*Thanks for watching.* I believe this is the accurate, up-to-date picture of ZNPP right now. By the way, at the end of the video, I said "until next time..." in Ukrainian.
Well, even though it might get in head… “A star for an effort” in saying “Until next time” in Ukrainian…it’s just…well, big of a difference between you saying this and all of those names of cities, districts etc. For that you can get A+.
if nuclear power is so safe why do i have birth defects from a nuclear power plant i am the grandchild of someone who got downwinders syndrome from the Hanford power planet and because of that my mom my self and my kids all have birth defects because of it so please tell me how safe is nuclear power when you don't even need the plant to melt down to be permanently effected by it or even need to be in direct contact with it like my self i have never been any ware near a nuclear power plant yet i have permanent defects because of a nuclear power plant my grandmother was near and even though people with downwinders can be compensated their offspring's like my self cant be compensated i just have to live with my disability's and that is something most pro nuclear people fail to see is the damage the plants actually cause to the people and their decedents who have to live around them how about this Kyle you love nuclear so much how about you live downwind from a nuclear power plant and just see what is dose to you and your decedents
Thanks for explaining this so well, but if this video does become outdated don't delete the video just add a disclaimer as every part of the story and how we have seen or will see it progress is great for the future.
Man, you went from doing like historical deep dives to doing ultra-specific rapid near history documentaries. This Channel is literally going to be a historical resource for the future. Thank you for your immense efforts.
Also considering you may actually read this being in the first 100 . I'm a highschool drop out that discovered his love for science later in life. I'm currently run a construction site and me and the guys love to listen to you on the way to the job all the way from your because science days. I truly think what you and your team do is a service and incredibly entertaining
Meltdown the misinformation! On a serious note, the tone and succinct information of your recent videos are very respectful and powerful. Thank you for keeping science scientific.
Japan…has a very interesting and unique culture. One of my top 5 fav RUclipsr’s talks about Japanese culture. Shout out to the channel “Let’s Ask Shogo” My Japanese friend in Kyoto.
@@evanjones2539 There is no part in Mr. Hill’s videos in which he states or insinuates a strike on ANY Nuclear Facility is safe. It doesn’t take a degree in civil engineering to know not to fk with fire. He is presenting facts on how Nuclear Facilities are CONSTRUCTED. He is countering fear-mongering misinformation that riles up the public (likely for political gains) and has no basis in fact.
Just one thing, my dude. Science can be scientific, funny and entertaining all at the same time, as many of Kyle's videos proove. Like, I don't dissagree that his recent videos are great, but please don't throw the others away, just because they are made for a wider audience. Many people wouldn't watch a whole videos like this, cuz they ain't into science as much as many of us are, but would prolly watch a lighthearted one in its entirety, for it's something that amuses and entertains them, the things that most people on the internet are looking for. And this doesn't make those videos worse, but better, because those videos are the ones that more people will learn something new from, and could make them research the topic even more. Don't misunderstand me, not that people wouldn't learn from this video, I personally learned a lot of things, but much more people would be able to learn something completely new to them by watching the other kind of content that Kyle provides. And I just want to say it again. I love all of Kyle's content, both he and his videos are great and awesome. I just think that the educational value of a video isn't just in it being purely scientific, but in it's availability to a wider audience. Because a video made from experts for experts is great for science and I love those videos too, but one made by a science communicator for all to see and be able to understand is just as great for science and the scientific community, because it raises the number of people with knowledge and the ability to think critically, something that, in my opinion, is just as important, as helping other people with a lot of knowledge to expand their horizonts. Sorry for the rant, just wanted to give my two cents on the topic. You don't even have to care about it, if you don't want to. I'm just another stranger on the internet you will never meet. Oh, and I'm also an addict. Not a recovering, but an active one. One love ❤️ One love ❤️
My first reaction on hearing about the attack on the powerplant was literally "Are they ENTIRELY stupid!?" And while the question still stands, I'm relieved to hear some actual facts about the safety and structural integrity of the place. Media is infamously uninterested in anything that's not sensational.
I mean - IF you think that then the first reaction should be - "is the Ukraine stupid?". Cause they apparently stationed armed forces there and they were the ones starting the fight.
@@ABaumstumpf You wouldn't do any different if you were a military general charged of defending a nuclear plant in a besieged country from homocidal maniacs heading to capture said nuclear plant.
@@OldSchoolZ-wy2yx ...... if you say so - of course. Lets just pretend you said something intelligent instead of that bullshit - that still means the Ukraine was the one who started the fighting.
@@ABaumstumpf Maybe Russian to make such an ignorant statement of "Ukraine was the one who started the fighting." So if Russia invades the USA and we shoot first, we are starting the fighting? Please give yourself more than 2 seconds to think before you post.
As if this isn’t somewhat sensational, securing any probability within all possibilities of a chain reactive event. Richard Feynman’s first realization problem he encountered and solved at Los Alamos. Stored barrels of radioactive materials stored in a large circular formation- ripe for a accidental trigger. KeyWord Trigger.
I swear most of the comments I’ve seen on other platforms seem to think NPPs are held together with little more than toothpaste and a dream, and that the tragedy at Chernobyl is seconds away from happening everywhere. So I really appreciate your videos like this. You explain things in a very approachable and non-intimidating way, and (to me, at least) show how a subject ought to be respected but not necessarily feared.
For what I heard and understood (from serious source, not some clicbaity news), the biggest threat is the conditions of work for the personnel that are now under Russian's army control: They can't work normally and have to get authorisation from the military for everything, which impairs their efficiency and potential reactivity, they have to do 12 hours long work shifts and, of course, the whole situation is extremly stressful.
@@Seminariteat I can, but it's in French. I'll post you a link in a second message, but just in case yt removes it, here is the title of said video: "Guerre en Ukraine : faut-il craindre une catastrophe nucléaire ? - 28 Minutes - ARTE". EDIT: posted the wrong video the 1st time -_-'
There's a lot of love that I see going into your pop-sci videos; but if I'm being honest, the sobering ones that focus on nuclear topics are the best, and provide a perspective that no one on RUclips can imitate or replace.
One of my lifelong best friends is a translator--she lives in Berlin now (where her husband is from) and is therefore out of the direct line of fire, but she has been helping to get some of the information disseminated between scientists and assisting in relocating those who have left Ukraine. The individual human cost of this is already incalculable, and I feel like people are focusing so much on other things which seem big and have catch6 headlines; yet ignoring the individual human lives and their stories which are attached to those tank tracks. As always, Kyle, I appreciate your skillful and gentle handling of these topics.
literally everyone is talking about the poor ukranians people idk how tf you missed that since it's like the #1 topic of discussion, maybe u aren't from america? but also, being concerned about nuclear power plants being assaulted probably translates into more concern for individual lives since this has repurcussions and ramifications for individuals
I sincerely hope there isn't another wave of "ugh, miGraNT wOrKERs" in the countries where refugees are relocating, like happened with Syrian refugees. We in the western world seem to care about this war so much because we identify closely with the Ukrainian culture and people, so we need to follow through with that energy during the future years of humanitarian outreach that will be needed
I added up all the concrete and steel at 4:56 and it's over 17 feet of it. That's just in the reactor itself. Then you'd also have all the other structures around it like the building it is housed in. It also doesn't count all the water, automatic shut down systems, and backups.
@@BohemioGaming that's actually comparable to german WW2 Flaktowers. type 1's had a 5m steel reinforced concrete ceiling. Turns out metal and concrete are hard to take apart.
I thought that the worry was the spend fuel pool which is like a very large high school swimming pool but much deeper. The building it is in is like a high school and not made of thick material. This it can be easily breached and if a bomb explodes in the pool it could damage the pool and empty it. While Westinghouse reactors are like an in-ground pool, the GE ones are part of the building and up above and even those the walls are thick the upper part is, again, like a high school.
Considering we have nuclear powered warships, which are by their nature, legitimate wartime military targets, I had a feeling that reactors are built to withstand extensive damage from outside forces whether natural or man made. From the sound of it though, a land based reactor should be ok as long as someone doesn't land a direct hit with a bunker buster.
@@endjentneeringclub We should create a new way to wage war. Have the leaders of the respective sides meet in a cage match. Let them be the ones to draw first blood instead of their soldiers. At least then they would've done something besides sit back and let their people bear the whole weight of the consequences. War is a stupid thing.
@@theguylivinginyourwalls That would be great in theory. Until one jackass realizes that instead of showing up alone to fight, he can bring 10 of his friends along. Armies are essential because there will always be at least one guy who doesn't play fair.
@@theguylivinginyourwalls: Your idea still has merit, the execution just needs work. If we are to choose a suitable war substitute, we'd need something that already has a strong regulatory body in place, with a robust rules system that is well-maintained and constantly updated to meet the ever changing needs of its purview. One thing immediately springs to my mind: _Magic: the Gathering._ Plus, if it is adopted worldwide as the replacement for war, Wizards of the Coast will be forced to reband the DCI, reinstate the Pro Tour scene, basically walk back every dumbass COVID-era decision it's made.
Just recently found your channel. I have always considered myself pro-nuclear, but your videos explaining how things work and how safety is designed into nuclear systems have already given me so much relief from safety concerns I did not even realize had been weighing on me so heavily. Thank you for making these videos on the history of nuclear events. I'll be watching the rest of your videos and look forward to seeing the ones you make in the future.
Thanks for the updates and information. I hope this helps people understand the true safety of nuclear energy moving forward. Not to mention, Ukraine out of any country in the world is likely to have the utmost of respect for the potential hazards of nuclear power - and so they operate as such. They monitor the aftereffects of the worst nuclear power disaster in history and with that information they choose to continue to operate their nuclear reactors. I think that says a lot.
