(Topic ID: 242932)

Chernobyl (HBO) who’s watching?


By Nevus

9 months ago



Topic Stats

  • 85 posts
  • 41 Pinsiders participating
  • Latest reply 9 months ago by russdx
  • Topic is favorited by 5 Pinsiders

You

Linked Games

No games have been linked to this topic.

    Topic Gallery

    There have been 2 images uploaded to this topic. (View topic image gallery).

    images (1) (resized).jpeg
    2BCA3CD8-D6C4-4F30-9856-F3B922693026 (resized).png

    There are 85 posts in this topic. You are on page 2 of 2.
    #51 9 months ago

    Thanks for bringing this topic up. I will certainly watch this sometime. 5 episodes on this subject sounds perfect.

    I usually spend most of my time reading. And the subject that I am most often reading the last week in April every year? You guessed it.

    Quoted from CrazyLevi:

    Not a bad primer for people who parrot the nonsense "we don't need regulations" line without actually thinking about it. It's not a coincidence that this hasn't happened in the U.S. The government's main job is to keep the people safe.

    Those regulators do have a purpose and they do provide some accountability and sensible standards to the operators of plants. They help manage the day-to-day minutiae, minor threats. They do report every single time an inner door and an outer door are opened simultaneously. That's great and it should be done. But that's not why Chernobyl #4 exploded.

    Nor did reactor 4 blow up because there was some corrosion on the switch gear in the switch yard. The reason a plant in the US has not blown up is because we don't have graphite moderated reactors, without hardened containment, and positive feedback to steam formation and control rods tipped with additional graphite, that don't have an operational plan to deal with a loss of power, all operated by folks with very limited knowledge. Simply put, the USSR didn't have the budget to build and run nuclear reactors. That's why reactor 4 blew up.

    They didn't have the budget in the design phase. They didn't' have the budget in the build and commission phase. That's why they were running loss-of-power test on reactor 4 that day. The three other identical reactors on site (and two more that under construction) had never even had such tests run. That's why the test was delayed that day too, because they didn't have enough electrical generation for the grid to deal with the loss of a fossil fuel plant.

    Reactor 4 blew up simply because the USSR did not have the resources reasonably run nuclear power generation. Just like they didn't have the budget to build and run successful space program. Just like they didn't have the resources to build enough fossil fuel generation plants. Just like they didn't have the budget to feed their people. They were a shoestring operation... winging it... in all aspects. And they desperately wanted the world to believe they could do all those things.

    #52 9 months ago

    kirkgun, yeah Chernobyl pretty much bankrupted USSR and started the fall. But even well designed and well tested nuclear reactors are not safe either... Fukushima Daiichi was a cluster too.

    #53 9 months ago

    The roof scene is 90 seconds to give the viewer a sense of how it was to be there. The speech to the men before they go up is also the exact speech they received.

    Although dramatic license is used frequently in the show, some of the included details are great viewing.

    I’ve started reading the book Midnight in Chernobyl. It’s quite good on the details and background.

    #54 9 months ago

    Biubblehead,

    Why would the control rods have tips that would briefly increase the reaction when inserted?

    That part has confused me. It seems like it defeats the point of having the AZ5 / SCRAM mechanism.

    #55 9 months ago

    I thought the actual number was 40 seconds for the liquidators according to other sources I have read, but either way, just enough time to throw a couple shovels of debris over the edge...

    I have been in a high radiation area, a reactor compartment, in complete double anti-c’s, doing a neutron detector replacement onboard the Andrew Jackson back in 1985. I have got about a 1.1 rem total occupational exposure on my record for about 4 years in the industry. These guys took 12,000 times that ammount in 90 seconds. They are the true heroes of Chernobyl. They faced a firing squad shooting a billion bullets at them for 90 seconds. Solar and wind energy kill people too, but mostly due to falling off a roof or tower, not shoveling radioactive debris from atop one. Some day we will wake up and see just how bad a genie we let out of the E=mc^2 bottle. Mother nature leaves these nuclear energy things to the stars... maybe its where we should have left it too.

