Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Chernobyl power plant captured by Russian forces

reuters.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

391–400 of 1001 posts

Re: Chernobyl power plant captured by Russian forces

#391

Post by pasabagi »

labster wrote: post #313
pkulak wrote: post #259

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Holy crap, Europe needs to get off natural gas yesterday.

As a disgruntled climate scientist, I think Europe needs to get off natural gas by 1990. It’s not as if the security benefits weren’t obvious when we all were buying from the Arab world, or the wider global security destabilization caused by climate change.

The cancellation of the NS2 pipeline has been a silver lining, even if it's hard to compare the long-term quanta of brutality a given amount of CO2 leads to vs the short term brutality of war.

Re: Chernobyl power plant captured by Russian forces

#392

Post by sterlind »

sofixa wrote: post #363
squarefoot wrote: post #253

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> The Russian forces seem to be trying to encircle or assault Kyiv. Yes, but although Putin is a bloody bastard, he's not stupid. His plan isn't to take entire control of Ukraine militarily but to swap the legit government with a puppet one he would control at will. Once he succeed, which is a matter of a few days, he'll gradually withdraw most of the forces, things will slowly return to normal and in a few years Ukr…

> His plan isn't to take entire control of Ukraine militarily but to swap the legit government with a puppet one he would control at will. Once he succeed, which is a matter of a few days,he'll gradually withdraw most of the forces, things will slowly return to normal and in a few years Ukraine will essentially (if not effectively) annex itself to Russia I wouldn't be so certain. I don't think Ukrainians would just c…

what if Russia used chemical weapons? doesn't hurt physical infrastructure, provokes shock and fear, kills or incapacitates a lot of people, denies tons of area to the Ukrainians.

I'm not sure Russia has much left to lose politically by stooping to that.

Re: Chernobyl power plant captured by Russian forces

#393

Post by ciex »

swyx wrote: post #372
ejb999 wrote: post #371

Probably not a bad idea to put all your troops and equipment stockpiles near an area that just about everyone is going to be reluctant to bomb indiscriminately - nobody wants to accidentally destroy that shell protecting that nuclear power plant I would imagine.

is this the same plant as the one from 1986? this plant is still active today? im very surprised.

When a nuclear power plant has a failure as catastrophic as that in Chernobyl it is active (radioactive) for a _very_ long time, with no way of shutting it down. The immediate site of the power plant will be uninhabitable for about 20,000 years, however, the wider area might become safe to live in in just a couple of hundred years. While radiation levels decrease in general, there have also been measurements of increasing radiation in 2021.

Re: Chernobyl power plant captured by Russian forces

#394

Post by rad_gruchalski »

bayesian_horse wrote: post #210
charliea0 wrote: post #119

The Russian forces seem to be trying to encircle or assault Kyiv. I think they've taken the nuclear plant because it is a defensible point along their shortest line of advance. They wouldn't want to move past it without controlling the site.

I think they seized it because they need the general area to move their troops. In that case they can't tolerate Ukrainian troops there, but somebody has to be in control and responsible for this site to ensure, among other things, no terrorists make off with radioactive material. I'm totally condemning the Russian actions, but in this particular case they may be acting somewhat responsibly. Unlike with the bombing o…

> but somebody has to be in control and responsible for this site to ensure, among other things, no terrorists make off with radioactive material

Please… Russians will just use it for their propaganda as a support to the claim that Ukraine was working on nuclear weapons.

Re: Chernobyl power plant captured by Russian forces

#395

Post by sidewndr46 »

swyx wrote: post #372
ejb999 wrote: post #371

Probably not a bad idea to put all your troops and equipment stockpiles near an area that just about everyone is going to be reluctant to bomb indiscriminately - nobody wants to accidentally destroy that shell protecting that nuclear power plant I would imagine.

is this the same plant as the one from 1986? this plant is still active today? im very surprised.

No, the current structure is from 2018

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

Re: Chernobyl power plant captured by Russian forces

#396

Post by anothernewdude »

hutzlibu wrote: post #201
nine_k wrote: post #149

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Also, either side would be pretty reluctant to bomb it, or otherwise battle too hard close to it. It's a great position to hold if you can.

