russia's deliberate and unprovoked attack. Take that away and the world would be looking at reasonable energy prices, no threat of a(nother) nuclear disaster, and not 40K+ dead Russian soldiers (though the last part isn't a bad thing).
As it stands, Ukraine's devastating counter-attack this week shows the end is nigh. They are taking back what is theirs and as of today have launched further attacks against the invaders in the Donetsk and Luhansk oblasts. It is only a matter of time for them to liberate their country and as those moments draw closer it remains to be seen how Russia will react at the nuclear plant. Will they go full stupid and have it explode, or will they admit their defeat and take their lumps? That is the question.
Re: (Score:3)
As a follow up, reports are filtering out that Russia is abandoning the entire Kharkiv Oblast and leaving behind metric shit tons of equipment. They're not even trying to take it with them. They are simply fleeing to the Russian border.
For those that doubt this, it is quite easy to find pictures [twitter.com] and video [twitter.com] of said abandonment.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: Copium abounds (Score:4, Informative)
Russian troops have abandoned the entirety of Kharkiv Oblast except for a small slice East of the Ohskil(sp). Russian troops in the areas of Severodonetsk, Lisichansk, and Rubizhne [twitter.com] are supposedly holding out long enough to allow others to steal what they can before fleeing. The terrorist Denis Pishilin has fled to Rostov on Don in Russia. Several settlements northwest and west of Kherson have been abandoned by Russian troops due to lack of fuel, ammo, and food.
It's over. At the current rate of abandonment it's possible Ukraine could reclaim all of its territory except Crimea within the next 2 months. Crimea may have to wait until next year or face a mass evacuation during winter while under fire from artillery, rockets and anti-ship missiles. This on top of once again not having water flow down the canal.
Russia's defeat will go down as one of the worst in history. A nation with all that firepower couldn't seize its neighbor 1/3 its size AND lost tens of thousands of troops in the span of a few months.
Re: (Score:2)
Yeah, it's impressive how open Russia has been in showing the rest of the world that they are a huge paper tiger.
Prior to this "not a war" in Ukraine, most people (including me) thought that Russia's conventional military was probably pretty decent - maybe not as good as the US, but at least half way to US standards.
Now that the rest of the world, including their huge southern "best friend", China, knows that they are a paper tiger, things should get very interesting in the near term for Russia. Only thing
Re: Copium abounds (Score:4, Interesting)
Thank you for confirming you're a Russian troll. You can easily confirm everything through your own sources who are squawking about the incompetence of the Russian military. Now for some more good news. Russian troops are (unconfirmed as yet) fleeing from Snihirievka north of Kherson. Also, supposed chatter that Russians around Kherson may be trying to negotiate a surrender. Soldiers and Kadoryvs aren't getting along.
What is confirmed are the fleeing convoys of vehicles out of Starobil's'k toward Luhansk. The same thing for Svatove, Luhansk. Multiple Russian vehicles with fleeing Russian troops running away from the front line. Expect to hear more good news over the next week as Russian troops flee for their lives.
In the Kharkiv oblast Ukrainian forces have now gone to the border with Russia in the vicinity of Kudiivka. Vovchans'k is now liberated. Ukrainian troops continuing to move east and north with Russians fleeing ahead of them.
In Belgorod another oil facility has mysteriously gone up in flames. Most likely due to someone smoking too close to the pipes.
The collapse will continue until Ukraine liberates its country. Victory will be complete when the Kerch bridge is either destroyed or rendered inoperable.
Re: (Score:2)
Only way that nuclear power plant can be made to explode is if you pack it full of TNT and set the TNT off.
Meltdown is possible, depending on the design of the reactor(s) and cooling systems. Explosion? No. Not without packing the place with TNT, anyways...
Re: (Score:3)
Maybe explosion wasn't the proper word, but you understood my meaning. As Russian troops continue to flee en mass, Putin may become desperate to "penalize" Ukraine that his last act would be to do something to the plant. Render it inoperable as well as contaminate the landscape which just happens to be near a lot of Ukrainian wheat fields (among other crops).
Re: Copium abounds (Score:2)
40K+ dead Russian soldiers (though the last part isn't a bad thing).
It's ok to feel sorry for them too, they didn't all ask to be put in the position they're in, and nobody wants to die for their country over something so ignoble. I'm pretty sure they didn't all sign up to be the bad guys. It's got to be at least a part of why they've been sucking so much, they really don't want to be there.
