161–170 of 894 posts
One can wonder what does it takes for the west to military intervene. Sanctions are a long term plan but it won't save Ukraine.
"BREAKING: Ukraine's energy ministry claims firefighters have been fired at while trying to put out fire at Zaporizhzhia nuclear power plant" https://twitter.com/spectatorindex/status/149954992461016678...
If Russia explodes a dirty bomb that plumes into nato countries, what happens?
Fortunately that kind of not a thing. Pulling fuel out of a reactor without special tools and training would 100% kill you, and trying to build a bomb with a fuel rod assuming you got it out would also kill you. Transporting that bomb without thick concrete or lead shielding would also kill you. Blowing it up would put a bunch of heavy dust in the air that would fall out quickly and could easily be washed off of anyo…
Live stream from plant: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fYUT36YGOh8 Automated Radiation Monitoring system: https://www.npp.zp.ua/en/safety/arms
Don't trust the radiation monitoring system, the actual monitoring system has been destroyed by a rocket impact three days ago.
The monitoring system has been shot down on 1 Sep.
Here is the statement from the Nuclear Agency in Ukraine:
On March 1, 2022 at 11:40 as a result of rocket impact, the communication network of Zaporizhzhya NPP was damaged. As a result, the Automated Radiation Monitoring System (ARMS) of the Zaporizhzhya Nuclear Power Plant lost its full functionality and stopped the transmission of data to the international radiation monitoring network IRMIS. IAEA has been informed about the incident.
One can wonder what does it takes for the west to military intervene. Sanctions are a long term plan but it won't save Ukraine.
The risks of nuclear war from a NATO militarily intervention are far too high to even consider it. I’m sorry to say, but there is really nothing that could happen in Ukraine that would be bad enough for us to accept the risk of nuclear annihilation.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
No. It is many orders of magnitude less dangerous. It would potentially cause thousands of deaths, not hundreds of millions . This is true even if a melt down was caused, like Chernobyl, which others have already explained is quite improbable. Chernobyl caused between ~100 and ~16,000 deaths, depending sensitively on how one models the effects of small (sub-natural-background) radiation increases over a large populat…
Some people are really talking insanity. These insane people I think need to watch the Tsar bomba go off. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WwlNPhn64TA We aren't talking about fatman and little boy. Talking about thousands of H bombs and literally the apocalypse for the human race.
https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=30549210
The experts on there are NOT concerned. At least yet.
Lots of scope for misinformation and panic here (understandably) as it’s a live developing story, but I don’t think we all need to retire to our bunkers just yet.
Would urge caution about reading too much into this until we have a bit more info. Rushing to try and interpret live radiation levels and talk of “this escalates to nuclear war” is a bit premature.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Potentially. I'd worry more about coolant and power (to run the coolant pumps if the plant has to shut down) than about direct hits on a containment structure, but it's not like that won't eventually also cause problems if they keep doing it. This is, so far as I know, the first time anyone has carried out a military attack on an operating nuclear plant. Nobody knows yet how that really plays out. But it looks like w…
>This is, so far as I know, the first time anyone has carried out a military attack on a nuclear plant The Israelis bombed an Iraqi plant in the 80s I think.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> Reactors generally can't melt down the way Chernobyl did anymore. a) "the way Chernobyl did" is technically correct (the VVER reactor that Zaporizhzhia is uses a difference containment strategy), but a distinction without meaning - a meltdown is a meltdown. b) "anymore" - Zaporizhzhia nuclear plant was built between 1980 and 1996. It's true that it is a safer design than Chernobyl, but yes it absolutely can still m…
> Note that this "spreading radioactive particles around" is probably more dangerous to health than a meltdown. Put in different terms: We're basically talking about the equivalent of a dirty bomb.