    #56 9 months ago

    I've been watching ! Every episode sends literal chills down my spine and I have the most awful sleep that same night! I was 11 when it happened and I remember my parents talking about it, and being so concerned about the people affected by it directly! The way its shot you feel like you're there with them going through it. AM I right???

    #57 9 months ago
    Quoted from Nevus:

    Biubblehead,
    Why would the control roads have tips that would briefly increase the reaction when inserted?
    That part has confused me. It seems like it defeats the point of having the AZ5 / SCRAM mechanism.

    It deals with when the rods are at core bottom. Not all control rods are removed at all times, some remain inserted in order to control where in the core the fission fuel is burned out. When they are fully inserted the tips are on the bottom, helping reflect neutrons and plugging holes that allow fast neutrons to escape through if the tips were not made of graphite. This was an answer to how to increase neutron flux as deep in the bottom of the core as possible, allowing maximum fuel burn at the bottom, something we had to worry about in our reactors as well, but compensated for differently due to being a pressurised, water moderated reactor. The effects of the positive power increase due to the tips initial insertion was erroneously disregarded by the designers during the development of the reactor, thus the operators not understanding how inserting rods made power increase initially. They had unknowing placed the reactor into the very worst operational scenario as possible. Low power, low thermal load, rods fully withdrawn to maintain neutron flux density above the 200Mw power requirement, high steam void occurrences, and no ability to turn reactor power using the control rods without initially increasing reactivity and pushing the reactor “over the edge”.

    #58 9 months ago
    Quoted from Bublehead:

    The Chernobyl RBMK reactor was hiding two design flaws that made it dangerous, a positive void reactivity coefficient, and graphite tipped controll rods. When uranium fissions, it produces two fission fragments plus 2 to 3 free fast neutrons that go on to cause more fissions and thus a chain reaction. Reactivity- which is a measure of what happens to the neutron population from generation to generation of neutrons produced, measures the change in population of neutrons per life cycle. On average, each fission produces 2.42 neutrons. In the neutron life cycle, this 2.42 average must get past a bunch of obstacles in order to make another atom of uranium split and give up another 2 to 3 neutrons to keep the cycle going. When the number of fissions per unit time is constant, Reactivity is 0. That means that for every 2.42 neutrons produced, at least 1 fission is created by its neutron offspring, so 1.42 neautrons are lost (or made up for) due to a whole bunch of reasons.

    The positive void reactivity coefficient dirrectly speaks to one of these losses of neutrons. When water is in the core, the water acts like an absorber, it slows neutrons down which is a good thing if you are the moderator- which is a material that slows fast neutrons down to thermal energy levels that let the neutrons be absorbed and prevents them escaping the core before being absorbed by an uranium atom. In this reactor design, they use graphite blocks as the moderator, so water in the core acts like a poison to the nuclear cycle, and steam (void space) is way less absorptive and causes reactivity to increase due to providing more fast neutron flux that increases reactor power. With almost all boron control rods removed from the core to maintain “measured” reactor power above 200 megawatts (for the safety test they were conducting), at low power levels and high rod heights, actual reactor power can be a lot higher at the core bottom where the nuclear activity is shielded from the detectors due to physical location. Hot spots in the core, where steam voids made reactor power swing wildly due to the positive void reactivity coefficient, caused power to suddenly start to spike and the operators, seeing the unchecked power increases SCRAMMED the reactor, which immediately starts inserting all the boron control rods back into the core.

    This is when all hell broke loose, because the rods, which had been pulled completely out of the core, initially start displacing the water below the rod channels, replacing it with graphite, because the rod tips (bottoms) where made out of graphite because when fully inserted, they provided flux shaping that helped overall core flux densities at the bottom of the core. This water displacement adds positive reactivity due to the positive void coefficient, the graphite increases reactivity by being a more efficient moderator than water.

    In a nuclear reactor, to make it stable and controllable, we do not rely soley on first generation neutrons to make up for all neutron population losses in the life cycle. Some of these neutrons come from the decay of radioisotopes called delayed neutron precursors. These are fission product particles that decay releasing neutrons when they do. If during the operation of a nuclear reactor, if you increase neutron population to the point that these delayed neutrons are no longer needed to sustain the chain reaction, the reactor can go on a runaway power excursion- basically a nuclear atom bomb.

