Any experimental reactor accidents I should cover let me know!

@Belisknerful

3 жыл бұрын

As I wrote in one of my prev. comments, you may take a look at Jaslovské Bohunice. Built from 1958 and using non-enriched uranium as fuel in former Czechoslovakia (now located in Slovakia). Interesting fact, all accidents which happend there are, along with the scrapping process, considered as classified. But still a general info is out.

@rogerc7960

3 жыл бұрын

France detonated 8 atom bombs near Bordeaux

@lukahierl9857

3 жыл бұрын

The ball pit reactor AVR jürich in germany. I know not a specific accident, rather a complete Cluster f***.

@absolutely1337

3 жыл бұрын

ahhhh love a good vid on saturday from you. thznks.

@XFly170

3 жыл бұрын

I entered the Matrix and went to see The Oracle to ask her that question. « Come in, XFly170, I’ve been waiting for you. The cookies are almost done. » she said as I walked in. « What nuclear reactor accident should Plainly Difficult cover next? » I asked her. « The one that hasn’t happened yet, XFly170, the one that hasn’t happened yet. » The Oracle said as she offered me a cookie, still steaming hot out of the oven. « But... if he does a video about it, won’t that stop it from happening? » I asked her back, in between two bites of her cookie. « What’s really going to bother your mind later on is, whether you’d have eaten a cookie right here in this kitchen tonight if the video stops it from happening. »

Look at that, an adequately contained, properly cleaned up nuclear mishap.

@NPrinceling

3 жыл бұрын

Like clockwork... :D

@aswisshuman637

3 жыл бұрын

Nolan Flynn welllllllllll is made by us.......i am just confused we did not build an clock out of it

@sehvehn7955

3 жыл бұрын

Lol. This happens once a month on an air craft carrier. Reactor always acting funky

@arthas640

3 жыл бұрын

Well it WAS sunk into a mountain and used lower powered method. It was also a somewhat experimental model so they planned ahead for failure whereas most normal powerplants are built with more efficiency in mind and that may result in it being harder to clean up (like being close to water sources that makes it harder to contain when it fails)

@jamesricker3997

3 жыл бұрын

That's probably why they put it in a cave Just in case

The biggest surprise of this episode is that after the accident Switzerland stopped its nuclear program

@PlainlyDifficult

3 жыл бұрын

I suppose the massive clean up soured the desire

@davidgustafik7968

3 жыл бұрын

@Phục Đạt Đức How is CERN polluting anything?

@matteckert7541

3 жыл бұрын

@Phục Đạt Đức caring about the environment and nuclear power aren't mutually exclusive, nuclear power is the only true renewable energy and it's less deadly than other "renewable" sources.

@Panzerfan93

3 жыл бұрын

actually no, it only offically got disbanded in the 1980s, but it was quasi-dead way before

@pullt

3 жыл бұрын

@Phục Đạt Đức One of the biggest travesties of the Nuclear Age is how environmentalists became so ardently anti-nuclear power.... Way, way, WAY more pollution is created by other energy sources. Is nuclear perfect? No, but the planet would be cleaner and safer if more nuclear energy was used.

In addition to safety, was defensibly a consideration here? Building a mostly-hidden, mostly-bomb-proof reactor seems like a very Swiss thing to do.

@TotallyNotRedneckYall

3 жыл бұрын

The whole darn country is a bunker 🤣

@Duraltia

3 жыл бұрын

The Reinforced Concrete Shell of a Nuclear Reactor can probably only be penetrated by a Bunker Buster - There's a snipped out there where they "flew" ( rocket propelled on a rail ) an entire Jet into a representative portion of such a shell on a test site - Viewed directly from the side - At first it looked like the plane went straight through it but a different angle showed the plane just disintegrating on the wall with the latter not having given a single darn fuck about what just had happened.

@FortuneZer0

3 жыл бұрын

Caverns were indeed a way of protecting instalations as one cant pin point the targets.

