751–760 of 894 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Ran out of arguments pretty quickly so taking cover behind your high horse. One of the most pathetic things one can do.
Talk to me about reducing energy from nuclear after you've done something to reduce energy from russian oil and gas. until then - go fuck yourself.
Live stream from plant: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fYUT36YGOh8 Automated Radiation Monitoring system: https://www.npp.zp.ua/en/safety/arms
Just realised that the point I've made in response to a comment probably should be a level higher: 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 o…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Talk to me about reducing energy from nuclear after you've done something to reduce energy from russian oil and gas. until then - go fuck yourself.
You need to have some kind of an authority to argue like this. E.g. did you do anything about it? But even then it takes a special kind of stupid to behave like this.
what are you doing again?
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Doesn't matter what they think or acknowledge. If they set foot in a country that supports those convictions, they can be arrested.
If who exactly sets foot in a country that recognizes the convictions? No country is going to try to start a war with Russia by detaining their President.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Operators of nuclear plant are civilians. They are not part of force. Civilians can be captured, they cannot surrender, because nobody asks them to do that. I never heard that police or army asks somebody unarmed to surrender.
Really? You have never heard anyone ever describe regular citizens surrendering to the invader? I feel like you are arguing a technicality here - if you are faced with people with guns of course you'd say "I surrender" even if technically that's not what you're doing.
So, aside from the obvious nature of messing around with Nuclear generating station being an idiotic move. From a tactical move for Russia - clearly they want the generating station offline to cause further chaos in Ukraine and that it supplies 1/6 of the power I believe(?). Was the generating station fighting to say online / not surrender or did Russia just show up guns blazing? It's clearly a tactically important s…
This has been a real reckoning for me, as somebody who has historically been very pro-nuclear. Quite simply, humanity is too good at screwing things up to harness such a fundamentally powerful and dangerous source of power. It requires a commitment to long lasting peace and stability that we're just not capable of.
The risk of nuclear fallout is still relatively "localised", however that risk is dwarfed by the cost of disrupting centralised power production. A few nuclear plants are easy targets in the event of a war.
Distributed solar and concentrated solar w/molten salt seem like good options.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
The Chernobyl reactor suffered a steam explosion that destroyed the containment chamber and lead to an open air reactor core fire. Fukushima suffered several hydrogen gas explosions that also caused explosive venting of radioactive material and severe structural damage. So yes nuclear plants can explode extremely violently and that can disperse huge quantities of radioactive material. They’re not nuclear detonations…
You're literally arguing the same points I made: + It's not the fission material that explodes (like in a bomb) + The explosion is relatively small + Radiation is then dispersed to the wider area via atmospheric or tidal conditions (like smoke drifting) rather than as a direct result of the explosion All points I was making too. > but the consequences can still be catastrophic and as at Chernobyl the fallout can be s…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
But then he got replaced 4 years later. Unlike what happened in Russia.
Definitely a strong case for term limits. If Putin had left after 8 years, he would now be considered a great president. He wasn't perfect, but he stabilised the Russian economy after the bankruptcy of the 1990s. He could have left a great legacy, but his addiction to power has become his ruin. And quite possibly that of Ukraine and Russia.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
You need to have some kind of an authority to argue like this. E.g. did you do anything about it? But even then it takes a special kind of stupid to behave like this.
yes, i've donated to ukrainian army that is fighting to stop the fascist russian scourge and i'm helping to coordinate delivery of humanitarian aid so that people aren't dying because of fascist russian scourge. all of that hopefully helps ukraine last enough for russia to collapse and become a dead wasteland with no oil or gas exports. what are you doing again?