@E Van I think one of the key takeaways is that instead of a graphite moderated reactor that needs the water to keep it in check, these are water moderated reactors that require the water to make fission possible. If the reactor gets hit and the water drains out, what little reaction there is will stop. If the water converts to steam, the reactor will expel it, then dry up and then stop. Thus the reactor won't become a giant self sufficient raging inferno.
Most people aren't very smart, and this isn't a truly simple concept. Fission is complicated, and the Dr. Is explaining is explaining it very well. (but who thinks about heat transfer, fission products, how fuel rods are built, or how reaction containers are fortified.. Or even the mass of depleted fission products and how they are not easily aerosolized? Very few, I assume.)
most people are not smart, without our technology they would still think that the earth is the eye of a turtle and if the turtle shakes its had that causes earthquakes. Dont expect to much from the common fool
I'm afraid there's no such a button. Education is a key here but it is impossible to educate this kind of topics en mass af far as my living experience suggests.
I just watched over 2 hours of vids from this channel. Fascinating stuff and extremely well presented. I'm a U of I civil engineering grad so it makes me happy to see a prof of this caliber at my alma mater!
Thank you Prof. Ruzic! I didn't know the plant was made of a set of pressurised water reactors; I thought the reactors were of the old RMBK design. I'm a bit more serene now. It would be nice to see you more often. Regards from the UK, Anthony
I have really been wondering about the risk of attack and the credence of the nightly news casts that have been freaking me and my kids out. Thank you for this and the calm and logical explanation, it will help me and my kids sleep better.
love your lessons' prof, the few real prof's we still have. You also must have been irritated by the nonsense of what politicians say about these power plants.Hope to see more of your video's. Your video's of the past should be obligatory to watch for student one's they go to university there they get thought how to play dames on electric game and standard computers and to write manifests to fight climate change.
@@Txmj122 I've watched lectures on youtube. Some of them are pretty good. The information is similar, but the but the production value for this channel is much higher. He's not using the first take. It's one of the reasons I subscribed and hope he posts more often.
I recently gave a presentation on the "three cookies" quiz. I think I'll link this video to some of my colleagues so they can understand better. Thank you for being a rational mind in the hysteria.
That was a nice presentation. Simple to understand. I have a B.S. in Nuclear Engineering, U of I, 1981; now pretty much retired. I feel that I got an excellent education there, and I wish you all the success in your career. My career did not go so well, unfortunately, but I had a few psychological "issues" that made it difficult to work with other people (and at times endangered my security clearances), and that was fatal. I had a feeling that my college life would be as good as my life would get, and except for making big bucks for several years, I am now a pensioner waiting for his next check. Sorry to cheer you up so much!
That's good to hear. I have degree level physics and have been a proponent of nuclear derived electricity for decades. Nuclear power is deliberately demonised by the 'establishment'.
One thing that needs explanation. Why was the news media making a huge deal about Chernobyl losing offsite power when there shouldn’t be anything to cool there?
You still need electricity to run the ventilation fans. I suppose the 'New Safe Confinement' is held under slightly 'negative' pressure to the surroundings by those fans. This means some air from the inside is drawn out the NSC by fans, filtered and ejected to the outside, while there are other fans to 'push' back air in (but a little less than is drawn out, to maintain the negative pressure). Loss of electrical power to these fans (and al the other systems for conditioning this air, like heating or cooling) wil eventually lead to loss of negative pressure and a chance that some contaminated air could escape.
I would add that graphite, that was in RBMK reactor, which was secondary moderator that kept reaction going, also is flammable and it's hot ashes became radioactive that spread with wind across long distance - modern reactors not only do not have secondary moderators, they do not have flammable/ash-able components so EVEN in full and total meltdown with uncovered reactor core (which itself is very hard to achieve), hazard zone would be localized, and not widespread.