@martigrey5872

3 жыл бұрын

@@Duraltia yes the walls stop a plane and they did prove that but if you're watching German state TV they changed the voiceover to say the walls can't withstand a plane. But the footage shows there is no more plane, just a standing wall.

@MazeFrame

3 жыл бұрын

@@Duraltia Watched a documentary on a tunnel fire. The problem is not the impact, it is what the heat does to the concrete.

Here's a little constructive criticism: All throughout the video, I heard at least 3 different types of radiation measurements, and no real "scale" for them. When explaining the exposure of the radiation, it's be insanely helpful to give something to compare it to, like an x-ray or something. Asides from that, that was a great video.

@deephorizon1365

3 жыл бұрын

@TurboCMinusMinus It would still give a good idea of if it's not much or "holy fuck the world is ending", also a different scale to use could be how long it would take to kill you lol or normal background radiation

@mcblaggart8565

3 жыл бұрын

@TurboCMinusMinus To be fair, those vague scales are also used by lying anti-nuclear types to create irrational fear of radioactivity. Like when barely detectable radiation from Fukushima washed up in California. HUNDREDS OF TIMES THE NATURAL LEVEL OF RADIOACTIVE CESIUM! (The natural level is practically zero)

@krivdik

3 жыл бұрын

@@mcblaggart8565 Yep, just take a plane and climb into 10 000m, where background radiation levels are on average 40 times highter, than on ground level. Seems like, it does not realy bother anyone, since such level of radiation is still completely fine.

@zolikoff

3 жыл бұрын

Rads are fine because it's an objective and used-by-industry measurement. Comparing to X-rays is not useful at all. Sieverts would be better than Rads, but it's not a big difference you just divide by 100. However, some statements aren't qualified in exposure/dose, but rather regulatory limits, eg. "Ten times the allowable exposure", which is bad because it provides no objective information. It should be stated what that actual value was.

@mjfan653

3 жыл бұрын

i think a lot of it is due to the reports and citations using diferent scales, and conversions would/could be done diferent depending on how much of what was in that measured radiation. but yeah, he could, for example, use the original reported scale + number, and give an channel standard comparison along that number, if it's not in that scale already... would help a lot of the less nuclear people watching understand the severity and help put things in context, especially over the diferent accidents/videos

Low enrichment fuel. Oh no. Graphite moderation. Oh no! Air cooling. OH NO!

@PlainlyDifficult

3 жыл бұрын

A healthy mixture for disaster

@MAAnderson22

3 жыл бұрын

What's wrong with low enrichment fuel? Wouldn't that be better than high (er) enrichment?

@derekp2674

3 жыл бұрын

@@PlainlyDifficult UK Magnox reactors ran safely with NU or vLEU fuel, graphite moderation and CO2 cooling for many decades.

@andybub45

3 жыл бұрын

Not great, not terrible.

@mile290productions3

3 жыл бұрын

We didn't learn from Chernobyl did we?

When I heard magnesium and water I thought: Hmm - no problems with corrosion?.... ah ... yes.

"What the operators didnt know..." {Shudders} *DUN DUN DUN*

Even most people in Switzerland don t know that this happened...

@hkkhgffh3613

3 жыл бұрын

Attention stay away from da Bünzlies!

@foreverpinkf.7603

3 жыл бұрын

They have been much smarter than their neighbors, e.g. France and Germany and stopped the madness.

@Peatch13

3 жыл бұрын

in our canton (bern) is a mandatory piece of history class, I assume is also in others.....vo wo bisch? 😅

@le0daniel

3 жыл бұрын

@@Peatch13 also wier im wallis hei niä va dem kehrt inner schüäl 😅

@Burnding

3 жыл бұрын

@@le0daniel Also ich has nummu us zöäfall ärfahru und has Plainly Difficult sogar vorgschlagu, ob ich där üsleser fär das video bi gsi weisi nid, aber interessant ischs trotz dem gsi

I think you should make a video explaining all the different measurements of radiation that you reference with counterparts of other systems and analogous real world examples. Like this many millisieverts is analogous to this many rems, or this many chest x-rays, or whatever. A dedicated video as well as other in video examples would help a lot of those not versed in the various measurement systems of radiation understand the scale of incidents and the levels of danger.