Putin needs to be held accountable. Shit rolls uphill in the military, this is a case where civilian leadership needs to learn that lesson.
Re: (Score:2)
40K+ dead anyone's soldiers is never a good thing. I'd much prefer those 40,000 soldiers eating Ukrainian wheat products, smoking Cuban cigars, drinking American colas, and doing whatever civilian things they were doing before, to lying dead in a field somewhere in a country not their own at the behest of a leader with Goals of a Greater Fatherland.
If simple humanity doesn't stir you, consider the number of bereaved and aggrieved created by those dead soldiers. The only "not bad" thing about is that they
Dignity (Score:3)
I hesitate to celebrate any large loss of human life. The situation is more complicated than that. Many joined the military before Russia was an aggressor, many have deserted or defected since, and many continue to seek the opportunity to do so at some future point. Many of those who are there are not there willingly, but rather for fear of retribution for themselves or even their families. Many have been fooled by Kremlin propaganda, as th
Re: Copium abounds (Score:4, Informative)
No, vlad it isn't. Ukraine is only considered Russia by Russia. To them and the rest of the world they are a different country.
Re: (Score:2)
Ukraine has been a real country with, y'know, cities and stuff for twice as long as Russia. Nobody can question whether Russia has had a great history, but it hasn't been so great to be their neighbor, and most of the world has lost its tolerance for military misadventure. It causes all kinds of economic upheaval that is inconvenient for other people, and they won't have it; and now that nuclear powers abound, there is too much risk of global cataclysm.
If this spasm doesn't end in nuclear fire, perhaps it w
Re: (Score:2)
The whole region is corrupt. The war is one Russian Mafia mob against another Russian Mafia mob. It is a kind of Russian civil war, in the great Italian tradition.
I don't recommend that you tell Ukrainians that they're actually Russians. It won't end well for you.
Re: (Score:3)
I don't recommend that you tell Ukrainians that they're actually Russians. It won't end well for you.
Indeed, Ukrainians remember the Holodomor (genocide committed against them by Stalin), the same way Jews remember Hitler's Holocaust.
Re: (Score:3)
Italy and France were once part of the Roman Empire and both speak Romance languages.
Yet most people are able to tell they are difference countries.
Canada used to be part of the United Kingdom. Most of them even speak the same language. And they have the same monarch. Yet they are different countries.
Re: (Score:2)
various actions of the western nations pretending they were going to admit Ukraine into Nato.
Not true. Ukraine applied, opposition was met from France and Germany. While the Western powers may easily pressurize/blackmail Croatia or Hungary into accepting Finland and Sweden, France and Germany are another story and therefore for all practical matters, NATO refused Ukraine in 2008. That still would be the situation without Russia's (Putin's) impulsive imperialism. Best Russia should have done was to offer a desirable alternative to Ukraine. They did exactly the opposite when they invaded the Donbas i
This whole situation (Score:2)
is proof that the human race is fucking garbage and ripe for extinction.
Re: (Score:2)
It's proof that we're not better than other animals just because we have bigger brains. It only means we can do more damage when we act like assholes.
Pretty much every complex life form on this planet is ripe for extinction, though, unless it lives in a seriously deep hole or around an undersea vent.
Re: (Score:2)
is proof that the human race is fucking garbage and ripe for extinction.
As a group, definitely. A co-worker of mine asked "Why has the human races till no mechanisms to keep people like Putin under control?" and that is exactly it. The problem is not single psychos in power, the problem is that psychos get put in power and are handed way too much power. And that is on the people as a whole.
Well, we have something like 2.5C warming already locked in (i.e. nothing can be done anymore to stop it) and the way things are going with denial still strong and not much effective being do
Re: (Score:2)
is proof that the human race is fucking garbage and ripe for extinction.
As a group, definitely. A co-worker of mine asked "Why has the human races till no mechanisms to keep people like Putin under control?" and that is exactly it. The problem is not single psychos in power, the problem is that psychos get put in power and are handed way too much power. And that is on the people as a whole.
I'm not a psychologist, but for years I've been aware of a paradox: good people tend to be more passive, accepting, accommodating, adaptive, etc., and bad people more proactive and aggressive. In fact, many cops, guards, animal handlers, etc., are trained to look for aggressiveness. There are many other psychological dynamics at play, like "group-think", "mob mentality", "lowest common denominator", etc.