Thank you so much for this most informative video, Professor! This I can use as a tool to dispel some of the fears of people around me here in Europe. You can explain it much better than I can. As a not-at-all nerdy hobby I study nuclear reactors (with a heavy emphasis on the good old RBMK, though flawed it is in its design), and your videos have taught me so much about the subject of fission/ nuclear reactors. How I wish I would have had the chance to follow even one of your classes. Keep up the good work!
Hey professor! Long time no see! Thanks for explaining that to us! By the way, when will you come back to Brazil so I can be your guide again? Say hello to everyone for me!
Good video overall. I too despair when I hear the paranoia regarding nuclear power, which has even caused some countries to try to get rid of nuclear reactors. Yes, if not designed properly and with a bit of bad luck they can make quite a huge and expensive mess. But the actual health risks for the population living near them are negligible. For example, the evacuation of the population near Fukushima did more damage to their health than sheltering in place would have. PS: Ukraine doesn't like very much to be called "The Ukraine".
Very nice professor! I took an energy class from you a couple years back and wondered if the remaining reactors in Ukraine were of the bad Chernobyl design. Thank you for the update!
The scary thing about the Chernobyl plant was it used graphite and when hot, carbon and the oxygen in the atmosphere like each other. The burning propelled the nuclear material into the atmosphere. It would be nice that these plants be designed so that if everything else fails, there would be a convectional cooling system.
The scary thing about the Chernobyl plant was that the operators pushed a reactor (with severe design flaws) into an unstable state just to perform an "experiment" so their bosses would be happy. Was Chernobyl preventable? Probably not. There's an old adage in engineering: "You can design a foolproof system, but eventually it will break in a way you never anticipated."
@@stevematda976 The idea that the operators were primarilly to blame is a narrative that the soviets initially pushed since it's easy, later analysis found that the severe reactor design flaws carry most of the blame. The operators' actions created the conditions that allowed the reactor's negative characteristics to manifest themselves, but the operators had no idea about that... the problems with the reactor design were already known at the time to the designers, but not communicated to the operators.
@@stevematda976 Or, as the translation of the 1993 Soviet report about this accident (Annex I to INSAG-7) said: "The Commission considers that the negative properties of this type of reactor are likely to predetermine the inevitability of emergency situations" ... in other words, the reactor was an accident waiting to happen
A kinetic rod penetrator from an MBT gun CAN go through a containment structure. Likely some of the larger tandem warhead AT rockets could too, but not the most common man portable AT systems.
Advanced atgms can penetrate 2400mm of steel. But the explosion is very focused. They do have bunker busters that would do the trick. But considering they occupy the place, they could just turn off the pumps. Or just grab the spent fuel and toss it out in occupied territory. Remove the generators that power the pumps. And it doesn't have to be on orders from above. The occupying force could just decide to loot the place or detain the workers.
@RBMK5000 I agree that common man portable AT systems are not going through 1.5m concrete and 100mm carbon steel. Honestly, I've watched quite a few videos these last 7 months + of this class of weapons failing to penetrate the MBT armor they were designed to defeat. However: look at air launched and vehicle launched AT rockets, particularly those with tandem in line warheads or very large single shaped charge warheads, as in the case of USA AGM114-K "Hellfire" missile. The weight of HE in these is an order of magnitude larger than the common man portabl AT weapons, THOSE could make a hole. Hopefully nobody is stupid enough to use such things. As far as the depleted Uranium or Tungsten rod penetrators, the present generation of those fired from smooth bore guns at well over 1,500 m/second? At 90° those WILL go through the described 1.5m concrete + 100mm steel too.
Great presentation! Just some quick advice though- It’s just “Ukraine”, not “The Ukraine”. Give Ukraine the prefix suggests its still a part of the Soviet Union, which it isnt
I certainly did not mean anything derogatory when I said "the' Ukraine. Of course it is an independent country. The word "the" just slipped out. It is true that I would not say, "Here is a map of the France". On the other hand it does sound perfectly natural to say "Here is a map of the United States". It also could be habit from having heard it described by that term for most of the last of my 64 years! I did not realize it was politically sensitive, but sure do now. I am more "up" on the science than on the politics and I try to concentrate on the science part.