@piotrcurious1131

3 жыл бұрын

To accurately measure "radiation" you could just equalize it to it's total energy equivalent, Watts. Problem is, when You have nuclear pollution, You do not only worry about radiation alone, wchich is actually harmless from short distance (like any EM radiation, inverse square law applies) What is a problem is that various ISOTOPES are released. Carbon, Cesium, Plutonium , Iodine - have high bio-availability. Cadmium pollutes steel, actually to get non radioactive steel nowadays (f.e. to build scientific instruments) You need to buy it from special reserves created from old , pre-radioactive era ships and other scrap. So uniform radiation scale is not really telling us anything about disaster, not even rough estimate on type or mass of isotopes released. It is bit like trying to measure farts judging on how loud they are, and arguing over decibells vs spectral analysis of fart sounds...

@GentlemansCombatives

3 жыл бұрын

I need to know it in roentgen

@ZGryphon

2 жыл бұрын

Well, the sievert-to-rem equivalence, at least, is pretty easy, since the rem was retroactively defined as 0.01 sievert in 1976. :)

@gargoyle7863

4 ай бұрын

Measurements max out at 3.6 Roentgens. Not good, not terrible.

You failed to mention a very critical part of the description of the Lucens Reactor design. This particular design, much like the RBMK design in Chernobyl, used two types of moderator material, graphite and deuterated water (H2O also works), a difficult balancing act if there ever was one. Both types of designs unintentionally incorporated uncharacterized positive void coefficient failure-modes which could allow unaccounted-for excess moderating material near the reactor fuel. Thus, when the coolant, being affected, couldn't maintain fuel temperature stability due to an excess of reactivity from the over-moderation event (keff >> 1), a meltdown ensued. So it appears that the Swiss had a meltdown of a very similar type to the Chernobyl design, except in the Lucens design they had 1/2 to 1/3 the uranium enrichment level and less overall starting nuclear material that could get into a positive-feedback runaway situation. If this was publicly available knowledge, the Russians might have been able to modify their reactor and avoid a catastrophe.

@nevermind824

3 жыл бұрын

The Russians new this. The soviet state didn't release its own research into the void physics to its own scientific community.

@cud0s

3 жыл бұрын

Russians knew this - they even had accidents in other rbmk reactors before chernobyl, but they did not share information between theimselves

@neutronalchemist3241

3 жыл бұрын

The main problem at Lucens had been the use of magnesium along with CO2 and water in a high temperature environment. Since those charateristics were not present in the RBMK reactors, the Soviets would have considered them to be safe anyway. It has to be said that the problems of Lucens were even easier to predict than those of the RBMK reactors, since it was well known that the Magnox alloys were rapidly corroded by water (it was for that reason the "magnox" British reactors had no water in the core, and that had not completely saved them anyway) even more since in a CO2 atmosphere water forms carbonic acid. In the original design, the magnesium was not directly in contact with water, but it needed only a small leakage.

@Waldemarvonanhalt

2 жыл бұрын

Keep in mind, cost-effectiveness was everything for the Soviets. They didn't even build their NPP's with containment buildings, due to cost. I seriously doubt they would accept the cost of overhauling relatively new reactors.

@misham6547

2 жыл бұрын

@@Waldemarvonanhalt the pwr reactors where build with an containment building but due to the hot swapping of fuel in the RBMK reactor they didn't want to build one because it would remove that feature

The figurines are what always make me chuckle

@totalrecone

3 жыл бұрын

Me too. We didn't get a "bollocks" this time, but we *did* get an "Oh s*ht" which is on par :)

@stevie-ray2020

2 жыл бұрын

They always remind me of those illustrations in the foreign language text-books from high-school!