Not that I was against nuclear power, but there is an unpleasant fact worth to be considered: Ukraine, even if we would want, cannot such massive switch of energy generation. NPP generate 54% of country's energy, so attempts to switch from nuclear would be unbearable to our economy (I hope, after the war, there still will be an economy worth talking about).
you know, this could weirdly end up being good press for nuclear power, people can see how it was still able to function even under severe circumstances. And that's a powerful point, I wonder why it's not more widely paid attention to that the country who paid in lives for the mistakes at Chernobyl is the country that still uses nuclear power.
Looking at this attack live (powerplant was streaming video feed from one of security cameras) and seeing smoke from Unit 1, was scary. But knowledge that reactor is really in thick concrete bunker and that smoke was from something else were... that did not kick in until later. Great vid. But what Kyle forgot to tell (it was totally not that important in the context of this video, so there is no need to blame him for this) was that when administrative buildings were still shelled and caught fire minutes later, the firefighters from the city where there was still active fight jumped up and rode to the powerplant. They were chased off from that gate by russian soldiers and not allowed to enter. But still level of dedication and courage those firefighters have is amazing. That shows that plants have wast emergency network that kicks in at the moment when something is not right.
@Carlll I also followed it live (meanwhile going wtf about being able to get live video from a situation in a war zone thousands of km away, and about that involving a NPP). Yes, those firefighters were courageous, and are much more deserving of being called heroes than many of those who take up arms.
I used to work in a nuclear power plant and all the emergency systems can be sent automatically by SMS, VOIP, VHF frequency, landlines, etc and are backed up by two generators in two separate locations. The FD and local emergency management agency would regularly train with plant staff and allow guided tours to these emergency personnel to familiarize with the plant. This is all up to national and international standards so I would assume the Ukrainian power plant have similar emergency SOPs. If a meltdown did happen Russia would not be able to hide it without destroying certain recording instruments. Just for the record I did not work near the reactors or any control rooms. I was a full time paramedic and only saw the reactor hall once and never permitted to enter the main "control floor". I have been in the fuel assembly pool area a few times and is probably the neatest part of any large plant getting to see it glow.
@@Unknown_Ooh Interesting. I was an auxiliary operator at a PWR and we were thoroughly trained to fight any fires at the plant. We drilled often too. We did this because community firefighters were not authorized to enter radiologically controlled areas and of course we were. I was wondering if the Ukrainian plant worked the same way. Yes, the Cherenkov radiation coming off spent fuel in the pool is a beautiful blue!
I very much appreciate the calm music, tone, and visuals of these videos about such a tense and stressful subject for many that is still ongoing. Thank you for doing it not for the clicks and views and shock factor but as a reassuring peice that keeps the weight still there but not pressing down
The important thing to remember is that you _should_ be skeptical of nuclear reactors _even while_ acknowledging that nuclear power is both safe and necessary. Scrutiny is essential to maintain safety. That's true for anything from aircraft to electrical generation, and nuclear reactors are no different.
This resonates with me so much. I work with live electrical equipements and a lot of my collegues just shrug off safety when it's impractical and the risk is minimal. But minimal does not equal zero... Especially when you know anyone that worked before you could also have been lax on safety, from the manufacturer to the night shift guy making makeshift modifications.
@@KnightOwlSC I think you got it wrong. The message is, the public doesn't need to worry because safety measures have evolved. It's like planes. People think planes aren't dangerous. I'm sorry, but if the plane goes down, everybody dies horribly. It's just that considering this danger a very strict planning and quality control is being enforced around the construction and handling of planes. It's makes them statstically less lethal bit they're not harmless. Nuclear reactors are not nothing to worry about by themselves. The people building and handling them put a lot of effort into prevention and damage control. The best way to illustrate this is, the first tragedies are way more lethal and damaging than the later ones. But the technology is pretty much the same
But… but… the HBO Chernobyl TV show said that a nuclear reactor can become a “nuclear bomb” (direct quote) at the blink of an eye! Your “science” can’t be more accurate than multiple Emmy nominations.
"Your science can't be more accurate than multiple Emmy Nominations!" Oh that's gold, I think I gotta use this one on people who quote celebrities too.
once again, thanks for being a sane voice of information while this happens. I would ask that you never delete these videos. if the situation changes you could make another video, if its just you talking to a camera to correct your information. I would happily watch that so that I can learn.
Fossil Fuel Lobbyists: So you think dangerous Nuclear-power is the future of energy? Me: I DO, and I'm tired of people pretending that it's not. Nuclear accounts for close to one _percent_ of workplace AND pollution related fatalities in energy production. Which fossil fuels have killed *millions.* Nuclear waste is so miniscule compared to the energy gains that we could run off nuclear alone for ten thousand years, and we'd still never see a *drop* affect the environment. The fears are unwarranted.
That's the thing so few seem to get. Yes, there are dangers; and yes, with nuclear some of those dangers can get _very_ bad _VERY_ quickly; and yes, the waste products are hazardous are insanely longer timescales. But every power option is dangerous. And both control and clean up (in the event of a fault) are getting better by the day. And many designs being worked on have little to no wasted and many even use the waste we have now as fuel with their infancy being almost entirely due to fear and lack of funding. Unless we plan on totally and permanently dismantling our civilization and having everyone live forevermore as naked hunters resulting in the death of _billions in just a few weeks,_ there are tradeoffs and dangers. (And if you can't see the tradeoff _there,_ then I simply have nothing to say to you. I will not deal with you. Please remove yourself. I won't sugar-coat it.) Nuclear is, by far, the best option we have right now. It can with little relative work provide scale above things like wind, solar, hydroelectric, and geothermal. It is cleaner and safer, right now, than things like coal and gas. It is necessary and required.
@@scaper8 Also we should not fear about nuclear waste, because with nuclear fusion it will become possible in 30-100 years to isolate and fusion radiactive material, the energy needed being provided by "standard" fusion reactor. or we will find another solution, in 50 years we have gone from taking of in the first plane to landing on the moon. Who know what we will be able to do in 100, 1000 or enven 10 000 years ?
@@justeunfan3364 Honestly what little waste reactors produce thats not recyled and reused is so small and extremely easy to store and properly dispose of its its essentially a non-issue.
@@dragonace119 It depend, we have already produced huge amount of waste with all nuclear powerplant around the world, and most people are not confortable with leaving it for thousands of years, so thinking about ways to recycle them can be useful. Also, it happend a lot that when doing ressearch on one topic, we make discoveries about another thing so trying to recycle nuclear waste can be a greate way to improve our knowledge and our confort.
Thanks Kyle for looking into this. It wasn't the damage or leakage I was so worried about but more the message it sends and frame of mind you would have to be in to order such a thing. And I'm really well educated on this, I have studied nuclear energy and my uncle was a lead engineer at the San Onofre nuclear plant and now currently is on the board of the NRC. So I understand this and I want to see MORE nuclear power in the future, its very clean, very safe.
Thank you so much for these videos, Kyle. And once again, kudos for the way you're able to share this information with the gravitas and seriousness you do compared to the wacky tone of your other videos. You've always impressed me with the way you're able to change the mood of your teaching tone in relation to the subject matter.
Some few things that could go through those reinforced concrete walls and explode directly onto the fuel rods would be a Schrewerer Gustav Shell, which was able to punch through 7 meters (23ft) of concrete and blew up an ammunition dump, and 16 in. mk8 shells that were able to punch through 30 ft. of reinforced concrete, as well as a piece of a Yamato-class 26 in. turret armor.
They could do that but it was found out during WW2 that battleship sized guns are simply not accurate enough to target something as small as a containment building.
@@randomlyentertaining8287 maybe not one shell, but the Iowa-class can shoot 9 of them per half a minute, and they had some pretty accurate targeting systems towards the latter part of their service lives
Great work as always! I know that I'll come across someone using these events as evidence against nuclear power, but it's great to have the additional context provided in this video.
I think the worry is more that War can cause enough chaos that all the redundancy in the world can't stop it. As low as a chance it could be, it is still a chance. Now, one would think the Russian military is smart enough to not try to obliterate such a hot target, especially considering how invaluable that plant would be if they did succeed in taking Ukraine, but that requires the presence of intelligent thought, and Humans don't always meet that standard. Hence the worry. These plants may be built like bunkers, but we've long ago made weapons that can damage bunkers. A dumb enough fool could still cause catastrophe.
Thank you for posting the current addition to your series. You have no idea how much these videos have helped me put my worries at ease. Please keep up the good work!
CANDU reactors and I am sure most other designs had to take into account everything from terrorist attacks, bombings, planes crashing into it etc, they have active and passive systems with MULTIPLE redundancies usually 4x for every system. Reactors are extremely over engineered and are very very safe even when put into situations like these. Very good video covering most of the misconceptions Kyle keep it up!
That's why they cost so much to build. The costs are all upfront. While coal and natural gas costs, damages are after the fact... ( with no expectations to pay for them)
@@captaindave88 Its like planes and car : planes are build with lot of redundancies, and so they are much safer than cars but people are more affraid of them than of car because they don't understand it. Sadly today sensational is prefered to long studies, and it cost a lot to humanity.
@@sinofprideescanor6619 Same here. I used to think he had some sort of crazy (not like a mad genius , but just insane) plan for this whole scenario , but I'm starting to think he's actually just gone insane
no its smart, cut off the countries power, ukrain would be crippled even more so if it didnt have power...and when u take control of said plant....u can use it as leverage because it is in fact a potential bomb if used correctly. then again american's thought it was smart to vote in a 80 year old corpse that feeds on the life force of young children to stay alive.....