Hey, Professor, I have a small question. What about the pipes that take the steam to the generators. Those are basically "holes" in the containment building, right? How do they shield the radioactivity from coming out those holes? I know it's minor compared to the whole size of the containment building, I'm just curious, because it seems the containment building is not _entirely_ sealed. Or is there some method to prevent leakage through those holes? Thank you!
The level of radioactivity at the edge of the pool the reactor is in is slightly above background. The containment building is not there to stop radioactivity escaping in normal use and is the 4th line of defence and as such is there in case of an emergency. For example, it would mitigate the effects of an explosion that could launch radioactive material into the air. In such a scenario those pipes are not going to be an issue.
@@alexdunhill4271 Thank you for responding. After writing the question, the obvious solution occurred to me. Say the concrete is one foot thick. Have the pipes go in at one spot, turn while in the concrete, and come out at another spot. The radioactive beams travel straight; if the pipes turn a corner, you can easily make it so the beams cannot escape.
Hi David, i have been watching a lot of your videos about radiation and was wondering would it be worst to try and intercept a nuclear strike due to high concentrations of nuclear material being scattered when it is intercepted?
Good to see your videos again! I understand the basically low risk of a radiation release from the plant. I do have a related non-radiation question. Statement: the Russians intend to and have claimed ownership of the plant. Since the complex is shut down, it's not making any electricity for anyone. If it goes on line again, presumably the Russians will direct the electricity to their grid. My question is: Is there any way the Ukrainians can sabotage the plant to prevent the Russians from stealing the electricity? Blow the turbines... Wreck the generators... Burn out the control systems... Something to keep the Russians from getting the benefits, but NOT causing a radiation release or completely destroying the complex. Thanks for your time and thoughts!
I do hope the good professor does not want to take part in furthering the online terrorism that your question implies. In this context, a little knowledge or misinterpretation is a big danger.
@@justgivemethetruth This isn't online terrorism and I resent the implication. It's simply an effort to prevent the Russians from profiting from their war on civilized behavior. If you really Do want the truth, please study the preliminary autopsies of the remains in the mass graves in Lyman to understand who, in fact, the terrorists are.
The reality is that the only sabotage that the Ukrainian troops were able to arrange was the shelling of buildings and territories. Do you think that after this shelling, many employees of the station will be engaged in sabotage? This is not an imaginary world of CNN and BBS, this is reality. Therefore, not only were there no acts of sabotage, but on the contrary, people did everything to keep the station in order. And to make the situation completely clear, there is a wonderful video where dozens of beaten-off Nazis threatened station workers back in the 19th year because they spoke Russian. And about the "theft" of energy, payments for energy resources are still being made between Ukraine and Russia. This may seem strange to you, but it is not invented by professors who are far from life.
When we needed him the most, he came back.
Absolutely.
Tru dat :D
"and that's what you need to know about "....
@E Van I think one of the key takeaways is that instead of a graphite moderated reactor that needs the water to keep it in check, these are water moderated reactors that require the water to make fission possible. If the reactor gets hit and the water drains out, what little reaction there is will stop. If the water converts to steam, the reactor will expel it, then dry up and then stop. Thus the reactor won't become a giant self sufficient raging inferno.
@E Van RBMK is BWR type reactor. Edit: But I ack that RBMK is not commonly categorized as what is known as “BWR.”
Such a shame that the general knowledge of Nuclear reactors/physics is so low. Thanks for getting the word out there professor
the general knowledge of everything is so low how else do you explain getting a corpse elected as president?
recreational nukes for all
Most people aren't very smart, and this isn't a truly simple concept. Fission is complicated, and the Dr. Is explaining is explaining it very well.
(but who thinks about heat transfer, fission products, how fuel rods are built, or how reaction containers are fortified.. Or even the mass of depleted fission products and how they are not easily aerosolized? Very few, I assume.)
most people are not smart, without our technology they would still think that the earth is the eye of a turtle and if the turtle shakes its had that causes earthquakes.