I thought only Tony stark could build a reactor in a cave

last time I was this early the day shift haven't ended yet

@PlainlyDifficult

3 жыл бұрын

😂😂

@letterslayer7814

3 жыл бұрын

pff its past bed time for us night shift people here in merica' thats right, merica'

@takase5037

3 жыл бұрын

@@letterslayer7814 i can assure most accidents at some point involves a shift change, here and the CSB videos

This comment is to boost our friend Al Go-Rhythm.

@ElTurbinado

3 жыл бұрын

thx for saving this from 0 views.

@duhluth

3 жыл бұрын

Not to be confused with my proto-internet electronica synth group, the Al Gore Rhythms 😎

@paststeve1

3 жыл бұрын

@@duhluth They invented the internet!

Reactors in caves may have problems, but it still seems like a better idea than how Chernobyl was built.

@spicywolf6718

3 жыл бұрын

You do realise that after the accident in 86 the other 3 reactors continued operating till 91,96,2000 respectively and there are still another 10 operational. There's nothing wrong with RBMK-1000 reactors so long as they are operated according to spec. Plus the remaining had modifications post 86.

@mihai08

3 жыл бұрын

Is chernobyl was in the position, the power of the blast would have demolishes the entire side, without the capability to dose of the 🔥... the core would have polluted the underground water traveling towards the lower points

@Zonda1996

3 жыл бұрын

Spicy Wolf Why would the RBMK-1000 design need to be modified after 1986 if there was nothing wrong with it in the first place? 💀

@Calliber50

3 жыл бұрын

If it was a man made cave and properly sealed. I would highly advise against using an existing cave without proper engineering. Caves are formed through years of water running through and carving the cave. So there are many paths for any nuclear mishap to disperse.

@spicywolf6718

3 жыл бұрын

@@Zonda1996 they added more safety measure to the control computers and changed a few mechanical feeds. The reactor design itself was unchanged. They even used the same design and scaled it down to make 30MW mini reactors

That's such a sad and premature end to what could have been a marvellous piece of technology and engineering.

"The control room experienced 10 times the maximum admissible concentration for occupational exposure... Rb 88 which has a short half-life of around 18 minutes". That's still 5 times the maximum admissible concentration tho

Rb - the amphibious element ("ribit" - frog) I'll show myself out.

@DrBrown88

3 жыл бұрын

🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣👍

@pocketstationman6364

3 жыл бұрын

The one character I let die on purpose.

@BrilliantDesignOnline

3 жыл бұрын

Nuclear humor.

@stevie-ray2020

2 жыл бұрын

@@BrilliantDesignOnline Atomic-mirth?

"unless you're Sayano-Shushenskaya" - hmmm, a hint for a future video???? en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sayano-Shushenskaya_Dam

@josephfutrell5619

3 жыл бұрын

If you want dam accidents, should probably go with one of the worst in modern times, en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vajont_Dam

Don’t have time to watch right now, pre liking and commenting how excited I am.

@PlainlyDifficult

3 жыл бұрын

Thank you!

Magnesium in a reactore core, plus cooled whit CO2, ingres of water. If that isnt concerning go a head and turn reactor on. Nuts... Overheat magnesium and it burns in CO2, water reacts whit Mg at room temps realisin H2 (at Mg melting temp thats explosive), CO2 disolved in water is a weak acid but its more than fast at coroding Mg, product is carbonate that acts as a calk. Nice desighn, nuts...

@jfan4reva

3 жыл бұрын

I remember as a kid seeing a demonstration on a tv science show how, something impossible could happen - a metal burning! They squirted some water on magnesium powder and it burst into flames. I also remember when Honda started making magnesium engine covers for some of their motorcycles, and mechanics quickly learned not to weld near those magnesium parts. How do you fight a magnesium fire? You hose down everything near by so it won't burn, and let the magnesium burn itself out. This reactor probably was a brilliant design, but only when everything goes right. Like all high tech, when things aren't within specs, things tend to go wrong quickly and catastrophically. The higher the level of technology, the less 'robust' (less able to withstand out of spec excursions) the device.

@Zonkotron

3 жыл бұрын

@@jfan4reva Sand, cement, that kind of stuff will mostly snuff a magnesium fire.