This is excellent unbiased news and informative education man. I hope you do more stuff like this. I also pray for peace in this crazy time. Be safe everyone. Love from Texas.
I know an expert they said given these are 22 year old rods ambient air is enough to keep them cool. Furthermore power is not needed to maintain cooling according to them.
@@roolenoir3183 No, there were several cores on the site, the others were not actually shut down when core #4 exploded because their power was still needed, and after the initial cleanup radiation levels outside the building housing core #4 are not that high. (You wouldn't want to work there year round, but I believe a few months out of the year is pretty safe.) The Chernobyl facility continued producing power until 2000. After that it still recieved power to run pumps to keep the remaining fuel rods cool, although as the other comment suggests, they are 22 years old and no longer much of a risk. A study done after Fukushima suggested the rods will not even boil off the water they're sitting in if the pumps lose power. The elephants foot is still hot, but it's in the basement, it has basically no effect on radiation levels outside the building. As Kyle said in the video, a few feet of concrete is sufficient to stop basically any direct radiation, and the site is contained so debris from the elephants foot isn't getting moved around. (I believe the elephants foot is only a small part of the total corium mass, but the rest is also contained in different parts of the basement.)
Frankly we could safely abandon Chernobyl entirely, closing up access to the sarcophagus for good. The downside would be the loss of observational data on the lagest unintentional formation of "corium" in the world. Power is not needed at Chernobyl since all radioactive waste is effectively cooled by ambient heat losses. Ambient meaning the temperature of the local environment with no artificial cooling.
Thank you for the way you explain these things. Not only are they worded in a way that makes it easier to understand but it comes as a comfort of sorts.
When it comes to the history of nuclear power I'm reminded of a saying we have in aviation. Flying is best described as hours and hours of boredom punctuated by moments of stark terror. The moments of stark terror are the moments you remember best, because they are so pungent. The history of nuclear power is pretty much the same. Decades upon decades of plants all over the world boringly humming along, with a few moments of stark terror. To that note, plane crashes are far more common throughout history than nuclear meltdowns.
Plane crashes don't irradiate thousands of square kilometers making it uninhabitable for tens of thousands of years. Plane crashes don't kill people from horrible, agonizing sicknesses decades later. Plane crashes don't displace and ruin the lives of tens of thousands of people for generations. Plane crashes are horrible, but not even near the category of a Nuclear Disaster.
@@DaHaiZhu That wasn't even close to my point. My point was in the long history of nuclear power there have been very few moments of terror. The correlation I made between aviation and nuclear power has nothing to do with the results of said moments of terror, I have no idea how you came to the conclusion that I was, because I never suggested anything of the like.
as messed up as this situation is, accurate, unbiased information is always a good thing. thank you, kyle. i know this isnt the story you had in mind last year.
Yup. It's fun seeing videos of Ukrainian farmers stealing Russian tanks, but a bit of sober science is good. Through the emotional volatility of the world, something to ground oneself in reality helps keep one sane. Crossing fingers that the violence ends soon.
Kyle you did a good job of explaining this. I did something similar on my LinkedIn but I wanted to focus on the nuclear content within the cores. It's impossible for this to be ten times Chernobyl with only six times or a bit less the amount of nuclear material. I'm a nuclear operations training instructor and former authorized nuclear operator but not a missile expert. I know how well built these structures are except I don't know how destructive missiles can get. I wanted to focus on the ability of the workers to remain focused under these stressful times as well as not commit human performance errors under duress. There's still a lot of potential for things to go wrong in shutdown reactors. It's not to make the public afraid, but to be aware that there's still real risk. All the best. Keep putting out great content!
Even if they're aware of this information, and even if they absolutely agree with Putin, I would imagine the commanders on the ground would be telling their guys to consider their shots very carefully around the nuclear power plant. Or at least, I would hope they're bright enough to pass that order down.
@@davidty2006 Yeah. In the clips I only saw a flare and small arms fire, maybe the gun on a BMP. Nothing large. So I suspect they were holding back intentionally.
@@davidty2006 They have a whole slew of possible configurations, if I remember correctly. I didn't see anything bigger than an autocannon is what I'm saying.
Thanks for this, i was very worried about this situation for a long time, just by hearing the headline news, I didnt follow up by watching nonsense information, but my worried brain construed enough nonsense by itself. Again thank you ❤
I think you might be downplaying it too much not because the direct attack can cause issues but because the human element is also under attack and so far all meltdowns seem to have either incompetence or malfeasance (protecting own ass) as aggravating causes. Being under direct fire and siege might impact the security procedures in a way to generate more serious accidents, even if a core explosion is impossible.
You never explicitly say it But I get the impression you're only talking about incidental or accidental damage. Like there's fighting at the plant. Maybe a few shots accidentally hit it. But what if the plant is the target? What if it was hit with bunker busters intending to make it the world's biggest dirty bomb?
I am living like 120km from ZNPP. I knew that it is almost impossible to trigger such catastrophe they are talking about in news. Still there are news that the ukrainian staff there is tortured by russians because they don't want to obey their commands. I am really worried for those people. And there is still a huge threat in Chornobyl NPP. Hope this war will end soon and all russians will get out from Ukraine. Слава Україні!
I'm afraid the only way that will happen are Ukrainians either pushing them out, or killing them. And unfortunately Russia like the U.S. also has bunker buster missiles and bombs that can penetrate a containment building and blow up a reactor intentionally, or worse yet they could target them with nuclear weapons. Doing that would cause intense nuclear fallout from all the vaporized and irradiated material at ground zero. Either act is the act of a madman, because like Chernobyl the fallout will descend upon Russia, literally.
Hey Kyle. Not afraid of the artillery breaching the core. But the “shiulds” and “mights “ are what we are afraid of. Mainly, even though you mentioned it, but have the fighting causing a loss of power to cool the core and getting another Fukushima
He DID address this. There are multiple redundant backup safety systems, usually (I can't speak of the configuration of the Ukrainian plant) in secure locations and behind water tight doors. Redundant diesel generators can supply power if external power is lost and the plant reactors aren't producing any power themselves, also usually behind water tight doors (except at Fukushima). These reactors are Pressurized Water Reactors, which are far safer than the Chernobyl and Fukushima plants, as Kyle mentioned, and even if the worst happened and fuel melted down, it's likely that it would be confined to the containment structure, as he mentioned. I worry about the plant operators who are working with guns to their backs and apparently without proper rest. That's were the danger is. (I am an ex operator)
Yes. Yes they can. Some reactors can even survive being directly bombed or shelled with artillery fire. Not something I would want to see in a combat based conflict, but something that should be expected during war. It takes a bit of effort to destroy a nuclear power plant. Especially if they are well constructed. Many if these facilities have been designed or constructed to withstand extremely high force explosions, such as a nuclear explosion. So I am fairly sure that it would take a serious effort to actually destroy or demolish a nuclear facility.
They would probably need to drop anti-bunker shells and bombs to do serious damage or ironically enough a Nuke. They are just a really over-engineered bunkers.
It's funny. We still have WW2 Flaktower's standing...because they're mainly made from concrete and steel, in huge amounts. Too much of a bother to get rid of, especially inside a city. Nuclear plants are like that as well just....much much bigger. Yeah you can make it stop functioning as a power plant. That's about it.
I would rather not test that hypothesis of surviving shelling. Everytime someone tells me Nuclear plant designs keep getting better and more idiot proof. I ask them, what about the older designs in use that still have those flaws newer designs patched out? Besides, the real danger now is human error. The personel are under a lot of stress now and likely reduced efficiency. Best case scenario is the power plant simply turns off.
@@arnowisp6244 Gen 2 water moderated reactors reactors can be considered 99.99% safe. Gen 3s, like these are, 99.999A% The new Gen 4 designs, let's say 99.99999+ - You're in far mode danger from your stove, or the soap in the bathtub.
@@arnowisp6244 Plant shutting down is actually worst case. Best case is just some equipment damage. There's nothing there to explode and the entire reactor assemlby is shielded by meters and meters of steel-reinforced concrete. Even if you somehow managed to get something interesting to happen to the fuel rod's...it'd still all be contained. The Soviet's not having containment was primarily what made chermobyl so bad as well as the underlying construction of the plant there.
I would love to see a video on the different types of nuclear reactors and how they work and their safety profiles. I think part of the problem is that most people think reactors are all the same and don't realize just how different they are from older reactors like at Chernobyl
It boggles my mind to consider that so many people seem to think engineers are running around building giant powderkegs, not doing *everything in their power* to ensure the plants are safe and reliable.
Will he? I velice scientist like this don't want people to lose faith in Science. Being wrong is fine. Being wrong and leading to a Nuke disaster...not so much.
I already trust nuclear fission plants as way to generate electricity. The thing that worried me a little was the land that we have to excavate in order to store nuclear waste. Fortunately, I believe scientists and engineers are designing reactors that can run on spent nuclear fuel.
Breeder reactors can already recycle fuel until it’s non hazardous. The only reason we don’t already do that and spend hundreds of millions on containment vessels/location is because of nuclear non-proliferation acts. My mom is a radiochemist who designs, implements, and runs exercises on radiation emergency response protocols for anything from reactors to a satellite launch. She responded to the Fukushima reactor meltdown and to this day she adamantly states that nuclear reactors are safe and the only reason there’s any waste to be disposed of is because of bureaucratic limitations and the refusal to spend money to develop more efficient recycling practices.