Dont expect to much from the common fool
if it was more widely understood there would be far less anti-nuclear hysteria, far more nuclear reactors and far lower CO2 emissions.
Oh wow, I wondered if there was going to be another update.
Thanks for hanging in there, Professor.
I've missed your posts and obtaining important information to clearly understand. It'd be great to see more. Thanks Professor!
What button do I push to eliminate the misconception that a nuclear reactor can explode like a nuclear bomb?
I wish I knew......
It's not a button, more like years of dedication to educate the public, excatly what Prof Ruzic doing.
I'm afraid there's no such a button. Education is a key here but it is impossible to educate this kind of topics en mass af far as my living experience suggests.
Easy. Install a nuclear weapon inside every nuclear power plant, thus eliminating the misconception.
what's the difference between a melt-down and explosion? not much.
I've been eagerly awaiting just this kind of video. Thanks for all of your great work!
Thanks!
I just watched over 2 hours of vids from this channel. Fascinating stuff and extremely well presented. I'm a U of I civil engineering grad so it makes me happy to see a prof of this caliber at my alma mater!
Thank you Prof. Ruzic!
I didn't know the plant was made of a set of pressurised water reactors; I thought the reactors were of the old RMBK design.
I'm a bit more serene now.
It would be nice to see you more often.
Regards from the UK,
Anthony
Also, RBMK are still operated in Russia...
why you did not google it, if you were not "serene" before? All the info is there, independent of presenters. Get the facts and be serene :)
They're about the same design vintage - VVER type PWRs. Much safer than RBMKs for obvious reasons.
Outstanding presentation at a time when people are worried. Thank you.
Glad to see you back emergyprof.
Absolutely.
Thank you!
I was wondering if you were still doing UA-cam videos, glad to see you are still around
Thank you Prof! If only the news could play this video , Useful information would be delivered by them 🤦🏻♂️
Thank you for this concise and on point presentation! Very much appreciated.
Timely video professor. Great explanation. Awesome learning information. Love the squeaky marker. Cheers man.
Glad to see you back! Commenting for the algorithm!
Thanks for doing this. I'm a long time watcher of your show, and I used to live in Zaporizhzhia. Thanks for all the amazing content
I have really been wondering about the risk of attack and the credence of the nightly news casts that have been freaking me and my kids out. Thank you for this and the calm and logical explanation, it will help me and my kids sleep better.
The media has been scare mongering anything nuclear or radiation related for over a half century now.
dont watch the news especially not with your kids they push a lot of things out of proportion to get view
What I want to know is how he can write backwards so well. That's amazing. Love the videos, glad people are learning about nuclear energy/ physics.
Video is flipped horizontally.
IBM explains its setup for writing backwards in the air! Not very high-tech fortunately. ua-cam.com/video/Uoz_osFtw68/v-deo.html
Yes! The war is the issue and risk here. Thank you for emphasising that.
Very happy to see Mr EnergyProf back! I always love these videos!!!
It was a wonderful surprise to open UA-cam and find a new video from you! Thank you so much!! We have missed you!!!!
love your lessons' prof, the few real prof's we still have. You also must have been irritated by the nonsense of what politicians say about these power plants.Hope to see more of your video's. Your video's of the past should be obligatory to watch for student one's they go to university there they get thought how to play dames on electric game and standard computers and to write manifests to fight climate change.
Thank you!
Always good to see a new video from you, but especially so in these times and on this subject. Thanks for some reassurance.
Welcome back, missed your classes!
I wish videos on this channel were posted more frequently. just about anything he talks about is interesting to hear
He probably spends much much longer preparing a video than the average youtuber. This would explain both the high quality and infrequent posts.
@@nathanbanks2354 considering his job is to give lectures, he already has the material anyway
@@Txmj122 I've watched lectures on youtube. Some of them are pretty good. The information is similar, but the but the production value for this channel is much higher. He's not using the first take. It's one of the reasons I subscribed and hope he posts more often.