    If allowed to continue (due to design) a nuclear bomb goes instantly bang. In a reactor, the density of the fuel, the enrichment of the fission fuel, added poisons and control rods are all designed for safe power generation, not instantaneous power production, so the fuel rods start heating up really quickly, flashing the water in the core to steam (remember that positive void coefficient?) and now the reactor literally blows itself apart due to both power generation, but mainly due to steam pressure.

    This is what happened. The added positive reactivity of the initial rod insertion due to scramming the reactor made up for the delayed neutrons from precursors and the reactor went super critical and on an uncontrolled power excursion until physics took over and blew it apart. The graphite caught fire, and 60 tons of radioactive waste was vaporized and spread all over Russia and the rest of the world.

    Easy for you to say.....

    #59 9 months ago
    Quoted from Saveleaningtower:

    agree. hard to watch. but it all had to be done. i am wondering if the roof bio-bots did a single 90 second shift and that was it or if they were asked to repeat either the next day or week. the roof at 12000 roentgens - the most dangerous place on Earth!

    Quoted from gearheaddropping:

    From what I read, it was 90 seconds and done....bus'd right out of the region with a medal pinned to your chest.

    They nentioned that in the latest podcast. Those 90 seconds was considered a maximum lifetime dose so after that their job was done. The speech they got prior to going up to the roof was the actual speech as well.

    #60 9 months ago
    Quoted from docquest:

    They nentioned that in the latest podcast. Those 90 seconds was considered a maximum lifetime dose so after that their job was done. The speech they got prior to going up to the roof was the actual speech as well.

    That's just insane!!!

    #61 9 months ago
    Quoted from BillySastard:

    It's amazing how the plant personnel denied everything

    That is how things there work. From the personnel, to the people in charge of the city, to the KGB, local secretary of Communist Ideology, the head of the militia, the mayor. They would rather die then let their superiors, or worst the West, think they had a problem they couldn't handle. That is how Chikatilo took so long to track down.

    Quoted from Tommy-dog:

    Governments lie and never told everyone how bad this actually was.

    The mayor let the parade the next day go on, before evacuating the city.

    Quoted from Atari_Daze:

    Were there possibly cosmonaut deaths that were never reported???

    Russia always rewrites history. Leaders come in and out of favor. Get added to pictures they were never in, get removed from pictures they were in. Even Czars have been removed from their history.

    Quoted from jgentry:

    I had a former employee (I am an environmental chemist) that actual went to Chernobyl 3 times over the course of 18 months to help with heavy metals testing. He has had cancer twice already. He spent limited time on site with full hazmat suites.

    Just think of all the people that were on the bridge or top of apartment building to see the pretty silver cloud over the reactor. Or after the evacuation and the people who went there and stole furniture and TV's, etc. etc. and hauled to Kiev and other cities to sell and spread the contamination.

    LTG : )

    #62 9 months ago
    Quoted from LTG:

    That is how things there work. From the personnel, to the people in charge of the city, to the KGB, local secretary of Communist Ideology, the head of the militia, the mayor. They would rather die then let their superiors, or worst the West, think they had a problem they couldn't handle. That is how Chikatilo took so long to track down.

    The mayor let the parade the next day go on, before evacuating the city.

    Russia always rewrites history. Leaders come in and out of favor. Get added to pictures they were never in, get removed from pictures they were in. Even Czars have been removed from their history.

    Just think of all the people that were on the bridge or top of apartment building to see the pretty silver cloud over the reactor. Or after the evacuation and the people who went there and stole furniture and TV's, etc. etc. and hauled to Kiev and other cities to sell and spread the contamination.
    LTG : )

    The U.S’ history when it comes to nuclear secrecy and environmental disasters isn’t exactly spotless. I’m sure you’ve seen the footage of American troops marching directly towards mushroom clouds.

    And patiently waiting for the HBO series about Love Canal.