@@CoffeeKadachi Your mom is 100% right. I've been in university for nuclear engineering and all the "problems" with nuclear are only because regulations, restrictions, and policy cause them. Once all the politicians are out of the Oil industry's wallet, we'll see how great nuclear really is.
Coal plants produce far more waste than nuclear plants. Nuclear waste is a non-issue. I once saw a picture - forgot the exact context - where it is shown that a nuclear waste of a power plant that worked for 40 years only takes about as much space as a small parking lot.
@@elu9780 3 problems. Not the only nuclear plant in existence. Will work more than 40 years. Waste will be hazardous for thousands of years.Then it does't look as it is so little. If we improve waste situation then I will agree that is great power source but if we have to live on earth next to toxic waste for milenia then we will finally run out of safe space to live.
Steam turbines are still the most efficient way we know of to generate power, even with their fairly dismal efficiency of 30-ish percent, it's the best we got.
this is easily my favourite video you’ve ever done kyle (and i’ve seen a great deal!). the delivery, pace, perspective, information, import, urgency, and relevance of it are all as fascinating as they are needed right now. i hope this video reaches many, and that it both eases fears and encourages adoption of essential technology needed to help control climate change. as much of a threat as geopolitics can feel at times, the world still needs to unite over the biggest and most certain threat of all in the climate crisis.
My concern definitely is not the containment structure. My concern are the cooling ponds. Or are the cooling ponds also within the containment structure? [Edit:] I looked at the model and yes, the cooling pond is directly besides the core (otherwise fuel transfer would be deadly). So no, not even fuel rod melting in the ponds is likely. It could only happen if the Russian troops destroyed the plants generators, batteries and grid connection.
Ive been an advocate for nuclear energy since I was a teenager. While I believe green energy such as wind, solar and hydro are great, I dont think they are effective main power sources for multiple reasons; what they are good for is remote energy production as well as supplemental energy sources paired with nuclear energy. This is the green future that our species needs.
While Half-Life History has always had an aspirational feel, illustrating what we’ve learned from catastrophe to be a guiding light against fear, it is still fascinating to me that over 36% of these videos have been current events. I think this series has become one of the most important compendiums for facts surrounding nuclear energy, past or present, and you using this space to educate the public in these fearful times is just an excellent use of your platform. Thank you as always Kyle for the great work.
In light of recent events whereby Russian occupiers have threatened to intentionally bomb the power plant rather than allow it to fall back into Ukrainian hands, is your position unchanged? Instead of accidental shelling, what about in a case where those in control of the plant are intentionally looking to cause a nuclear disaster? How much damage could a suicidal maniac inflict if they had impure intentions?
Depends on what they managed to Sabotage. At best the safety features means they can render it inoperable. At worst...they can disable those safety features. It would be interesting if these safety features of Nuke plants were never built with tye possibility of a Maniac trying to cause a Nuclear disaster on Purpose.
Kyle, your channel is a literal heaven for a nuclear nerd like me. I use this information to promote nuclear power everywhere possible in my school. Thanks :)
Problem #1: The NPP Ukraine-South (located in Mykolajiw) appears to be a strategic goal of the invading forces, as they make their way there. That plant is of much older design, and DOES NOT have proper containment (heavy concrete designed to withstand fighter plane impacts), only much less sturdy confinement. Problem #2: Each power station, while of "same" design, develops different characteristics, which the staff on site learn to operate with. Thus first locking down the staff on site, and subsequently replacing them with "friendly" operators who do NOT know how to properly operate the machinery with its local kinks, is not a bright idea. Problem #3: Most emergency and backup systems are NOT located WITHIN a (possibly missing) containment structure, and are much less resilient against military actions (including small-arms fire). We have seen what happens after a few days, when primary and backup cooling can not be maintained due to lack of off-site power in Japan - with the difference, that Russian designed NPPs typically have much fewer redundant safety systems, and due to Ukraine not being a wealthy state, many upgrades and additional safety systems never been added after completion of the station. Problem #4: Depending on fully centralized power generation (do not suggest the proliferation risk and orders-of-magnitude larger safety/security issues with "modern" small-scale reactors) makes it very easy for a military aggressor, to take out all power for an entire country. Ukraine has been operation in island mode (disjoint from both western european grid, and russia) since the outbreak of hostilities. Thus it is much more fragile and easier to induce a full blackout - in the process killing civilians en-masse even in locations without hostile forces soon.
Thanks for not butchering our city names. I still can't imagine why Germany would shut down their 3 nuclear reactors, they are literally the safest energy source today, on the contrary we need to build more of them.
Thank you. Videos like these are the reason why I believe that youtube is a good social media. Its so important to cut through the bs and educate people.
Your other videos are much more fun to watch. But these documentaries are the ones that will be remembered; and hopefully, used in classrooms for many years to come. Keep up the good work 👏 🙂
Yes, we all know the safety of nuclear power plants. But your script seems to nonchalantly if not flippantly say, "Oh - No problem," in the face of an attack that is inherently reckless & foolhardy.
Thank you for this Kyle. While you may not be an "expert" per se, your knowledge of atomic energy and engineering in general makes this information all the more reassuring.
I agree with you about the physical structures and safeguards. So long as no idiot targets any of the reactors with a bunker-buster (bombs specifically designed to get through thick concrete) -- which seems highly unlikely -- they should remain safe. My bigger concern is the human factor. Thew Ukrainian crew running the plant are effectively being held hostage and are both overstressed and overworked now. The odds of a human mistake increase with each passing day of occupation, and the human factor has been partly (or fully) responsible in nearly every past nuclear incident. Huge credit to the crew's resilience and diligence in keeping things operating safely thus far.
definitely agree here. the Chernobyl crew had already been working non-stop for days since they can't change shifts under occupation, and unless there just happens to be a couple of nuclear scientists in those Russian soldiers, they're the only expert that can keep things in control
As I was watching the news about the attack, I just kept thinking, so no one at the news station bothered to ask anyone who knows anything about a modern nuclear power plant. Bunker busters would have trouble causing catastrophic problems.
*Thanks for watching.* I believe this is the accurate, up-to-date picture of ZNPP right now. By the way, at the end of the video, I said "until next time..." in Ukrainian.
thanks for the edutainment content, 👍 keep up the good work
edit: misspelling was fixed
Appreciated.
This plant is far better designed than Chernobyl and Fuku were.
My wife and I love every one of ur videos . We r also so huge science nerd and love talking and Chernobyl
Well, even though it might get in head…
“A star for an effort” in saying “Until next time” in Ukrainian…it’s just…well, big of a difference between you saying this and all of those names of cities, districts etc. For that you can get A+.
if nuclear power is so safe why do i have birth defects from a nuclear power plant
i am the grandchild of someone who got downwinders syndrome from the Hanford power planet and because of that my mom my self and my kids all have birth defects because of it
so please tell me how safe is nuclear power when you don't even need the plant to melt down to be permanently effected by it or even need to be in direct contact with it like my self i have never been any ware near a nuclear power plant yet i have permanent defects because of a nuclear power plant my grandmother was near
and even though people with downwinders can be compensated their offspring's like my self cant be compensated i just have to live with my disability's
and that is something most pro nuclear people fail to see is the damage the plants actually cause to the people and their decedents who have to live around them
how about this Kyle you love nuclear so much how about you live downwind from a nuclear power plant and just see what is dose to you and your decedents
Thanks for explaining this so well, but if this video does become outdated don't delete the video just add a disclaimer as every part of the story and how we have seen or will see it progress is great for the future.
agreed!
I also agree.
Absolutely
Good information that should encourage discussion instead of shutting people down.
You do a great public service. Keep up the great work.
heheh your pfp, on point
Man, you went from doing like historical deep dives to doing ultra-specific rapid near history documentaries. This Channel is literally going to be a historical resource for the future. Thank you for your immense efforts.
Also considering you may actually read this being in the first 100 . I'm a highschool drop out that discovered his love for science later in life. I'm currently run a construction site and me and the guys love to listen to you on the way to the job all the way from your because science days. I truly think what you and your team do is a service and incredibly entertaining
What state
Man, i wsnt god to bring back because science
Jesus christ keystrokes i am gonna leave this here for people to decipher
@@WhatWhy42 why would someone answer that on a RUclips comment lolol wtf
@@russell3023 good question 🙃
@@russell3023 I'll answer it: I live in NJ. No one cares. What is someone gonna do with that information?
Meltdown the misinformation!
On a serious note, the tone and succinct information of your recent videos are very respectful and powerful. Thank you for keeping science scientific.
@@dosgos is a country yes
Japan…has a very interesting and unique culture. One of my top 5 fav RUclipsr’s talks about Japanese culture. Shout out to the channel “Let’s Ask Shogo” My Japanese friend in Kyoto.
And a hit on the cooling ponds would be safe........?
@@evanjones2539 There is no part in Mr. Hill’s videos in which he states or insinuates a strike on ANY Nuclear Facility is safe. It doesn’t take a degree in civil engineering to know not to fk with fire. He is presenting facts on how Nuclear Facilities are CONSTRUCTED. He is countering fear-mongering misinformation that riles up the public (likely for political gains) and has no basis in fact.