Ty sir. Your lectures are apolitical and informative
I recently gave a presentation on the "three cookies" quiz. I think I'll link this video to some of my colleagues so they can understand better. Thank you for being a rational mind in the hysteria.
I was missing your videos professor! Don't go away for so long, please!
Excellent videos, hoping to see more!
That was a nice presentation. Simple to understand. I have a B.S. in Nuclear Engineering, U of I, 1981; now pretty much retired. I feel that I got an excellent education there, and I wish you all the success in your career. My career did not go so well, unfortunately, but I had a few psychological "issues" that made it difficult to work with other people (and at times endangered my security clearances), and that was fatal. I had a feeling that my college life would be as good as my life would get, and except for making big bucks for several years, I am now a pensioner waiting for his next check. Sorry to cheer you up so much!
Glad you retired
I've learned so much from you about nuclear energy. Thank you for helping tear down the misconceptions that surround it.
That's good to hear. I have degree level physics and have been a proponent of nuclear derived electricity for decades. Nuclear power is deliberately demonised by the 'establishment'.
The Hero we needed came back! I've learned so much from you over the years, thanks for the explanation!
Good to see you Prof.
Finally you are back professor
Ayyyyyy you’re back 🙏🙌😭😭😭 your videos are so unique, thank you for the information
Good that you are back! More videos please 🙂
Thank you professor for the clarification.
A most timely video Professor. Good to see you back.
I always enjoy your content Professor Ruzic. I hope you make more content if/when your busy schedule allows.
its about time professor
Absolutely.
One thing that needs explanation. Why was the news media making a huge deal about Chernobyl losing offsite power when there shouldn’t be anything to cool there?
You still need electricity to run the ventilation fans. I suppose the 'New Safe Confinement' is held under slightly 'negative' pressure to the surroundings by those fans. This means some air from the inside is drawn out the NSC by fans, filtered and ejected to the outside, while there are other fans to 'push' back air in (but a little less than is drawn out, to maintain the negative pressure). Loss of electrical power to these fans (and al the other systems for conditioning this air, like heating or cooling) wil eventually lead to loss of negative pressure and a chance that some contaminated air could escape.
I would add that graphite, that was in RBMK reactor, which was secondary moderator that kept reaction going, also is flammable and it's hot ashes became radioactive that spread with wind across long distance - modern reactors not only do not have secondary moderators, they do not have flammable/ash-able components so EVEN in full and total meltdown with uncovered reactor core (which itself is very hard to achieve), hazard zone would be localized, and not widespread.
You need to make a visit down-under, nuclear energy debate is just beginning and many many misconceptions! Your talks are very informative, thanks!
Great as always Professor!
We really needed you back. Very much appreciated Professor
Thank you for your informative videos ... I always learn from them.
A voice of reason in the mad world. Thank you sir!
I missed you Professor. Really enjoyed this one!
Glad you are back even if just for a one off. I found your videos extremely instructive. Keep that squeaky pen in action.
If a F5 tornado is heading your way, a nuclear containment building looks like a good place to hangout 💪
Great video, great channel. I love Prof Ruzic!
Awesome to have you back.
Thank you so much for this most informative video, Professor! This I can use as a tool to dispel some of the fears of people around me here in Europe. You can explain it much better than I can. As a not-at-all nerdy hobby I study nuclear reactors (with a heavy emphasis on the good old RBMK, though flawed it is in its design), and your videos have taught me so much about the subject of fission/ nuclear reactors. How I wish I would have had the chance to follow even one of your classes. Keep up the good work!
Hi, im happy to see you again please upload more videos
Hey professor! Long time no see! Thanks for explaining that to us! By the way, when will you come back to Brazil so I can be your guide again? Say hello to everyone for me!
Glad to see you back again!!!
Good to see you again Prof.
Much appreciated explanation. Thank you!!!
Thanks Prof. As always, very enlightening.
Nice to see you again.
It's so good to see you after a long long time😊
We missed you!! Welcome back!