    #63 9 months ago
    Quoted from CrazyLevi:

    The U.S’ history when it comes to nuclear secrecy and environmental disasters isn’t exactly spotless. I’m sure you’ve seen the footage of American troops marching directly towards mushroom clouds.

    I agree. I was just pointing out how things in Russia worked at that time.

    Quoted from CrazyLevi:

    And patiently waiting for the HBO series about Love Canal.

    Hey just because the crap underground is slowly creeping towards the east coast water table, doesn't mean there is a serious problem.

    LTG : )

    #64 9 months ago
    Quoted from Bublehead:

    a nuclear bomb goes instantly bang

    Your analysis is amazing! Appreciate it. So do you believe that the two explosions that occurred were first, a nuclear explosion and then second, a steam explosion that followed shortly after?

    #65 9 months ago
    Quoted from Bublehead:

    kirkgun, yeah Chernobyl pretty much bankrupted USSR and started the fall. But even well designed and well tested nuclear reactors are not safe either... Fukushima Daiichi was a cluster too.

    I hope they make a series on Fukushima also. There's a whole lot of brave souls who endangered themselves, for the benefits of others in that disaster too. I hope their story is told widely also.

    Our understanding of the power of nature (and frequency) is the clear failure in that one. That was more a failure of geologists and seismologists than nuclear engineers. Certainly in 20/20 retrospect, designs could have been made that would have prevented the worst of what happened from happening. But all the design flaws were overlooked because we completely failed to recognize the power (and frequency) of nature. The built it to withstand earthquakes and tsunamis, just not that big. I remember the second that I heard Japan had just had an 8.9 earthquake (later revised to 9.0). I'm tearing up just thinking about hearing that on the car radio. Two minutes later I was glued to my computer, and remained so for a long time.

    #66 9 months ago
    Quoted from Saveleaningtower:

    Your analysis is amazing! Appreciate it. So do you believe that the two explosions that occurred were first, a nuclear explosion and then second, a steam explosion that followed shortly after?

    There is some debate as to if a nuclear “explosion” occured or if the instantaneous pressure rise was the inital blast or a secondary explosion was nuclear in nature. No one is really sure because catastrophic destruction and radiation has made analysis impossible. My take is first explosion was the initial steam explosion due to hot spot runaway, this was the cause of the initial rise in power that made them initiate AZ-5 scram. This scram pushed the whole reactor into runaway causing a second steam explosion more powerful than the first, both explosions being steam pressure related, and not necessarilly a nuclear fizzle, but damn close to one if not.

    #67 9 months ago
    Quoted from CrazyLevi:

    The U.S’ history when it comes to nuclear secrecy and environmental disasters isn’t exactly spotless. I’m sure you’ve seen the footage of American troops marching directly towards mushroom clouds.
    And patiently waiting for the HBO series about Love Canal.

    Now now, merica was smart enough to seal its nuclear waste in uncrackable concrete on an island 100 yards from the ocean in a hole below sea level. Nothing could possibly go wrong.

    #68 9 months ago

    I had a hard time watching episode 4 with all the dog killing. When I was in the special forces in Iraq, I had no issue (if I had to) to kill a person but to shot a dog, no way.

    #69 9 months ago
    Quoted from jgentry:

    Now now, merica was smart enough to seal its nuclear waste in uncrackable concrete on an island 100 yards from the ocean in a hole below sea level. Nothing could possibly go wrong.

    I worked in the civilian nuclear power generation field as an engineer and consultant at a number of plants in the U.S. for a number of years prior to my current career.

    I do not recall any dry cask storage units or depots being in a hole below sea level. But I may be wrong.

    I think you meant "to NOT seal" alluding to Japan?

    #70 9 months ago

    He's referring to the US government dump from nuke testing in the Marshall islands...

    https://www.forbes.com/sites/trevornace/2019/05/27/fears-grow-that-nuclear-coffin-is-leaking-waste-into-the-pacific/#1f2c8b1f7073

    #71 9 months ago
    Quoted from Tommy-dog:

    I had a hard time watching episode 4 with all the dog killing. When I was in the special forces in Iraq, I had no issue (if I had to) to kill a person but to shot a dog, no way.