Just one thing, my dude. Science can be scientific, funny and entertaining all at the same time, as many of Kyle's videos proove. Like, I don't dissagree that his recent videos are great, but please don't throw the others away, just because they are made for a wider audience. Many people wouldn't watch a whole videos like this, cuz they ain't into science as much as many of us are, but would prolly watch a lighthearted one in its entirety, for it's something that amuses and entertains them, the things that most people on the internet are looking for. And this doesn't make those videos worse, but better, because those videos are the ones that more people will learn something new from, and could make them research the topic even more. Don't misunderstand me, not that people wouldn't learn from this video, I personally learned a lot of things, but much more people would be able to learn something completely new to them by watching the other kind of content that Kyle provides.
And I just want to say it again. I love all of Kyle's content, both he and his videos are great and awesome. I just think that the educational value of a video isn't just in it being purely scientific, but in it's availability to a wider audience. Because a video made from experts for experts is great for science and I love those videos too, but one made by a science communicator for all to see and be able to understand is just as great for science and the scientific community, because it raises the number of people with knowledge and the ability to think critically, something that, in my opinion, is just as important, as helping other people with a lot of knowledge to expand their horizonts.
Sorry for the rant, just wanted to give my two cents on the topic. You don't even have to care about it, if you don't want to. I'm just another stranger on the internet you will never meet. Oh, and I'm also an addict. Not a recovering, but an active one.
One love ❤️
One love ❤️
My first reaction on hearing about the attack on the powerplant was literally "Are they ENTIRELY stupid!?" And while the question still stands, I'm relieved to hear some actual facts about the safety and structural integrity of the place. Media is infamously uninterested in anything that's not sensational.
I mean - IF you think that then the first reaction should be - "is the Ukraine stupid?".
Cause they apparently stationed armed forces there and they were the ones starting the fight.
@@ABaumstumpf You wouldn't do any different if you were a military general charged of defending a nuclear plant in a besieged country from homocidal maniacs heading to capture said nuclear plant.
@@OldSchoolZ-wy2yx ...... if you say so - of course.
Lets just pretend you said something intelligent instead of that bullshit - that still means the Ukraine was the one who started the fighting.
@@ABaumstumpf Maybe Russian to make such an ignorant statement of "Ukraine was the one who started the fighting." So if Russia invades the USA and we shoot first, we are starting the fighting? Please give yourself more than 2 seconds to think before you post.
As if this isn’t somewhat sensational, securing any probability within all possibilities of a chain reactive event. Richard Feynman’s first realization problem he encountered and solved at Los Alamos. Stored barrels of radioactive materials stored in a large circular formation- ripe for a accidental trigger. KeyWord Trigger.
I swear most of the comments I’ve seen on other platforms seem to think NPPs are held together with little more than toothpaste and a dream, and that the tragedy at Chernobyl is seconds away from happening everywhere.
So I really appreciate your videos like this. You explain things in a very approachable and non-intimidating way, and (to me, at least) show how a subject ought to be respected but not necessarily feared.
For what I heard and understood (from serious source, not some clicbaity news), the biggest threat is the conditions of work for the personnel that are now under Russian's army control: They can't work normally and have to get authorisation from the military for everything, which impairs their efficiency and potential reactivity, they have to do 12 hours long work shifts and, of course, the whole situation is extremly stressful.
The same crew has been on shift since it's capture.
They're trying to make demands to switch work groups out.
Can you Provide a source? I just want proof befor i go ahead and talk to people about this.
@@Seminariteat I can, but it's in French. I'll post you a link in a second message, but just in case yt removes it, here is the title of said video: "Guerre en Ukraine : faut-il craindre une catastrophe nucléaire ? - 28 Minutes - ARTE".
EDIT: posted the wrong video the 1st time -_-'
Sounds like a point of failure. Best case scenario the power plant is turned off.
Worst case, Ukraine, Europe and Russia will be in a Panic.
The real danger is that unless they have extra clothes
and a laundry service it is going to get a little funky in the control room.
There's a lot of love that I see going into your pop-sci videos; but if I'm being honest, the sobering ones that focus on nuclear topics are the best, and provide a perspective that no one on RUclips can imitate or replace.
Try Plainly Difficult as well
One of my lifelong best friends is a translator--she lives in Berlin now (where her husband is from) and is therefore out of the direct line of fire, but she has been helping to get some of the information disseminated between scientists and assisting in relocating those who have left Ukraine.
The individual human cost of this is already incalculable, and I feel like people are focusing so much on other things which seem big and have catch6 headlines; yet ignoring the individual human lives and their stories which are attached to those tank tracks. As always, Kyle, I appreciate your skillful and gentle handling of these topics.
literally everyone is talking about the poor ukranians people
idk how tf you missed that since it's like the #1 topic of discussion, maybe u aren't from america?
but also, being concerned about nuclear power plants being assaulted probably translates into more concern for individual lives since this has repurcussions and ramifications for individuals
I sincerely hope there isn't another wave of "ugh, miGraNT wOrKERs" in the countries where refugees are relocating, like happened with Syrian refugees. We in the western world seem to care about this war so much because we identify closely with the Ukrainian culture and people, so we need to follow through with that energy during the future years of humanitarian outreach that will be needed
I dont think we all need to know a backstory to someone. Think we all care about the bigger picture in the end. Get over yourself
I added up all the concrete and steel at 4:56 and it's over 17 feet of it. That's just in the reactor itself. Then you'd also have all the other structures around it like the building it is housed in. It also doesn't count all the water, automatic shut down systems, and backups.
5.1 meters, if you are not familiar.
@@BohemioGaming that's actually comparable to german WW2 Flaktowers. type 1's had a 5m steel reinforced concrete ceiling.
Turns out metal and concrete are hard to take apart.
I thought that the worry was the spend fuel pool which is like a very large high school swimming pool but much deeper. The building it is in is like a high school and not made of thick material. This it can be easily breached and if a bomb explodes in the pool it could damage the pool and empty it. While Westinghouse reactors are like an in-ground pool, the GE ones are part of the building and up above and even those the walls are thick the upper part is, again, like a high school.
@@BohemioGaming 16.728 feet, so he was close. I wish we would have converted to the metric system in the 1970s primarily because fractions suck.
@@thegreenpickel Piss on the metric system. Let them convert to us
Considering we have nuclear powered warships, which are by their nature, legitimate wartime military targets, I had a feeling that reactors are built to withstand extensive damage from outside forces whether natural or man made. From the sound of it though, a land based reactor should be ok as long as someone doesn't land a direct hit with a bunker buster.
@@endjentneeringclub We should create a new way to wage war.
Have the leaders of the respective sides meet in a cage match. Let them be the ones to draw first blood instead of their soldiers. At least then they would've done something besides sit back and let their people bear the whole weight of the consequences.
War is a stupid thing.
@@theguylivinginyourwalls
That would be great in theory.
Until one jackass realizes that instead of showing up alone to fight, he can bring 10 of his friends along.
Armies are essential because there will always be at least one guy who doesn't play fair.
@@Chad_Thundercock Damn, foiled by human nature again.
@@theguylivinginyourwalls: Your idea still has merit, the execution just needs work. If we are to choose a suitable war substitute, we'd need something that already has a strong regulatory body in place, with a robust rules system that is well-maintained and constantly updated to meet the ever changing needs of its purview. One thing immediately springs to my mind: _Magic: the Gathering._
Plus, if it is adopted worldwide as the replacement for war, Wizards of the Coast will be forced to reband the DCI, reinstate the Pro Tour scene, basically walk back every dumbass COVID-era decision it's made.
@@sdfkjgh Gay AF
Thank you. Tired of the " sky is falling" fear mongering that has become so pervasive in our media and culture. Bless you.
Just recently found your channel. I have always considered myself pro-nuclear, but your videos explaining how things work and how safety is designed into nuclear systems have already given me so much relief from safety concerns I did not even realize had been weighing on me so heavily.
Thank you for making these videos on the history of nuclear events. I'll be watching the rest of your videos and look forward to seeing the ones you make in the future.
Thanks for the updates and information. I hope this helps people understand the true safety of nuclear energy moving forward.
Not to mention, Ukraine out of any country in the world is likely to have the utmost of respect for the potential hazards of nuclear power - and so they operate as such. They monitor the aftereffects of the worst nuclear power disaster in history and with that information they choose to continue to operate their nuclear reactors. I think that says a lot.
Not that I was against nuclear power, but there is an unpleasant fact worth to be considered: Ukraine, even if we would want, cannot such massive switch of energy generation. NPP generate 54% of country's energy, so attempts to switch from nuclear would be unbearable to our economy (I hope, after the war, there still will be an economy worth talking about).
you know, this could weirdly end up being good press for nuclear power, people can see how it was still able to function even under severe circumstances. And that's a powerful point, I wonder why it's not more widely paid attention to that the country who paid in lives for the mistakes at Chernobyl is the country that still uses nuclear power.
Kyle, you're a blessing to the science educator community.
Thank you for keeping us informed and knowledgeable!
Thanks for the video man. I just found your channel. Thanks for breaking it down. Opened my eyes on how the plants work
Thank you for being here to help assuage these major concerns and fears. I really appreciate your videos.
Awesome video and super clear cut, straightforward, no bullshit.
Looking at this attack live (powerplant was streaming video feed from one of security cameras) and seeing smoke from Unit 1, was scary. But knowledge that reactor is really in thick concrete bunker and that smoke was from something else were... that did not kick in until later. Great vid.
But what Kyle forgot to tell (it was totally not that important in the context of this video, so there is no need to blame him for this) was that when administrative buildings were still shelled and caught fire minutes later, the firefighters from the city where there was still active fight jumped up and rode to the powerplant. They were chased off from that gate by russian soldiers and not allowed to enter. But still level of dedication and courage those firefighters have is amazing. That shows that plants have wast emergency network that kicks in at the moment when something is not right.
