A Brief History of: The Lucens Reactor Meltdown (Short Documentary)
Вставка
- Опубліковано 18 чер 2024
- #nuclear #swiss #history
After a few industrial accidents we are back to looking at a nuclear industry disaster and this one has been on my to do list for quite some time.
This is mainly due to it being a nuclear reactor inside an underground cavern James Bond villain style. Today we are looking at the ill fated and short lived Lucens reactor in Switzerland.
Want to become a channel member? / @plainlydifficult
Paypal Donate Link: www.paypal.com/cgi-bin/webscr...
Help the Channel Grow Like, Comment & Subscribe!
Subscribe Here: ua-cam.com/channels/b0M.html...
Equipment used in this video:
Rode NTG3, Audient ID4, MacBook Pro 16, Hitfilm, Garage Band
Check out My Twitter:
/ plainly_d
Check out these other great channels:
/ dominotitanic20
/ cynicalc. .
/ jabzyjoe
/ @qxir
Sources:
www-pub.iaea.org/MTCD/publica...
www.revue.ch/en/editions/2019...
www.swissinfo.ch/eng/radioact...
commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Ca...
pris.iaea.org/PRIS/CountrySta...
large.stanford.edu/courses/201...
www.unifr.ch/sfsn/pdf/50years-...
commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Fi...
www.ensi.ch/de/themen/versuch...
commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Fi...
www-pub.iaea.org/MTCD/Publica...
books.google.co.uk/books?id=r...
alchetron.com/Lucens-reactor
books.google.co.uk/books?id=v...
www.ensi.ch/fr/2012/05/31/ser...
Photos
By Josef Schmid - doi.org/10.3932/ethz-a-000049951, CC BY-SA 4.0, commons.wikimedia.org/w/index...
By Werner Friedli - This image is from the collection of the ETH-Bibliothek and has been published on Wikimedia Commons as part of a cooperation with Wikimedia CH. Corrections and additional information are welcome., CC BY-SA 4.0, commons.wikimedia.org/w/index...
By Toyliri - Own work, CC BY-SA 3.0, commons.wikimedia.org/w/index...
By MVVAlt - forums.drom.ru/garazh/t1151508..., CC BY-SA 3.0, commons.wikimedia.org/w/index...
By Ch-info.ch - Own work, CC BY-SA 3.0, commons.wikimedia.org/w/index...
www.research-collection.ethz....
ba.e-pics.ethz.ch/latelogin.js...
By NH2501 - Own work, CC BY-SA 3.0, commons.wikimedia.org/w/index...
By Taxiarchos228, CC BY-SA 3.0, commons.wikimedia.org/w/index...
Any experimental reactor accidents I should cover let me know!
As I wrote in one of my prev. comments, you may take a look at Jaslovské Bohunice. Built from 1958 and using non-enriched uranium as fuel in former Czechoslovakia (now located in Slovakia). Interesting fact, all accidents which happend there are, along with the scrapping process, considered as classified. But still a general info is out.
France detonated 8 atom bombs near Bordeaux
The ball pit reactor AVR jürich in germany. I know not a specific accident, rather a complete Cluster f***.
ahhhh love a good vid on saturday from you. thznks.
I entered the Matrix and went to see The Oracle to ask her that question. « Come in, XFly170, I’ve been waiting for you. The cookies are almost done. » she said as I walked in. « What nuclear reactor accident should Plainly Difficult cover next? » I asked her. « The one that hasn’t happened yet, XFly170, the one that hasn’t happened yet. » The Oracle said as she offered me a cookie, still steaming hot out of the oven. « But... if he does a video about it, won’t that stop it from happening? » I asked her back, in between two bites of her cookie. « What’s really going to bother your mind later on is, whether you’d have eaten a cookie right here in this kitchen tonight if the video stops it from happening. »
Look at that, an adequately contained, properly cleaned up nuclear mishap.
Like clockwork...
:D
Nolan Flynn welllllllllll is made by us.......i am just confused we did not build an clock out of it
Lol. This happens once a month on an air craft carrier. Reactor always acting funky
And they still banned further development and replacement.