    I was thinking, im going to fast forward thru those parts....if they are going to make it really graphic or depressing.

    Thank you for your services....

    #72 9 months ago

    I watched this documentary (zero hour) done a while back that goes in more detail about what happened and why. Also interviews a couple of the workers that were there when it happened, the tall guy that held the door open in the first episode lived in real life and he talks about what his life was like after everything that happened to him, also the guy that was the ahole engineer in the first episode they tell what happened to him, Its worth a look.

    #73 9 months ago
    Quoted from Stones:

    I was thinking, im going to fast forward thru those parts....if they are going to make it really graphic or depressing.
    Thank you for your services....

    They don’t show anything. Just enough so you know what the men are doing. Depressing, yes. Graphic, no.

    #74 9 months ago
    Quoted from crlush:

    I watched this documentary (zero hour) done a while back that goes in more detail about what happened and why. Also interviews a couple of the workers that were there when it happened, the tall guy that held the door open in the first episode lived in real life and he talks about what his life was like after everything that happened to him, also the guy that was the ahole engineer in the first episode they tell what happened to him, Its worth a look.

    Thanks for posting. I've watched a fair amount of Chernobyl documentaries, missed that one.

    #75 9 months ago
    Quoted from Grandnational007:

    I worked in the civilian nuclear power generation field as an engineer and consultant at a number of plants in the U.S. for a number of years prior to my current career.
    I do not recall any dry cask storage units or depots being in a hole below sea level. But I may be wrong.
    I think you meant "to NOT seal" alluding to Japan?

    Not from nuclear power plants. From bomb testing.

    images (1) (resized).jpeg
    #76 9 months ago
    Quoted from jgentry:

    Not from nuclear power plants. From bomb testing.[quoted image]

    Ahh, cactus dome...where the surrounding area is more contaminated than the actual contents under the concrete. A sad, and undeniable side effect of the advancement of our understanding of fission and fusion at a time where a ruthless future belligerent was in a race at any cost with us to harness the technology. I'm not saying it's ethical, but now that it's been done, we have a significantly greater understanding of nuclear physics, which will undoubtedly greatly help future generations in harnessing the power in a safe, peaceful, manner.

    My stance on nuclear technology is this: as with most technological advances in modern history, they mostly derive from military endeavors; thusly, nuclear power generation being an offshoot of nuclear weapon development, it is our duty to stay at the forefront of nuclear technology, both militarily as well as civilian, as to keep advanced ahead of any current or future users who may use the technology for evil. I.E. now that the dragon is out of the box, we must be the caretakers of it.

    It's not the world I would have created, but now that we're here, it's the stance I must take...

    #77 9 months ago
    Quoted from Bublehead:

    There is some debate as to if a nuclear “explosion” occured or if the instantaneous pressure rise was the inital blast or a secondary explosion was nuclear in nature. No one is really sure because catastrophic destruction and radiation has made analysis impossible. My take is first explosion was the initial steam explosion due to hot spot runaway, this was the cause of the initial rise in power that made them initiate AZ-5 scram. This scram pushed the whole reactor into runaway causing a second steam explosion more powerful than the first, both explosions being steam pressure related, and not necessarilly a nuclear fizzle, but damn close to one if not.

    You're spot on, one of the leading theories is that of a steam explosion. When they (or the automatic emergency CPU) shut down the reactor, the graphite on the rods flashed the coolant in the reactor and boom it popped the core. There are reports that there were two explosions.

    #78 9 months ago
    Quoted from davidlldennis:

    You're spot on, one of the leading theories is that of a steam explosion. When they (or the automatic emergency CPU) shut down the reactor, the graphite on the rods flashed the coolant in the reactor and boom it popped the core. There are reports that there were two explosions.

    From what I have read, there is debate regarding whether just a steam explosion could do the damage that was done to the bottom plate. That is why some physicists think the first explosion was nuclear.