@Carlll I also followed it live (meanwhile going wtf about being able to get live video from a situation in a war zone thousands of km away, and about that involving a NPP). Yes, those firefighters were courageous, and are much more deserving of being called heroes than many of those who take up arms.
I used to work in a nuclear power plant and all the emergency systems can be sent automatically by SMS, VOIP, VHF frequency, landlines, etc and are backed up by two generators in two separate locations. The FD and local emergency management agency would regularly train with plant staff and allow guided tours to these emergency personnel to familiarize with the plant. This is all up to national and international standards so I would assume the Ukrainian power plant have similar emergency SOPs. If a meltdown did happen Russia would not be able to hide it without destroying certain recording instruments. Just for the record I did not work near the reactors or any control rooms. I was a full time paramedic and only saw the reactor hall once and never permitted to enter the main "control floor". I have been in the fuel assembly pool area a few times and is probably the neatest part of any large plant getting to see it glow.
@@Unknown_Ooh Interesting. I was an auxiliary operator at a PWR and we were thoroughly trained to fight any fires at the plant. We drilled often too. We did this because community firefighters were not authorized to enter radiologically controlled areas and of course we were. I was wondering if the Ukrainian plant worked the same way. Yes, the Cherenkov radiation coming off spent fuel in the pool is a beautiful blue!
I'm constantly impressed and inspired by the balls of the Ukrainian people. If something is needed, they just go for it. That's really cool
I very much appreciate the calm music, tone, and visuals of these videos about such a tense and stressful subject for many that is still ongoing.
Thank you for doing it not for the clicks and views and shock factor but as a reassuring peice that keeps the weight still there but not pressing down
The important thing to remember is that you _should_ be skeptical of nuclear reactors _even while_ acknowledging that nuclear power is both safe and necessary. Scrutiny is essential to maintain safety. That's true for anything from aircraft to electrical generation, and nuclear reactors are no different.
This resonates with me so much. I work with live electrical equipements and a lot of my collegues just shrug off safety when it's impractical and the risk is minimal. But minimal does not equal zero... Especially when you know anyone that worked before you could also have been lax on safety, from the manufacturer to the night shift guy making makeshift modifications.
Wrong place for that kind of talk.. almost every single nuclear related video that shows up here is about how there isn't anything to worry about.
@@KnightOwlSC I think you got it wrong. The message is, the public doesn't need to worry because safety measures have evolved. It's like planes. People think planes aren't dangerous. I'm sorry, but if the plane goes down, everybody dies horribly. It's just that considering this danger a very strict planning and quality control is being enforced around the construction and handling of planes. It's makes them statstically less lethal bit they're not harmless. Nuclear reactors are not nothing to worry about by themselves. The people building and handling them put a lot of effort into prevention and damage control.
The best way to illustrate this is, the first tragedies are way more lethal and damaging than the later ones. But the technology is pretty much the same
But… but… the HBO Chernobyl TV show said that a nuclear reactor can become a “nuclear bomb” (direct quote) at the blink of an eye! Your “science” can’t be more accurate than multiple Emmy nominations.
"Your science can't be more accurate than multiple Emmy Nominations!"
Oh that's gold, I think I gotta use this one on people who quote celebrities too.
@@TheKiroshi be sure to put quotation marks around the word “science”, to make people cringe to the high-heavens.
once again, thanks for being a sane voice of information while this happens. I would ask that you never delete these videos. if the situation changes you could make another video, if its just you talking to a camera to correct your information. I would happily watch that so that I can learn.
Fossil Fuel Lobbyists: So you think dangerous Nuclear-power is the future of energy?
Me: I DO, and I'm tired of people pretending that it's not.
Nuclear accounts for close to one _percent_ of workplace AND pollution related fatalities in energy production. Which fossil fuels have killed *millions.* Nuclear waste is so miniscule compared to the energy gains that we could run off nuclear alone for ten thousand years, and we'd still never see a *drop* affect the environment. The fears are unwarranted.
Only because people are too afriad to make Nuclear plants more common place. How else?
That's the thing so few seem to get. Yes, there are dangers; and yes, with nuclear some of those dangers can get _very_ bad _VERY_ quickly; and yes, the waste products are hazardous are insanely longer timescales.
But every power option is dangerous. And both control and clean up (in the event of a fault) are getting better by the day. And many designs being worked on have little to no wasted and many even use the waste we have now as fuel with their infancy being almost entirely due to fear and lack of funding.
Unless we plan on totally and permanently dismantling our civilization and having everyone live forevermore as naked hunters resulting in the death of _billions in just a few weeks,_ there are tradeoffs and dangers. (And if you can't see the tradeoff _there,_ then I simply have nothing to say to you. I will not deal with you. Please remove yourself. I won't sugar-coat it.)
Nuclear is, by far, the best option we have right now. It can with little relative work provide scale above things like wind, solar, hydroelectric, and geothermal. It is cleaner and safer, right now, than things like coal and gas.
It is necessary and required.
@@scaper8 Also we should not fear about nuclear waste, because with nuclear fusion it will become possible in 30-100 years to isolate and fusion radiactive material, the energy needed being provided by "standard" fusion reactor. or we will find another solution, in 50 years we have gone from taking of in the first plane to landing on the moon. Who know what we will be able to do in 100, 1000 or enven 10 000 years ?
@@justeunfan3364 Honestly what little waste reactors produce thats not recyled and reused is so small and extremely easy to store and properly dispose of its its essentially a non-issue.
@@dragonace119 It depend, we have already produced huge amount of waste with all nuclear powerplant around the world, and most people are not confortable with leaving it for thousands of years, so thinking about ways to recycle them can be useful. Also, it happend a lot that when doing ressearch on one topic, we make discoveries about another thing so trying to recycle nuclear waste can be a greate way to improve our knowledge and our confort.
The part at the beginning disclosing your motivations and experience is hugely underrated. Truly sets a new bar in integrity
Thanks Kyle for looking into this. It wasn't the damage or leakage I was so worried about but more the message it sends and frame of mind you would have to be in to order such a thing. And I'm really well educated on this, I have studied nuclear energy and my uncle was a lead engineer at the San Onofre nuclear plant and now currently is on the board of the NRC. So I understand this and I want to see MORE nuclear power in the future, its very clean, very safe.
Thank you so much for these videos, Kyle. And once again, kudos for the way you're able to share this information with the gravitas and seriousness you do compared to the wacky tone of your other videos. You've always impressed me with the way you're able to change the mood of your teaching tone in relation to the subject matter.
Some few things that could go through those reinforced concrete walls and explode directly onto the fuel rods would be a Schrewerer Gustav Shell, which was able to punch through 7 meters (23ft) of concrete and blew up an ammunition dump, and 16 in. mk8 shells that were able to punch through 30 ft. of reinforced concrete, as well as a piece of a Yamato-class 26 in. turret armor.
They could do that but it was found out during WW2 that battleship sized guns are simply not accurate enough to target something as small as a containment building.
@@randomlyentertaining8287 maybe not one shell, but the Iowa-class can shoot 9 of them per half a minute, and they had some pretty accurate targeting systems towards the latter part of their service lives
Thank you again Kyle. Logic and rational though wins the day once again!
Please start including sources. I've been trying to find the video at 5:15, and I can't seem to find an uncut and uncropped version everywhere.
Great work as always! I know that I'll come across someone using these events as evidence against nuclear power, but it's great to have the additional context provided in this video.
I think the worry is more that War can cause enough chaos that all the redundancy in the world can't stop it. As low as a chance it could be, it is still a chance. Now, one would think the Russian military is smart enough to not try to obliterate such a hot target, especially considering how invaluable that plant would be if they did succeed in taking Ukraine, but that requires the presence of intelligent thought, and Humans don't always meet that standard.
Hence the worry. These plants may be built like bunkers, but we've long ago made weapons that can damage bunkers. A dumb enough fool could still cause catastrophe.
Easily the most grounding and informative series out there about nuclear power and its dangers/safeties. Thank you
This half-life series of yours is really informative and thought provoking. Really appreciate the effort you put in to them
Thank you for posting the current addition to your series. You have no idea how much these videos have helped me put my worries at ease. Please keep up the good work!
"You can crash a runaway train into one, and literally nothing happens."
Well, to the container, at least.
As always, thanks Kyle for the great information! Great Video.
CANDU reactors and I am sure most other designs had to take into account everything from terrorist attacks, bombings, planes crashing into it etc, they have active and passive systems with MULTIPLE redundancies usually 4x for every system. Reactors are extremely over engineered and are very very safe even when put into situations like these. Very good video covering most of the misconceptions Kyle keep it up!
That's why they cost so much to build. The costs are all upfront. While coal and natural gas costs, damages are after the fact... ( with no expectations to pay for them)
@@captaindave88
"Externalize" the costs.😏
@@captaindave88 Its like planes and car : planes are build with lot of redundancies, and so they are much safer than cars but people are more affraid of them than of car because they don't understand it. Sadly today sensational is prefered to long studies, and it cost a lot to humanity.
@@justeunfan3364 If Europe had used more nuclear power, then perhaps even that war over natural gas won't be necessary, ironically...
@Aditya Chavarkar Yes, France is the exception.
Italy is also anti-nuclear.
Thank you for keeping your material current and relevant!
The fact that russia would even risk bombing a nuclear power plant is still crazy to me. We live in a scary world sometimes.
It leads me to believe Putin is actually going senile
@@sinofprideescanor6619 he is pushing 70, definitely going crazy or senile... Or both. Advanced age will do that to you, he is no exception.