This guy is a professional at reverse reading and writing
Good video overall. I too despair when I hear the paranoia regarding nuclear power, which has even caused some countries to try to get rid of nuclear reactors. Yes, if not designed properly and with a bit of bad luck they can make quite a huge and expensive mess. But the actual health risks for the population living near them are negligible.
For example, the evacuation of the population near Fukushima did more damage to their health than sheltering in place would have.
PS: Ukraine doesn't like very much to be called "The Ukraine".
Any teacher I had would drop my scores for referring to Wikipedia :D It's so satisfying.
Great video, thank You, please publish stuff more often.
Very nice professor! I took an energy class from you a couple years back and wondered if the remaining reactors in Ukraine were of the bad Chernobyl design. Thank you for the update!
Great video, as always Professor 👍
glad you are here to speak some sense, despite this paranoia we have around here
Thanks for the video, Doc.
Thank you for your work, Prof!
Please continue making more new videos.
The scary thing about the Chernobyl plant was it used graphite and when hot, carbon and the oxygen in the atmosphere like each other. The burning propelled the nuclear material into the atmosphere. It would be nice that these plants be designed so that if everything else fails, there would be a convectional cooling system.
The scary thing about the Chernobyl plant was that the operators pushed a reactor (with severe design flaws) into an unstable state just to perform an "experiment" so their bosses would be happy. Was Chernobyl preventable? Probably not.
There's an old adage in engineering: "You can design a foolproof system, but eventually it will break in a way you never anticipated."
@@stevematda976 The idea that the operators were primarilly to blame is a narrative that the soviets initially pushed since it's easy, later analysis found that the severe reactor design flaws carry most of the blame. The operators' actions created the conditions that allowed the reactor's negative characteristics to manifest themselves, but the operators had no idea about that... the problems with the reactor design were already known at the time to the designers, but not communicated to the operators.
@@stevematda976 Or, as the translation of the 1993 Soviet report about this accident (Annex I to INSAG-7) said: "The Commission considers that the negative properties of this type of reactor are likely to predetermine the inevitability of emergency situations" ... in other words, the reactor was an accident waiting to happen
My favorite professor, really about to enroll to take your class
Yay, I'm so excited to watch this video.
Thank you for the video!
Thak you for sharing your knowledge. It's a shame the mass media doesn't do their job and report facts. THERE IS NO FREE PRESS.
Any reaction to the Leslie Stahl - 60 Minutes piece this evening?
Thank you for another excellent presentation!
A kinetic rod penetrator from an MBT gun CAN go through a containment structure. Likely some of the larger tandem warhead AT rockets could too, but not the most common man portable AT systems.
Advanced atgms can penetrate 2400mm of steel. But the explosion is very focused.
They do have bunker busters that would do the trick. But considering they occupy the place, they could just turn off the pumps. Or just grab the spent fuel and toss it out in occupied territory. Remove the generators that power the pumps.
And it doesn't have to be on orders from above. The occupying force could just decide to loot the place or detain the workers.
@RBMK5000
I agree that common man portable AT systems are not going through 1.5m concrete and 100mm carbon steel. Honestly, I've watched quite a few videos these last 7 months + of this class of weapons failing to penetrate the MBT armor they were designed to defeat.
However: look at air launched and vehicle launched AT rockets, particularly those with tandem in line warheads or very large single shaped charge warheads, as in the case of USA AGM114-K "Hellfire" missile. The weight of HE in these is an order of magnitude larger than the common man portabl AT weapons, THOSE could make a hole. Hopefully nobody is stupid enough to use such things.
As far as the depleted Uranium or Tungsten rod penetrators, the present generation of those fired from smooth bore guns at well over 1,500 m/second? At 90° those WILL go through the described 1.5m concrete + 100mm steel too.
Great presentation! Just some quick advice though- It’s just “Ukraine”, not “The Ukraine”. Give Ukraine the prefix suggests its still a part of the Soviet Union, which it isnt
I certainly did not mean anything derogatory when I said "the' Ukraine. Of course it is an independent country. The word "the" just slipped out. It is true that I would not say, "Here is a map of the France". On the other hand it does sound perfectly natural to say "Here is a map of the United States". It also could be habit from having heard it described by that term for most of the last of my 64 years! I did not realize it was politically sensitive, but sure do now. I am more "up" on the science than on the politics and I try to concentrate on the science part.
