Live data from Hacker News

The USSR used a nuclear charge to stop a gas well fire in 1966

coal-seam-gas.com

41–50 of 129 posts

Re: The USSR used a nuclear charge to stop a gas well fire in 1966

#41

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Obviously, but what does that comment have to do with anything? So corexit is harmful. My gp was talking about nuclear explosions and bacteria, not corexit.

The grandparent also said, "so it wasn't quite as big of an environmental disaster as first expected." The comment about corexit would appear to refer to that part. You could argue that it was or wasn't as big of a disaster as expected, but the corexit comment was certainly relevant regardless.

It wasn't relevant.

Damage from corexit would have be factored into initial concerns.

Re: The USSR used a nuclear charge to stop a gas well fire in 1966

#42
post #24

Earlier quoted context omitted.

My "favorite" Soviet use of nuclear explosions was for deep seismic exploration: http://scholar.google.com/scholar?q=deep+seismic+sounding+wi...

I can't find any reliable sources, so treat this as my own speculation. I heard that there were programs for a while in two big countries with acronyms starting with US that aimed into exploration of causing earthquakes/tsunamis that would hit across the word by using multiple underground nukes and constructive interference.

Certainly reasonable to believe. Those countries were exploring literally any and all avenues to undermine the other.

Re: The USSR used a nuclear charge to stop a gas well fire in 1966

#43
post #14

This puts me mind of Herzog's fantastic documentary, Lessons Of Darkness [1], about the crews putting out the oil well fires in Kuwait. Also, the Door To Hell [2] in Turkmenistan. [1] http://www.fandor.com/films/lessons_of_darkness [2] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Door_to_Hell

the odd thing about the Herzog film though is that it includes a narration that casts the images into a kind of scifi story unrelated to Kuwait/Iraq, rather than a documentary. The filming is amazing though.

Re: The USSR used a nuclear charge to stop a gas well fire in 1966

#44
post #4

The US and Russia cooperated on a program to do this in space in order to stop a asteroid from destroying the planet. Bruce Willis led the mission.

Wow. That's a lot of down votes for a joke/movie reference that shouldn't have offended anyone. Maybe this community isn't for me!

[deleted]

Re: The USSR used a nuclear charge to stop a gas well fire in 1966

#45
post #43
post #14

This puts me mind of Herzog's fantastic documentary, Lessons Of Darkness [1], about the crews putting out the oil well fires in Kuwait. Also, the Door To Hell [2] in Turkmenistan. [1] http://www.fandor.com/films/lessons_of_darkness [2] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Door_to_Hell

the odd thing about the Herzog film though is that it includes a narration that casts the images into a kind of scifi story unrelated to Kuwait/Iraq, rather than a documentary. The filming is amazing though.

Herzog has this concept of the ecstatic truth, which means his documentaries are rarely as simple as they can seem; it's almost a third form of film.

I'm an unabashed fanboy, but in any event, Lessons Of Darkness is highly, highly recommended.

Re: The USSR used a nuclear charge to stop a gas well fire in 1966

#46
post #45
post #43

Earlier quoted context omitted.

the odd thing about the Herzog film though is that it includes a narration that casts the images into a kind of scifi story unrelated to Kuwait/Iraq, rather than a documentary. The filming is amazing though.

Herzog has this concept of the ecstatic truth, which means his documentaries are rarely as simple as they can seem; it's almost a third form of film. I'm an unabashed fanboy, but in any event, Lessons Of Darkness is highly, highly recommended.

Like gp also said, his narration is also hypnotizing. It's pacing is like a metronome. Induces some sort of a trance.

Weeks after watching his films (for example The Cave Of The Forgotten Dreams) I would talk in his voice in my head.

Re: The USSR used a nuclear charge to stop a gas well fire in 1966

#47
post #23

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Here's a timelapse of every nuclear explosion since 1945. It really puts into perspective just how many nukes have gone off for purposes other than to kill people. It's amazing that only two were used for violence. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LLCF7vPanrY According to the video, people have detonated 2053 nukes, and America has the dubious distinction of having detonated over 1000.

Only two were actually used to kill people. Most of the rest were preparations for it.

Other way around. We had the Trinity test, Hiroshima & Nagasaki, and then we set off the rest. Unless you meant "preparations" for killing more people with our nuclear weapons, in which case you may be correct.

Re: The USSR used a nuclear charge to stop a gas well fire in 1966

#48
The US also had several plans for using nuclear explosions for non-military purposes:

The project team wanted to blow a path for a railway line through California’s Bristol Mountains; they wanted to use nukes to expand the Panama Canal; and they wanted to use underwater explosions to carve out a harbor in Alaska.

http://www.smithsonianmag.com/smart-news/the-us-once-wanted-...

Re: The USSR used a nuclear charge to stop a gas well fire in 1966

#49
Unfortunately the mere mention of "Nuclear" is a trigger word for most people, which is a tragedy considering that due to all the mistakes that were made in the past we have started to (finally) move to safer ways of using Nuclear Power.

If we were realists about Nuclear energy like other forms of energy, we should have been entering a golden age of Nuclear right about now.

Re: The USSR used a nuclear charge to stop a gas well fire in 1966

#50

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I doubt that anyone was offended. But you will find a very strong negative reaction to jokes in the comments. I think there is a (very wise) desire to avoid a reddit type culture that rewards extended jokes and similar things. This may well be the community for you, but just be aware that a lot of people are justifiably frightened of what can happen to online communities. I think a good rule of thumb would be 'would…

> 'would be a waste of someone's time to read this comment' That's not a good example to use for jokes because people can justify lighthearted humor as an improvement to their day. Having fun is healthy for you, and whatnot. I think a better way to deal with it is to say that there's a time and place for comedy and HN is not usually that place.

"Having fun is healthy for you"

The problem is that some vague reference to a shitty movie isn't fun. There's no witticism in his comment is there? He's effectively saying "this situation can be related to one in a movie".

Not exactly hilarious, is it?

Post reply on HN