    #79 9 months ago
    Quoted from Grandnational007:

    Ahh, cactus dome...where the surrounding area is more contaminated than the actual contents under the concrete. A sad, and undeniable side effect of the advancement of our understanding of fission and fusion at a time where a ruthless future belligerent was in a race at any cost with us to harness the technology. I'm not saying it's ethical, but now that it's been done, we have a significantly greater understanding of nuclear physics, which will undoubtedly greatly help future generations in harnessing the power in a safe, peaceful, manner.
    My stance on nuclear technology is this: as with most technological advances in modern history, they mostly derive from military endeavors; thusly, nuclear power generation being an offshoot of nuclear weapon development, it is our duty to stay at the forefront of nuclear technology, both militarily as well as civilian, as to keep advanced ahead of any current or future users who may use the technology for evil. I.E. now that the dragon is out of the box, we must be the caretakers of it.
    It's not the world I would have created, but now that we're here, it's the stance I must take...

    I don't really disagree with this. We can't undiscover it. As a chemist that has worked in the environmental testing field for my whole career it is hard to accept that we are OK generating power that produces waste that we have no way to dispose of and that is deadly to all life as we know it on earth though. That's not to say that other means of generating electricity are clean in anyway or do not have a negative impact on earth. We just have no real answers on how to deal with nuclear waste which should be enough to give people a reason to find another way. I was discussing it with someone a few weeks ago and their solution was to send it to the sun. My response was "Did you see the Challenger launch?".

    #80 9 months ago
    Quoted from jgentry:

    I don't really disagree with this. We can't undiscover it. As a chemist that has worked in the environmental testing field for my whole career it is hard to accept that we are OK generating power that produces waste that we have no way to dispose of and that is deadly to all life as we know it on earth though. That's not to say that other means of generating electricity are clean in anyway or do not have a negative impact on earth. We just have no real answers on how to deal with nuclear waste which should be enough to give people a reason to find another way. I was discussing it with someone a few weeks ago and their solution was to send it to the sun. My response was "Did you see the Challenger launch?".

    This is NOT targeted at you sir/ma'am:

    Brilliant! We will use nearly infinite resources to send a finite resource we are not even close to fully understanding the full potential of, to literally oblivion, in a highly risky, extremely inefficient manner.

    Remember, not that long ago, natural gas was simply burnt off at the well head as a waste product; vs today, where it is either used to cleanly and efficiently generate electricity, heat, etc., or is pumped back into the ground for future use.

    #81 9 months ago
    Quoted from Grandnational007:

    This is NOT targeted at you sir/ma'am:
    Brilliant! We will use nearly infinite resources to send a finite resource we are not even close to fully understanding the full potential of, to literally oblivion, in a highly risky, extremely inefficient manner.
    Remember, not that long ago, natural gas was simply burnt off at the well head as a waste product; vs today, where it is either used to cleanly and efficiently generate electricity, heat, etc., or is pumped back into the ground for future use.

    I'd feel a lot safer if there was a scientist for every social media blogger but that's just not the word we live in. Unfortunately very few people understand anything about how power is generated. Most have no clue how the power at their own house is generated. People would be horrified to know what is in all of the coal ash that we generate each year and how it is kept. The person that said send nuclear waste to the sun was a biologist with a masters degree and you could see the wheels turning in their head after my statement still trying to decide is it really was a bad idea or not

    #82 9 months ago
    Quoted from Saveleaningtower:

    From what I have read, there is debate regarding whether just a steam explosion could do the damage that was done to the bottom plate. That is why some physicists think the first explosion was nuclear.