"It's a great position to hold if you can." It is a great position to hold and fight in, because the area is pretty empty of civilians. And russia must avoid ukranian (russian in their eyes) civilian casualties, to not loose the little popular support they have for this war. And neither side will be so stupid to directly bomb the remains of the reactor, but I think it would need a serious direct bombing, for radiatio…

Then their bombing of hospitals was a bit silly

Re: Chernobyl power plant captured by Russian forces

#397

Post by herpderperator »

drekipus wrote: post #341
bayesian_horse wrote: post #210

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think they seized it because they need the general area to move their troops. In that case they can't tolerate Ukrainian troops there, but somebody has to be in control and responsible for this site to ensure, among other things, no terrorists make off with radioactive material. I'm totally condemning the Russian actions, but in this particular case they may be acting somewhat responsibly. Unlike with the bombing o…

> Unlike with the bombing of civilians or the whole damn war in the first place! Has this happened? Ukrainian civilians bombed?

Yes. A cyclist can be seen going about their life before a bomb lands in front of them. The proximity would have sent shrapnel directly into them. They did not survive. It is extremely sad and awful to watch unfold. Warning: the second video contains gore. https://twitter.com/realistqx1/status/1496757503195029508 and https://twitter.com/zyundex/status/1496735074720563203

Re: Chernobyl power plant captured by Russian forces

#398

Post by toyg »

Ourgon wrote: post #267
hutzlibu wrote: post #212

Earlier quoted context omitted.

"The memorandum was originally signed by three nuclear powers: the Russian Federation, the United Kingdom and the United States. China and France gave somewhat weaker individual assurances in separate documents." It is a bit unfair to blame it on US, France and UK only, when russia signed the document, too - and was the actual party to violate it by attacking ukraine already in 2014. (russia's position is, that since…

It is not just "a bit unfair", it is part of the nonsensical "all bad things are the fault of 'the west'" attitude which has gained so much popularity in the last decades. May I suggest the time has come (or, rather, has been here a long time) to stop (self-) flagellating and to start looking at the things which that much maligned "west" actually does right, things which are - gasp - worth defending?

It takes two to tango. Putin is as much a son of the loot of the USSR as Hitler was of the Versailles agreement.

Victory must be magnanimous or it's just temporary.

Re: Chernobyl power plant captured by Russian forces

#399

Post by pdabbadabba »

djrogers wrote: post #161
ncallaway wrote: post #30

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The EU and America have promised to help with economic sanctions on Russia and by providing military aid and lethal aid. The EU and America have explicitly not promised to help out with direct military action against Russia. The United States and Biden have said multiple times that the US will not have forces engage Russia directly in Ukraine. What specific promises are you referring to?

>. What specific promises are you referring to? The Budapest Memorandum. 1994 wasn't that long ago...

Still not very specific. Or correct, as far as I can see.

Here is the text of the memorandum: https://web.archive.org/web/20170312052208/http://www.cfr.or...

Can you point us to the provision that you claim the U.S./Europe have violated? It is only about 1-2 pages long, so I don't think this is too much to ask.

Re: Chernobyl power plant captured by Russian forces

#400

Post by throwaway894345 »

pkulak wrote: post #259
squarefoot wrote: post #253

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> The Russian forces seem to be trying to encircle or assault Kyiv. Yes, but although Putin is a bloody bastard, he's not stupid. His plan isn't to take entire control of Ukraine militarily but to swap the legit government with a puppet one he would control at will. Once he succeed, which is a matter of a few days, he'll gradually withdraw most of the forces, things will slowly return to normal and in a few years Ukr…

Holy crap, Europe needs to get off natural gas yesterday.

Yeah, this has been my frustration for a while. Honestly, at this point just buy natural gas from a country that isn't helmed by a warlord. Similarly, Germany decommissioning its nuclear reactors isn't helping matters. I genuinely wonder what short term solutions are feasible with respect to decreasing dependence on Russian gas--can Europe ramp up production of heat pumps or similar? Is "Norway expanding its natural gas capacity" a reasonable short term option? Would love to hear from people who know anything about this.
Post reply on HN