One little thing: hydroelectric is actually much less safe than fission, many more people are killed in hydroelectric disasters and the environment is often much more affected.

10:04 For as much of a shame it is this facility ended up being a write off, abandoned structures are one of my favorite things to learn about and explore, and this sequence of shots here is absolutely breathtaking. My artsy side loves this.

That’s why you don’t have to worry about melting fuel if your fuel’s already melted msr

"it's all mine" made me giggle

@PlainlyDifficult

3 жыл бұрын

😬

They first had planned to build it in Zürich (big city in Switzerland). Lukily they decided to build it elsewhere.

Talking about Dams, could you do any Dam failures? That would be sweet

@PlainlyDifficult

3 жыл бұрын

There’s a couple videos soon 😉

@alexandercarder2281

3 жыл бұрын

Plainly Difficult YESSSSSSSSS

@ferretyluv

6 ай бұрын

He already did Johnstown.

Really enjoying the videos. Keep up the good work

@PlainlyDifficult

3 жыл бұрын

Thank you

As much as I enjoy your weekly disaster content, I honestly enjoy your animations the most that's what truly makes the videos. Keep up the awesome work cheers

The last time I was this early, the reactor chamber was still spewing radiation

Amazing video man, Could you please do the West Lake Landfill next? I know all about it already but I think we all love your style of covering disasters!

I’ve always appreciated, and watched your nuclear reactor videos. They’re all very informative, and well made.

@PlainlyDifficult

3 жыл бұрын

Thank you

Good video mate

@PlainlyDifficult

3 жыл бұрын

Thank you

When it comes to nuclear reactors, Murphy's Law always applies.

One thing I've learned from this channel is that there have been a frightening number of accidents related to nuclear power.

@drewgehringer7813

Жыл бұрын

There's a lot of accidents related to generating electricity period to be honest, coal and natural power plants don't have a spotless safety record either but death by boiler explosion or being buried in a coal pile avalanche isn't as slow and unpleasant to look at as death by acute radiation syndrome.

The thing about hydro is you're still putting potential millions at risk downstream and even more if vital crop fields and ranches downstream are at risk should the damn fail as well, causing food shortages and severe short term economic repercussions. In addition, dams greatly disrupt the natural ecosystems they are built upon, requiring expensive work arounds to hopefully allow fish to migrate about but that still don't exactly replace a continuous river that is safe and easy for aquatic life to move up and downstream within.

@ianwilkinson5069

3 жыл бұрын

Just like the huge floods going on in china that no ones been talking about.

@robinwells8879

3 жыл бұрын

There is no harmless human activity. We just try to minimise the harm where we can. Sadly the "I'm against that brigade" realised that there is always a down side to any activity and latch on to that to achieve their nimby aims. I know of an offshore windfarm that was not developed because it might interfere with the life cycle of some bird that no one has ever seen on the sight. As a result you could argue that we delayed the closure of our older coal burning generators for a number of years more than we might have. Despite this, the activists responsible will count themselves great heroes of the environment!🙄 Humans are basically an infestation on an otherwise rather pleasant planet and that is the long and the short of it. If we all tried to do our bit for the environment rather than blaming everyone but ourselves, then we might do a lot better better.

@princeofcupspoc9073

3 жыл бұрын

Every large damn results in a major environmental mess. In theory, these issues are mitigated. In practice, that's not really the case. Wind and geo-thermal seem to be better in terms of environmental impact.

@krashd

3 жыл бұрын

@romaneeconti02 I'm going to assume that was sarcasm. It's not liberals who would see a complete end to red tape and regulations. en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Environmental_policy_of_the_Donald_Trump_administration

@5:01 "In December ninteen-sixty **EIGHT**" Hehe

They didn't learn: 2014 it became public that workers put 6 holes in the primary containment at nuclear power plant Leibstadt /Swiss. Reason: they wanted to put fire extinguishers there.... Thank you for your great videos!