    Yes, the theory is, water can not absorb that much energy that quickly, and in order to generate the forces required to deform the bottom plate the water would have had to flash to steam in like less than a millisecond. They say the actual ability for an H2O molecule to be accelerated to that speed and thus “absorb” the energy that quickly is physically impossible due to contact surface area, poor heat transfer properties of steam, lack of physical movement (water passing over the heated fule rods) and the other properties of a standard heat transfer equation (Qdot=mass times specific heat constant times the difference in temp). The opposite theory suggests that due to the tremendous energy present that the standard heat transfer equations do not apply since heating of the water would be due to actual radiant energy of the neutron flux, yet the interaction of neutrons with water is well documented and understood and the other side argues there is no way the flux could have been that great to cause it to spontaneously heat to produce that much pressure that quickly. From our training, and what they understood about nuclear physics in 1986, there is no way a nuclear reactor could ever get atom bomby due to reactor geometry and the fact that as soon as you reach critical mass and generate the cascading prompt jump neutron event (when prompt neutrons make up for delayed neutron precursors and the chain reaction goes into thermal runaway) the core will damage itself too rapidly for the reaction to sustain and cause any major release of nuclear energy, but that the heating of the water in the core would be nearly instantaneous and would likely blow the containment vessel lid off the reactor. Our worst case accident was a cold water accident at low power, way below the power range, when the reactor is sitting at what is called “source level”, where there may be little detectable neutron flux to determine actual reactor power levels. On naval reactors, our moderator is water. Sending a cold slug of water into our reactor is like thrusting graphite into the reactor at Chernobyl. Same effect. Adding positive reactivity to the core when the core has no way of turning power. The mistake the Chernobyl operators made was artificially maintaining reactor power (measured by measuring neutron flux density) by pulling the control rods. This is not how the Navy (and most other reactors) are designed to work. With the graphite tipped rods, all of them pulled from the core at the time, a reactor with a hidden positive void reactivity coefficient, and a runaway power excursion, they had basically cocked the hammer on a nuclear steam bomb, and pushing the AZ-5 scram switch pulled the trigger.

    #83 9 months ago
    Quoted from Bublehead:

    kirkgun, yeah Chernobyl pretty much bankrupted USSR and started the fall. But even well designed and well tested nuclear reactors are not safe either... Fukushima Daiichi was a cluster too.

    Ha, after watching the last episode I was wondering if Chernobyl was the precursor of the fall. Back in the day we probably thought Perestroika and Glasnost came about because Gorbachev was a different kind of leader...now I think it was an act of pure desperation because they had exhausted all other options.

    PS: side note, I have to shake my head at what a stupid species we are, we've engineered the very thing that can wipe out our own planet.....we knew the risks but we did it anyway. It's just a matter of time really...

    Here is the list of all new reactors coming online in the next 7 yrs

    2019 Belarus, BNPP Ostrovets 1 VVER-1200
    2019 China, CGN Fangchenggang Hualong One
    2019 China, CGN Hongyanhe 5 ACPR-1000
    2019 China, CGN Yangjiang 6 ACPR-1000
    2019 China, CNNC Fuqing 5 Hualong One
    2019 China, China Huaneng Shidaowan
    2019 China, CGN Taishan 2 EPR
    2019 Finland, TVO Olkiluoto 3 EPR
    2019 France, EDF Flamanville 3 EPR 1650
    2019 Korea, KHNP Shin Kori 4 APR1400 1400
    2019 Korea, KHNP Shin Hanul 1 APR1400 1400
    2019 Russia, Rosenergoatom Pevek FNPP
    2019 Russia, Rosenergoatom Novovoronezh II-2

    2020 Belarus, BNPP Ostrovets 2 VVER-1200 1194
    2020 China, CGN Hongyanhe 6 ACPR-1000 1119
    2020 China, CGN Fangchenggang 4 Hualong One 1180
    2020 China, CNNC Tianwan 5 ACPR-1000 1118
    2020 China, CNNC Fuqing 6 Hualong One 1150
    2020 China, CGN Bohai shipyard ACPR50S 60
    2020 India, Bhavini Kalpakkam PFBR FBR 500
    2020 Japan, Chugoku Shimane 3 ABWR 1373
    2020 Korea, KHNP Shin Hanul 2 APR1400 1400
    2020 Slovakia, SE Mochovce 3 VVER-440 471
    2020 UAE, ENEC Barakah 1 APR1400 1400

    2021 Argentina, CNEA Carem25 Carem 29
    2021 China, CNNC Tianwan 6 ACPR-1000 1118
    2021 Pakistan Karachi/KANUPP 2 ACP1000 1100
    2021 Slovakia, SE Mochovce 4 VVER-440 471
    2021 UAE, ENEC Barakah 2 APR1400 1400
    2021 USA, Southern Vogtle 3 AP1000 1250