It really takes a war to get you back? Seems a high bar.... Great to see your notification.
Excellent video Professor Ruzic.
Is it weird that I miss the squeaky markers? Haha
Been reading the news going, "Somebody get the Illinois signal."
Great video as usual
my favorite prof is back!
Nice video.
Wooooo Finally! Thank you Prof.😇
thank you. it was a good idea to make this video. we needed to know this.
Please do a video or two on the possibilities of closing the fuel cycle--fast reactors, waste burners, CURIO startup planning to recycle used fuel.
Thank you Sir!
Hey, Professor, I have a small question. What about the pipes that take the steam to the generators. Those are basically "holes" in the containment building, right? How do they shield the radioactivity from coming out those holes? I know it's minor compared to the whole size of the containment building, I'm just curious, because it seems the containment building is not _entirely_ sealed. Or is there some method to prevent leakage through those holes? Thank you!
The level of radioactivity at the edge of the pool the reactor is in is slightly above background. The containment building is not there to stop radioactivity escaping in normal use and is the 4th line of defence and as such is there in case of an emergency.
For example, it would mitigate the effects of an explosion that could launch radioactive material into the air. In such a scenario those pipes are not going to be an issue.
@@alexdunhill4271 Thank you for responding. After writing the question, the obvious solution occurred to me. Say the concrete is one foot thick. Have the pipes go in at one spot, turn while in the concrete, and come out at another spot. The radioactive beams travel straight; if the pipes turn a corner, you can easily make it so the beams cannot escape.
Thanks Professor. You were one of the teachers, teaching me how to be the backchannel for the west.
A token of appreciation and respect!:)
Hi David, i have been watching a lot of your videos about radiation and was wondering would it be worst to try and intercept a nuclear strike due to high concentrations of nuclear material being scattered when it is intercepted?
Please do more videos we miss you.
Hooray, he’s back! Now we just need his colleague Prof. Hammick.
Love the channel!
Looks like the radiation has made him become mostly invisible! A few more rads and he will be a superhero!
Ok. Next time it should not be a black sport coat!
THE LEGEND IS BACK BABY. Hell yea
Good to see your videos again! I understand the basically low risk of a radiation release from the plant.
I do have a related non-radiation question. Statement: the Russians intend to and have claimed ownership of the plant. Since the complex is shut down, it's not making any electricity for anyone. If it goes on line again, presumably the Russians will direct the electricity to their grid. My question is: Is there any way the Ukrainians can sabotage the plant to prevent the Russians from stealing the electricity? Blow the turbines... Wreck the generators... Burn out the control systems... Something to keep the Russians from getting the benefits, but NOT causing a radiation release or completely destroying the complex.
Thanks for your time and thoughts!
I do hope the good professor does not want to take part in furthering the online terrorism that your question implies. In this context, a little knowledge or misinterpretation is a big danger.
@@justgivemethetruth This isn't online terrorism and I resent the implication. It's simply an effort to prevent the Russians from profiting from their war on civilized behavior. If you really Do want the truth, please study the preliminary autopsies of the remains in the mass graves in Lyman to understand who, in fact, the terrorists are.
The reality is that the only sabotage that the Ukrainian troops were able to arrange was the shelling of buildings and territories. Do you think that after this shelling, many employees of the station will be engaged in sabotage? This is not an imaginary world of CNN and BBS, this is reality. Therefore, not only were there no acts of sabotage, but on the contrary, people did everything to keep the station in order. And to make the situation completely clear, there is a wonderful video where dozens of beaten-off Nazis threatened station workers back in the 19th year because they spoke Russian. And about the "theft" of energy, payments for energy resources are still being made between Ukraine and Russia. This may seem strange to you, but it is not invented by professors who are far from life.
Excellent, I thought as much.