I would say the location saved a whole load of contamination from being released into the atmospher. If only it was above ground, they could have just let all the radiation escape, opps, we wont do it again. lol

Why did the safety rupture disk vent the coolant into the reaction chamber? I mean it would not take that much extra effort to provide an "overflow tank" since in case of an accident the coolant would be (and was) contaminated. If the unit is suffering an overpressure accident it would be a risk.

Hi, random comment. I only just found your channel a few weeks ago. I've been going through all of your disaster videos days straight now. Keep it up!

Swiss: "We'll make cheese, but put a bunch of holes in it." Also the Swiss: "We'll make Reactors with Graphite, but put a bunch of holes in it."

Calling hydro safer than nuclear is not really looking at the actual deaths per amount of energy produced. Hydro is actually one of the worst offenders!

@nastyab8003

2 жыл бұрын

When you consider that EVERY person who has touched water has, inevitably, died!

"Hydroelectricity is safer" The list of biggest power plant disasters has determined that that is a lie

@aoilpe

3 жыл бұрын

As always; don’t forget the human factors...

@jebes909090

3 жыл бұрын

Well when a hydro disaster happens, things arent ruined for a thousand years. Thats a uniquely nuclear problem

@aoilpe

3 жыл бұрын

Water destroys everything,okay,but you can reuse the flooded lands right after. Pripyat isn’t destroyed but tauted up

@RipleySawzen

3 жыл бұрын

@@jebes909090 Pripyat isn't ruined. We could always use more nature conservatories!

@cactusman1771

3 жыл бұрын

@@RipleySawzen Scientists also found a fungus in the area affected by Chernobyl that decomposes radioactive materials. It eats it then turns it into energy.

Having a test reactor built underground actually is quite brilliant if you ask me.

Thanks again for educating us! 🤓🥸🤠😎

This really put the nuclear bomb on Switzerland’s nuclear program! I’ll show myself out

The swiss built something into a mountain. Let me put on my surprised face.

Another interesting and informative video. Enjoyed it thoroughly! Thanks!

Love this channel. The only bad thing is the videos aren't long enough

very interesting video i have been waiting for. keep it up! greetings from Switzerland!

@PlainlyDifficult

3 жыл бұрын

Thank you!

Always clear and informative....I enjoy the work, thank you.

Love your videos ! Keep up the good work

@PlainlyDifficult

3 жыл бұрын

Thank you!

This is very educating, keep it up!

Keep up the fantastic work on your great content Plainly Difficult!

INTERESTING PLACE IDEA: I don't know the full details but there is a place in Kent (UK) called St Mary's Island which has a history of buried nuclear waste with a housing estate on top, apparently the first residents had to take iodine tablets? Not sure of whats rumor or fact but definitely worth looking into. Love your channel BTW.

The contaminated heavy water was dealt with efficiently. By tipping the contamination into the nearest river it was able to flush away to the ocean allowing nature to deal with it effectively by having sea salt and sunlight neutralising it very quickly.

nice, I can't get enough of these

Another amazing video.

Oh man I can’t wait to see a video about my meltdown

Notice him algorithm-senpai!

@PlainlyDifficult

3 жыл бұрын

😬

Speaking of hydro power being so ultra safe...can you do an episode about the St. Francis Dam failure in California in 1928? It happened close to my hometown.

I would like to draw your attention to the small building in front of the dam at 1:14 - This is, in fact, a 9-story building. The dam is the Grande Dixence dam - at 285 meters, it's the tallest building in Switzerland. With the 15 million tonnes of concrete used for the dam, you could build a wall around earth's equator 1.5 meters high and 10 cm thick.

Loved the animations!

Something makes me think, that they didnt consult any experienced reactor designers before building this fiasco.

Well thats a weird one, usually the Swiss are very very careful about what they do. I also was taken aback by what I would have thought was a safe configuration doing the Swiss no good at all.

to that blind commenter: this disaster was rated a 4 out of 10 on the disaster scale

@felobatirmoheb4884

3 жыл бұрын

If a blind person has a subtitle reader system working then this comment is unironically helpful!

I really enjoy your work. Kudos to you.