    2022 India, NPCIL Kakrapar 3 PHWR-700 700
    2022 India, NPCIL Kakrapar 4 PHWR-700 700
    2022 India, NPCIL Rajasthan 7 PHWR-700 700
    2022 India, NPCIL Rajasthan 8 PHWR-700 700
    2022 Pakistan Karachi/KANUPP 3 ACP1000 1100
    2022 Russia, Rosenergoatom Kursk II-1 VVER-TOI 1255
    2022 Russia, Rosenergoatom Leningrad II-2 VVER-1200 1199
    2022 UAE, ENEC Barakah 3 APR1400 1400
    2022 USA, Southern Vogtle 4 AP1000 1250

    2023 Bangladesh Rooppur 1 VVER-1200 1200
    2023 China, CNNC Xiapu 1 CFR600 600
    2023 Korea, KHNP Shin Kori 5 APR1400 1400
    2023 Russia, Rosenergoatom Kursk II-2 VVER-TOI 1255
    2023 Turkey Akkuyu 1 VVER-1200 1200
    2023 UAE, ENEC Barakah 4 APR1400 1400

    2024 Bangladesh Rooppur 2 VVER-1200 1200
    2024 Korea, KHNP Shin Kori 6 APR1400 1400

    2025 India, NPCIL Kudankulam 3 VVER-1000 1050
    2025 UK, EDF Hinkley Point C1 EPR 1720

    2026 India, NPCIL Kudankulam 4 VVER-1000 1050
    2026 Japan, EPDC Ohma 1 ABWR 1383

    #84 9 months ago

    @kvan99, a quick look of this and it is all PWR or BWR and not a single liquid salt reactor on the list...

    #85 9 months ago

    ah crap, EDF Hinkley Point is not far from me lol. My gf dad used to work at another not far from mine as well but now decommissioned, managed to get a tour though was pretty cool but scary how much security a none working nuclear reactor has!!

    just watched the 4th ep with the kid / liquidators etc.. pretty hard hitting, puts shit into perspective (like arguing about crappy code on a 8k toy lol)

    Promoted items from the Pinside Marketplace
    $ 4.49
    Electronics
    Yorktown Arcade Supply
    From: $ 25.00
    Boards
    German-Pinball-Modular
    $ 22.00
    Cabinet - Sound/Speakers
    ModFather Pinball Mods
    $ 51.45
    Playfield - Toys/Add-ons
    Lermods
    $ 48.00
    Cabinet - Other
    ModFather Pinball Mods
    $ 218.00
    $ 189.00
    Displays
    Boston Pinball Company
    € 6.50
    Flipper Parts
    Buthamburg
    $ 16.95
    Playfield - Toys/Add-ons
    pinballmod
    $ 27.99
    Eproms
    Matt's Basement Arcade
    $ 59.95
    Playfield - Toys/Add-ons
    pinballmod
    $ 9,099.00
    Pinball Machine
    Classic Game Rooms
    From: $ 19.99
    Eproms
    Matt's Basement Arcade
    $ 39.95
    Playfield - Protection
    Little Shop Of Games
    $ 19.99
    Cabinet - Other
    Bent Mods
    From: $ 9.99
    Eproms
    Matt's Basement Arcade
    $ 17.00
    $ 84.95
    Playfield - Toys/Add-ons
    PinBoss Mods
    $ 7,500.00
    Pinball Machine
    Great American Pinball
    $ 75.00
    Playfield - Toys/Add-ons
    M&M Mods
    $ 8.00
    Electronics
    Third Coast Pinball
    $ 299.99
    Cabinet - Other
    PinGraffix Pinside Shop
    $ 150.00
    Cabinet - Toppers
    Rock Custom Pinball
    € 25.00
    Playfield - Toys/Add-ons
    YOYOKOPTER MODS
    There are 85 posts in this topic. You are on page 2 of 2.

    Hey there! Got a moment?

    Great to see you're enjoying Pinside! Did you know Pinside is able to run thanks to donations from our visitors? Please donate to Pinside, support the site and get anext to your username to show for it! Donate to Pinside