@@sinofprideescanor6619 Same here. I used to think he had some sort of crazy (not like a mad genius , but just insane) plan for this whole scenario , but I'm starting to think he's actually just gone insane
@@darth-imperius
Joe Biden ALSO is demented. Senility is also a possibility.
no its smart, cut off the countries power, ukrain would be crippled even more so if it didnt have power...and when u take control of said plant....u can use it as leverage because it is in fact a potential bomb if used correctly.
then again american's thought it was smart to vote in a 80 year old corpse that feeds on the life force of young children to stay alive.....
This is excellent unbiased news and informative education man. I hope you do more stuff like this. I also pray for peace in this crazy time. Be safe everyone. Love from Texas.
Can you make an update about the reports of Chernobyl losing power? The information seems to be spotty, but I'm curious about the possible scenarios.
I know an expert they said given these are 22 year old rods ambient air is enough to keep them cool. Furthermore power is not needed to maintain cooling according to them.
I thought the Chernobyl has been with out power since the 80’s I’m mean the “elephant foot is still crazy radioactive..
@@roolenoir3183 No, there were several cores on the site, the others were not actually shut down when core #4 exploded because their power was still needed, and after the initial cleanup radiation levels outside the building housing core #4 are not that high. (You wouldn't want to work there year round, but I believe a few months out of the year is pretty safe.) The Chernobyl facility continued producing power until 2000. After that it still recieved power to run pumps to keep the remaining fuel rods cool, although as the other comment suggests, they are 22 years old and no longer much of a risk. A study done after Fukushima suggested the rods will not even boil off the water they're sitting in if the pumps lose power.
The elephants foot is still hot, but it's in the basement, it has basically no effect on radiation levels outside the building. As Kyle said in the video, a few feet of concrete is sufficient to stop basically any direct radiation, and the site is contained so debris from the elephants foot isn't getting moved around. (I believe the elephants foot is only a small part of the total corium mass, but the rest is also contained in different parts of the basement.)
Frankly we could safely abandon Chernobyl entirely, closing up access to the sarcophagus for good. The downside would be the loss of observational data on the lagest unintentional formation of "corium" in the world. Power is not needed at Chernobyl since all radioactive waste is effectively cooled by ambient heat losses. Ambient meaning the temperature of the local environment with no artificial cooling.
Nuclear power plants were made with power outages in mind
Thank you for the way you explain these things. Not only are they worded in a way that makes it easier to understand but it comes as a comfort of sorts.
Fantastic breakdown Kyle and thank you for your continued dedication toward education and science communication.
I needed to hear this. Thank you
When it comes to the history of nuclear power I'm reminded of a saying we have in aviation. Flying is best described as hours and hours of boredom punctuated by moments of stark terror. The moments of stark terror are the moments you remember best, because they are so pungent. The history of nuclear power is pretty much the same. Decades upon decades of plants all over the world boringly humming along, with a few moments of stark terror. To that note, plane crashes are far more common throughout history than nuclear meltdowns.
Plane crashes don't irradiate thousands of square kilometers making it uninhabitable for tens of thousands of years.
Plane crashes don't kill people from horrible, agonizing sicknesses decades later.
Plane crashes don't displace and ruin the lives of tens of thousands of people for generations.
Plane crashes are horrible, but not even near the category of a Nuclear Disaster.
@@DaHaiZhu That wasn't even close to my point. My point was in the long history of nuclear power there have been very few moments of terror. The correlation I made between aviation and nuclear power has nothing to do with the results of said moments of terror, I have no idea how you came to the conclusion that I was, because I never suggested anything of the like.
I grew up near Neckarwestheim in Germany!!! Thanks for the informative video Kyle. You make great educational content!!!
as messed up as this situation is, accurate, unbiased information is always a good thing. thank you, kyle. i know this isnt the story you had in mind last year.
Yup. It's fun seeing videos of Ukrainian farmers stealing Russian tanks, but a bit of sober science is good. Through the emotional volatility of the world, something to ground oneself in reality helps keep one sane. Crossing fingers that the violence ends soon.
I appreciate the information you always put out that k you Kyle! And the team!
Kyle you did a good job of explaining this. I did something similar on my LinkedIn but I wanted to focus on the nuclear content within the cores. It's impossible for this to be ten times Chernobyl with only six times or a bit less the amount of nuclear material. I'm a nuclear operations training instructor and former authorized nuclear operator but not a missile expert. I know how well built these structures are except I don't know how destructive missiles can get. I wanted to focus on the ability of the workers to remain focused under these stressful times as well as not commit human performance errors under duress. There's still a lot of potential for things to go wrong in shutdown reactors. It's not to make the public afraid, but to be aware that there's still real risk. All the best. Keep putting out great content!
Thank you Kyle for a great explanation. It is reassuring to hear.
Even if they're aware of this information, and even if they absolutely agree with Putin, I would imagine the commanders on the ground would be telling their guys to consider their shots very carefully around the nuclear power plant. Or at least, I would hope they're bright enough to pass that order down.
There was a flare fired towards the reactors
But with it only being a flare it detonated mid air so it can do what flares do and light up the area.
@@davidty2006 Yeah. In the clips I only saw a flare and small arms fire, maybe the gun on a BMP. Nothing large. So I suspect they were holding back intentionally.
@@warlocc-paul BMP''s gun is a 30mm autocannon. But it also has a ATGM.
Similar thing with the BTR's.
@@davidty2006 They have a whole slew of possible configurations, if I remember correctly. I didn't see anything bigger than an autocannon is what I'm saying.
Thanks for this, i was very worried about this situation for a long time, just by hearing the headline news, I didnt follow up by watching nonsense information, but my worried brain construed enough nonsense by itself. Again thank you ❤
I think you might be downplaying it too much not because the direct attack can cause issues but because the human element is also under attack and so far all meltdowns seem to have either incompetence or malfeasance (protecting own ass) as aggravating causes. Being under direct fire and siege might impact the security procedures in a way to generate more serious accidents, even if a core explosion is impossible.
Thank you for continuing to educate people on the safety of nuclear power. You do the world a great service.
You never explicitly say it But I get the impression you're only talking about incidental or accidental damage. Like there's fighting at the plant. Maybe a few shots accidentally hit it. But what if the plant is the target? What if it was hit with bunker busters intending to make it the world's biggest dirty bomb?
Thank you for doing these, this is been a source of stress for me since I heard about it. I definitely feel more relieved now though.
I am living like 120km from ZNPP. I knew that it is almost impossible to trigger such catastrophe they are talking about in news. Still there are news that the ukrainian staff there is tortured by russians because they don't want to obey their commands. I am really worried for those people.
And there is still a huge threat in Chornobyl NPP.
Hope this war will end soon and all russians will get out from Ukraine.
Слава Україні!
I'm afraid the only way that will happen are Ukrainians either pushing them out, or killing them. And unfortunately Russia like the U.S. also has bunker buster missiles and bombs that can penetrate a containment building and blow up a reactor intentionally, or worse yet they could target them with nuclear weapons. Doing that would cause intense nuclear fallout from all the vaporized and irradiated material at ground zero. Either act is the act of a madman, because like Chernobyl the fallout will descend upon Russia, literally.
At least russians are out of Chornobyl NPP now.
Героям слава.
I hope they are safe
Thank you for explaining this so well, you put to rest some of my fears about the fire and shelling.
Hey Kyle. Not afraid of the artillery breaching the core. But the “shiulds” and “mights “ are what we are afraid of. Mainly, even though you mentioned it, but have the fighting causing a loss of power to cool the core and getting another Fukushima
He DID address this. There are multiple redundant backup safety systems, usually (I can't speak of the configuration of the Ukrainian plant) in secure locations and behind water tight doors. Redundant diesel generators can supply power if external power is lost and the plant reactors aren't producing any power themselves, also usually behind water tight doors (except at Fukushima). These reactors are Pressurized Water Reactors, which are far safer than the Chernobyl and Fukushima plants, as Kyle mentioned, and even if the worst happened and fuel melted down, it's likely that it would be confined to the containment structure, as he mentioned. I worry about the plant operators who are working with guns to their backs and apparently without proper rest. That's were the danger is. (I am an ex operator)
Thank you for dispelling Nuclear Danger myths Kyle! This video is important!
Yes. Yes they can.
Some reactors can even survive being directly bombed or shelled with artillery fire.
Not something I would want to see in a combat based conflict, but something that should be expected during war.
It takes a bit of effort to destroy a nuclear power plant. Especially if they are well constructed. Many if these facilities have been designed or constructed to withstand extremely high force explosions, such as a nuclear explosion.
So I am fairly sure that it would take a serious effort to actually destroy or demolish a nuclear facility.
They would probably need to drop anti-bunker shells and bombs to do serious damage or ironically enough a Nuke. They are just a really over-engineered bunkers.
It's funny. We still have WW2 Flaktower's standing...because they're mainly made from concrete and steel, in huge amounts. Too much of a bother to get rid of, especially inside a city. Nuclear plants are like that as well just....much much bigger.
Yeah you can make it stop functioning as a power plant. That's about it.
I would rather not test that hypothesis of surviving shelling.
Everytime someone tells me Nuclear plant designs keep getting better and more idiot proof. I ask them, what about the older designs in use that still have those flaws newer designs patched out?
Besides, the real danger now is human error. The personel are under a lot of stress now and likely reduced efficiency.
Best case scenario is the power plant simply turns off.