I love your vids, fascinating stuff

Nice channel, love disaster analysis.

@PlainlyDifficult

3 жыл бұрын

Thank you

Always eat my lunch while watching your vids!

If magnesium burns in blocks of DRY ICE, using magnesium alloys in CO2-cooled reactors would seem to make perfect sense to me! 😬🔥

Love this channel!

@PlainlyDifficult

3 жыл бұрын

Thank you

Another super good video 👍 😁

Great start to my YT visit, a meltdown!

Thanks for sharing!

aaah, finaly, ive searched for this a while back on this channel ;) thx alot!

@Peatch13

3 жыл бұрын

btw. we have still the oldest reactor in use in switzerland....hope nothing happen there 🤔

@aoilpe

3 жыл бұрын

@@Peatch13 Beznau , 51 years in use...!

Commenting for the algorithm cuz these videos are dope LOOK AT THAT INTERACTION

If an incident (not full-blown accident) might be of interest, you might look at the water hammer incident at the Ågesta reactor outside Stockholm. The reactor was eventually closed, but most of it is still there today.

Small note: the flag you used was the marine flag. The „proper“ Swiss flag is square.

When you get one of those minecraft mods with a nuclear reactor in it and you start building it not knowing how it goes together

It’s a shame Switzerland cancelled their entire program after this. Heavy water and gas-cooled reactors were way ahead of their time and this incident was handled excellently. Scram was successful and the dosages received were not that significant.

@francesconicoletti2547

3 жыл бұрын

Yah, but it also didn’t reliably produce power. The ship sank but everyone survived is not a glowing endorsement of the ship design.

@senpaichicken9408

3 жыл бұрын

Francesco Nicoletti Fair point, I’m just saying it was impressive for the 1960s alone. I see problems using graphite moderators nowadays, but some of these features are being put to use in CANDU and generation IV reactors. Material science and safety systems have both come a very long way since then and it seems like they lost the balance of innovation and safety with this one. If they had continued, I couldn’t imagine how far the Swiss would’ve come with their contribution to nuclear energy.

@jfan4reva

3 жыл бұрын

@@senpaichicken9408 It's a perception problem. Some years back someone in the U.S. came up with the idea of putting an additive into jet fuel to keep it from creating a huge fire when an airliner crashes. He got enough support to test the idea. So they deliberately crashed a 707 equipped with the system, but the pilot who flew it by remote control didn't hit the crash target accurately, and there was a huge fireball, so everyone thought the system was a failure. If you watch the video, 30 seconds after the fireball erupted, the fire was out. Fire trucks can barely get to a crash site on an airport in 30 seconds. The system worked, but because or the big fireball, everyone thought it was a failure, and it was never implemented.

Is that a cue mark before ad breaks? I'm new to the channel and I must say that I love that and although it's small it is a nice thing to make this channel stand out a bit

You know, sometimes I wonder what process is used to design these reactors. I might not be the smartest guy in the room, but this whole design seems more like "Hey, I think we might not die using this!" rather than anything one might consider 'safe'.

@leechowning2712

2 жыл бұрын

My question was "why did the pressure relief not go into a secure tank, rather than just spilling all over". I mean we can all agree that there is a risk of contamination in the water no matter what, so why wouldn't you design it to keep any leaked material safe.

@lars7935

Жыл бұрын

@@leechowning2712 Cost.

I've literally watched dozens of these videos. It astounds me not one of these facilities ever has an undo button.

@Zonkotron

3 жыл бұрын

And the worst part is that this total disregard for operating procedure and safe design process is what gave nuclear power it's bad name. There has never been a nuclear accident with bad consequences in a proper, well designed power plant. But we still had a shitton due to countries trying batshit crazy designs like this or the RBMK, making crazy experiments like some US test reactors or installing barely adequate reactors on the seaside of a tsunami region with backup generators in an unprotected basement *vomit*. All the while Designs such as the last 2 pre Chernobyl accident generations by Siemens-KWU like Brockdorf and Isar II in Germany never had any serious problems despite not being designed as super safe next gen plants. Just reasonable engineering done to high specifications......minimal problems with those, as with most other sane designs....