Putin has been very slowly, over many many years, inspiring Russian pride, influencing, amassing loyalt
Re: (Score:2)
Sure. Putin did sort-of sneak his way in. But as this is really nothing new, there need to be safety mechanisms for the case that such a person changes its tune once enough power has been accumulated. There are not. And that is basically on the people that do not learn and time and again make the same mistakes with leaders.
Another example where this went wrong is Xi. He was selected because he had styled himself as a moderate. Once in power, he turned it to be anything but moderate.
Re: (Score:2)
As we say to all people that think like you, "you go first."
need to learn a lesson here (Score:2)
The one thing that nearly all nuclear power plants need is to have a on-site low-temperature generator that uses the heat from the reactor as it is cooling down to run the pumps and help cool the reactors. There is absolutely no reason why this should not be on each site.
Re: (Score:2)
There is one reason: It does not work. Basic thermodynamics tells you that you cannot use the heat from something to cool it down. Seriously.
Re: (Score:2)
There is one reason: It does not work. Basic thermodynamics tells you that you cannot use the heat from something to cool it down. Seriously.
He's talking about powering a heat exchanger, and actually, that is the only way that any cooling system works; by generating heat in the right place to cause heat exchange that creates a localized cooling effect. Total system heat always increases.
The type of system envisioned above would be difficult and expensive, and it would only help in this type of power loss situation. Lots of other situations it wouldn't help. So, if it is a good idea or not is completely opaque to us. And given the fact that publi
Re: need to learn a lesson here (Score:2)
Basically, a failsafe as opposed to using a gas generator.
Re: (Score:2)
The plant is not "safely shut down". Conventional nukes need active cooling for years after shut-down. Which requires a reliable source of energy. Which this plant does not have. As soon as the 10 days of Diesel reserves run out, a core melt-down and spend fuel pools on fire become a real possibility. Yes, that will happen relatively slow, but look at Fuckushima for a reference how that works. And they had energy again there within a reasonable time and one core without fuel, or all of them would have melte
Re: (Score:2)
I know a little about nukes, but I didn't know it would take years to cool them down. What do they do for refueling? I know that isn't a multi-year process.
Re: (Score:3)
Refueling is done by moving the old rods to a storage basin that is actively cooled. They sit there for a while, typically years, before they become safe to transport. The rods stay cooled during this whole process, which is done underwater.
Re: (Score:2)
I guess I should have been more clear: active vs. passive cooling? IE, can the rods sit in a pool for years, no energy input required? I know that while in the reactor the cooling pumps need to run for some time, but I don't know how long, nor if all pumps need to run at full power. I thought I had read somewhere some years ago that the pumps need to run for a couple of days, then rods can be removed and placed in the passive cooling pools.
Re: (Score:2)
No. If you do that, the water evaporates and the rods catch fire. May take weeks, but the spend fuel rods need to be actively cooled for a while.
Re: (Score:2)
Refueling is done by moving the old rods to a storage basin that is actively cooled. They sit there for a while, typically years, before they become safe to transport. The rods stay cooled during this whole process, which is done underwater.
My question about refueling was meant in context of cooling requirements. The long form question would be: how long does the reactor have to cool down before they can start the refueling process?
From pictures / diagrams I've seen, the fuel rods are lowered out from the bottom of the reactor and moved underwater to the storage areas, so they're always under water.
If I'm correct about that, I wonder what contingency they have in place if something goes wrong with that process. Not like you can send in diver
Re: (Score:2)
No contingencies. Just hope you are able to grab stuff remotely. You can, to a degree, use robots.
Re: (Score:2)
It is safer to have it "cold" when/if it melts down, but now if power is lost again they'll have to use diesel generators and they only have 10 days of fuel. Russia probably can't supply diesel, and wouldn't give it up. The amount the generators need is insane, you'd need a bunch of big fuel trucks every day.
Being "safely shut down" is actually a super-high-risk situation, intended to avoid only the very worst case disaster.
Re: (Score:2)
That is why the Ruble is at a 9 year high against the Euro and USD.
Too bad they can't buy anything with them. My play money is at a 9 year high too, and nobody wants it. Play money is like that.