@@arnowisp6244 Gen 2 water moderated reactors reactors can be considered 99.99% safe. Gen 3s, like these are, 99.999A% The new Gen 4 designs, let's say 99.99999+ - You're in far mode danger from your stove, or the soap in the bathtub.
@@arnowisp6244 Plant shutting down is actually worst case. Best case is just some equipment damage. There's nothing there to explode and the entire reactor assemlby is shielded by meters and meters of steel-reinforced concrete. Even if you somehow managed to get something interesting to happen to the fuel rod's...it'd still all be contained.
The Soviet's not having containment was primarily what made chermobyl so bad as well as the underlying construction of the plant there.
What a valuable video Kyle. A big thanks for your efforts!
But hubris and human error will always be with us. Downplaying the danger these plants pose leads to complacency, then to catastrophe.
As always, thank you for your insight and information. So grateful for your braining
I would love to see a video on the different types of nuclear reactors and how they work and their safety profiles. I think part of the problem is that most people think reactors are all the same and don't realize just how different they are from older reactors like at Chernobyl
It boggles my mind to consider that so many people seem to think engineers are running around building giant powderkegs, not doing *everything in their power* to ensure the plants are safe and reliable.
Looks like you may be able to make a new video about it soon
Will he? I velice scientist like this don't want people to lose faith in Science.
Being wrong is fine. Being wrong and leading to a Nuke disaster...not so much.
@@arnowisp6244 so how is disaster going? Have you grown extra pair of hands already?
Thank you! This format of video is your calling. Amazing work!
I already trust nuclear fission plants as way to generate electricity. The thing that worried me a little was the land that we have to excavate in order to store nuclear waste. Fortunately, I believe scientists and engineers are designing reactors that can run on spent nuclear fuel.
Breeder reactors can already recycle fuel until it’s non hazardous. The only reason we don’t already do that and spend hundreds of millions on containment vessels/location is because of nuclear non-proliferation acts.
My mom is a radiochemist who designs, implements, and runs exercises on radiation emergency response protocols for anything from reactors to a satellite launch. She responded to the Fukushima reactor meltdown and to this day she adamantly states that nuclear reactors are safe and the only reason there’s any waste to be disposed of is because of bureaucratic limitations and the refusal to spend money to develop more efficient recycling practices.
@@CoffeeKadachi Your mom is 100% right. I've been in university for nuclear engineering and all the "problems" with nuclear are only because regulations, restrictions, and policy cause them. Once all the politicians are out of the Oil industry's wallet, we'll see how great nuclear really is.
@@taylorgalilea698 and why would all the politicians leave the oil industry's wallet with how our political system is?
Coal plants produce far more waste than nuclear plants. Nuclear waste is a non-issue. I once saw a picture - forgot the exact context - where it is shown that a nuclear waste of a power plant that worked for 40 years only takes about as much space as a small parking lot.
@@elu9780 3 problems. Not the only nuclear plant in existence. Will work more than 40 years. Waste will be hazardous for thousands of years.Then it does't look as it is so little. If we improve waste situation then I will agree that is great power source but if we have to live on earth next to toxic waste for milenia then we will finally run out of safe space to live.
This actually put my mind at ease. Thank you
Never ceases to amaze me that a high tech nuclear power plant still has roots to the industrial era with steam power
Steam turbines are still the most efficient way we know of to generate power, even with their fairly dismal efficiency of 30-ish percent, it's the best we got.
this is easily my favourite video you’ve ever done kyle (and i’ve seen a great deal!). the delivery, pace, perspective, information, import, urgency, and relevance of it are all as fascinating as they are needed right now. i hope this video reaches many, and that it both eases fears and encourages adoption of essential technology needed to help control climate change. as much of a threat as geopolitics can feel at times, the world still needs to unite over the biggest and most certain threat of all in the climate crisis.
My concern definitely is not the containment structure. My concern are the cooling ponds. Or are the cooling ponds also within the containment structure?
[Edit:] I looked at the model and yes, the cooling pond is directly besides the core (otherwise fuel transfer would be deadly). So no, not even fuel rod melting in the ponds is likely. It could only happen if the Russian troops destroyed the plants generators, batteries and grid connection.
Which they won't do. They are there to conquer not destroy.
Thanks for this. I was explaining my friends exactly this and your video is just the best.
Ive been an advocate for nuclear energy since I was a teenager. While I believe green energy such as wind, solar and hydro are great, I dont think they are effective main power sources for multiple reasons; what they are good for is remote energy production as well as supplemental energy sources paired with nuclear energy. This is the green future that our species needs.
This was the video I was waiting for. Thank you 👍
4:30 am get woken by a notification. See its science boi. Guess i can forgive him xD
I love the videos this channel comes out with. Just facts, sited sources, and passion behind the topics ❤️
Hey if a modern nuclear power plant can survive a war, one might think that nuclear power is probably one of the safest sources of power in the world.
And doesn't explode in flames like a oil refinery.
Can I suggest talking about how nuclear waste is contained.
We really need to get rid of the idea of glowing green goo.
Man I got to say. I absolutely love the way you do these half-life series and always look forward to them
Thank you for these recent videos about the situation in Ukraine.
While Half-Life History has always had an aspirational feel, illustrating what we’ve learned from catastrophe to be a guiding light against fear, it is still fascinating to me that over 36% of these videos have been current events. I think this series has become one of the most important compendiums for facts surrounding nuclear energy, past or present, and you using this space to educate the public in these fearful times is just an excellent use of your platform. Thank you as always Kyle for the great work.
Thank you! This really helps me stay calm.
In light of recent events whereby Russian occupiers have threatened to intentionally bomb the power plant rather than allow it to fall back into Ukrainian hands, is your position unchanged? Instead of accidental shelling, what about in a case where those in control of the plant are intentionally looking to cause a nuclear disaster? How much damage could a suicidal maniac inflict if they had impure intentions?
Depends on what they managed to Sabotage. At best the safety features means they can render it inoperable.
At worst...they can disable those safety features.
It would be interesting if these safety features of Nuke plants were never built with tye possibility of a Maniac trying to cause a Nuclear disaster on Purpose.
So what's the damage eventually?
Kyle, your channel is a literal heaven for a nuclear nerd like me. I use this information to promote nuclear power everywhere possible in my school.
Thanks :)
Problem #1: The NPP Ukraine-South (located in Mykolajiw) appears to be a strategic goal of the invading forces, as they make their way there. That plant is of much older design, and DOES NOT have proper containment (heavy concrete designed to withstand fighter plane impacts), only much less sturdy confinement.
Problem #2: Each power station, while of "same" design, develops different characteristics, which the staff on site learn to operate with. Thus first locking down the staff on site, and subsequently replacing them with "friendly" operators who do NOT know how to properly operate the machinery with its local kinks, is not a bright idea.
Problem #3: Most emergency and backup systems are NOT located WITHIN a (possibly missing) containment structure, and are much less resilient against military actions (including small-arms fire). We have seen what happens after a few days, when primary and backup cooling can not be maintained due to lack of off-site power in Japan - with the difference, that Russian designed NPPs typically have much fewer redundant safety systems, and due to Ukraine not being a wealthy state, many upgrades and additional safety systems never been added after completion of the station.
Problem #4: Depending on fully centralized power generation (do not suggest the proliferation risk and orders-of-magnitude larger safety/security issues with "modern" small-scale reactors) makes it very easy for a military aggressor, to take out all power for an entire country. Ukraine has been operation in island mode (disjoint from both western european grid, and russia) since the outbreak of hostilities. Thus it is much more fragile and easier to induce a full blackout - in the process killing civilians en-masse even in locations without hostile forces soon.
Thank you for these videos. Very informing.
Thanks for not butchering our city names. I still can't imagine why Germany would shut down their 3 nuclear reactors, they are literally the safest energy source today, on the contrary we need to build more of them.
If it's what the people want... even if it's wrong :/
Oil, politics and greed, business and stupid politicians.
Thank you. Videos like these are the reason why I believe that youtube is a good social media. Its so important to cut through the bs and educate people.
Thank you for covering this objectively, it seems like every other news source has an agenda these days.
Your other videos are much more fun to watch.
But these documentaries are the ones that will be remembered; and hopefully, used in classrooms for many years to come.
Keep up the good work 👏 🙂
Yes, we all know the safety of nuclear power plants. But your script seems to nonchalantly if not flippantly say, "Oh - No problem," in the face of an attack that is inherently reckless & foolhardy.
Thank you for this Kyle. While you may not be an "expert" per se, your knowledge of atomic energy and engineering in general makes this information all the more reassuring.
I agree with you about the physical structures and safeguards. So long as no idiot targets any of the reactors with a bunker-buster (bombs specifically designed to get through thick concrete) -- which seems highly unlikely -- they should remain safe.
My bigger concern is the human factor. Thew Ukrainian crew running the plant are effectively being held hostage and are both overstressed and overworked now. The odds of a human mistake increase with each passing day of occupation, and the human factor has been partly (or fully) responsible in nearly every past nuclear incident. Huge credit to the crew's resilience and diligence in keeping things operating safely thus far.
definitely agree here. the Chernobyl crew had already been working non-stop for days since they can't change shifts under occupation, and unless there just happens to be a couple of nuclear scientists in those Russian soldiers, they're the only expert that can keep things in control
Thanks once again for being a voice of sanity in these crazy times.
As I was watching the news about the attack, I just kept thinking, so no one at the news station bothered to ask anyone who knows anything about a modern nuclear power plant. Bunker busters would have trouble causing catastrophic problems.
Thanks for your videos regarding this it helps to ease my mind and I learn something new from it.