Nicely informative video.

I like this channel great job keep it up. The nuclear stuff is awesome. Im curries about the hydroelectric incident you mentioned though towards the end. What was the name?

I would like to ask you what you do for work? I've been watching you for a long time. Could for maybe do a live stream Q&A or maybe a pre recorded Q&A

@PlainlyDifficult

3 жыл бұрын

Thanks for the idea!

Never knew the Swiss tried this

@lordbertox4056

3 жыл бұрын

Most of of us swiss dont either. News papers were "convinced" by the goverment to not put it in the first page.

@aoilpe

3 жыл бұрын

@@lordbertox4056 You are too young to remember the Kaiseraugst protests? It was a theme at the time...

Comment for algorythm

@PlainlyDifficult

3 жыл бұрын

Danke!

@user-mo5tk7ys4c

3 жыл бұрын

@@PlainlyDifficult you are german?

@pferris3591

3 жыл бұрын

Response for algorithmic gratification! 😀

@poloziki9990

3 жыл бұрын

@@user-mo5tk7ys4c Nope, he is a mix between CGP Grey stickman and Genghis Khan ( ͡° ͜ʖ ͡°)

@Geckobane

3 жыл бұрын

I like turtles

'In theory, building a reactor underground makes sense as you already have a natural containment structure' - I almost felt a shiver as all I could imagine was a cave collapse during operation, and you can't escape the poison nor pressure; my mind made up a little drama about a person choosing to off themselves rather than die by radiation, only to be freed once dead, like a twisted morality story. Is fear of suffocation in tight space related to fear of heights? Both involve intense emotions related to distance and vulnerability

Fantastic. 🙂

It's not a true Supervillain-style design if the control room isn't inside the cave, where it would get cut off by the automatic doors, trapping the crew inside.

99% likes! Hell yeah! Love this channel and its quarks! (All pun intended)

@PlainlyDifficult

3 жыл бұрын

Thank you!

Interesting. I had not heard of this reactor before.

Bravo. Always fun.

Really interesting! Such confidence that their idea or experiment would work perfectly such that the prohibitive expense of a Disaster Cleanup within a mountain was disregarded. There is this graphic movie showing the severity and location earthquakes over the course of a year. Big deep earthquakes have Giant Circles and little earthquakes have little circles. The number of disasters you have outlined is so alarming. There are so many of these disasters you could make a similar movie of the planet with various different disasters blowing up over the course of the last century. My goodness we have been so destructive and so secretive that nobody seems to realize how much of this planet we've blown up or corrupted.

@pingwingugu5

3 жыл бұрын

Relax this planet is quite big. A radioactive cave here, and few old facilities there isn't going to cover the planet in nuclear waste anytime. Take lithium evaporation mines for size comparison, hundreds of square kilometers of inhabitable land.

@sooobyrooo5763

3 жыл бұрын

@@pingwingugu5 true that. The Earth had a lot of radiation all over the place to begin with and yeah it is big. But some of the stuff kind of gets spread all over the place and cumulatively it is not adding up to be any good.

@Davidautofull

3 жыл бұрын

im with scooby. that crap is all over the place and what WE know is probably only the tip of the iceberg. watch Plainlys vid on the little radioactive cubes. and there is a video showing our planet with every atomic explosion that is pretty scary. did you know that after the first test everyone born since had something, ill say radioactive markers, in there DNA?

Switzerland had ONE negative experience with atomic energy and basically went, "throw this entire nuclear program away, this shit is SCARY."

@zolikoff

3 жыл бұрын

Basically all of humanity right now.

@francesconicoletti2547

3 жыл бұрын

No they went, let’s buy something that works, this shit is complicated.

Nuclear energy is a very education-demanding, scientific, and exacting field, and must be treated with respect. If there is a fatal nuclear flaw, you must prepare for everything, but as a human, you can't imagine and prepare for *everything,* and "nature cannot be fooled."