Well it WAS sunk into a mountain and used lower powered method. It was also a somewhat experimental model so they planned ahead for failure whereas most normal powerplants are built with more efficiency in mind and that may result in it being harder to clean up (like being close to water sources that makes it harder to contain when it fails)
The biggest surprise of this episode is that after the accident Switzerland stopped its nuclear program
I suppose the massive clean up soured the desire
@Phục Đạt Đức How is CERN polluting anything?
@Phục Đạt Đức caring about the environment and nuclear power aren't mutually exclusive, nuclear power is the only true renewable energy and it's less deadly than other "renewable" sources.
actually no, it only offically got disbanded in the 1980s, but it was quasi-dead way before
@Phục Đạt Đức One of the biggest travesties of the Nuclear Age is how environmentalists became so ardently anti-nuclear power....
Way, way, WAY more pollution is created by other energy sources. Is nuclear perfect? No, but the planet would be cleaner and safer if more nuclear energy was used.
Here's a little constructive criticism: All throughout the video, I heard at least 3 different types of radiation measurements, and no real "scale" for them. When explaining the exposure of the radiation, it's be insanely helpful to give something to compare it to, like an x-ray or something. Asides from that, that was a great video.
@TurboCMinusMinus It would still give a good idea of if it's not much or "holy fuck the world is ending", also a different scale to use could be how long it would take to kill you lol or normal background radiation
@TurboCMinusMinus To be fair, those vague scales are also used by lying anti-nuclear types to create irrational fear of radioactivity.
Like when barely detectable radiation from Fukushima washed up in California. HUNDREDS OF TIMES THE NATURAL LEVEL OF RADIOACTIVE CESIUM! (The natural level is practically zero)
@@mcblaggart8565 Yep, just take a plane and climb into 10 000m, where background radiation levels are on average 40 times highter, than on ground level. Seems like, it does not realy bother anyone, since such level of radiation is still completely fine.
Rads are fine because it's an objective and used-by-industry measurement. Comparing to X-rays is not useful at all. Sieverts would be better than Rads, but it's not a big difference you just divide by 100. However, some statements aren't qualified in exposure/dose, but rather regulatory limits, eg. "Ten times the allowable exposure", which is bad because it provides no objective information. It should be stated what that actual value was.
i think a lot of it is due to the reports and citations using diferent scales, and conversions would/could be done diferent depending on how much of what was in that measured radiation.
but yeah, he could, for example, use the original reported scale + number, and give an channel standard comparison along that number, if it's not in that scale already... would help a lot of the less nuclear people watching understand the severity and help put things in context, especially over the diferent accidents/videos
Low enrichment fuel.
Oh no.
Graphite moderation.
Oh no!
Air cooling.
OH NO!
A healthy mixture for disaster
What's wrong with low enrichment fuel? Wouldn't that be better than high (er) enrichment?
@@PlainlyDifficult UK Magnox reactors ran safely with NU or vLEU fuel, graphite moderation and CO2 cooling for many decades.
Not great, not terrible.
We didn't learn from Chernobyl did we?
In addition to safety, was defensibly a consideration here? Building a mostly-hidden, mostly-bomb-proof reactor seems like a very Swiss thing to do.
The whole darn country is a bunker 🤣
The Reinforced Concrete Shell of a Nuclear Reactor can probably only be penetrated by a Bunker Buster - There's a snipped out there where they "flew" ( rocket propelled on a rail ) an entire Jet into a representative portion of such a shell on a test site - Viewed directly from the side - At first it looked like the plane went straight through it but a different angle showed the plane just disintegrating on the wall with the latter not having given a single darn fuck about what just had happened.
Caverns were indeed a way of protecting instalations as one cant pin point the targets.
@@Duraltia yes the walls stop a plane and they did prove that but if you're watching German state TV they changed the voiceover to say the walls can't withstand a plane. But the footage shows there is no more plane, just a standing wall.
@@Duraltia Watched a documentary on a tunnel fire. The problem is not the impact, it is what the heat does to the concrete.
"What the operators didnt know..."
{Shudders}
*DUN DUN DUN*
When I heard magnesium and water I thought: Hmm - no problems with corrosion?.... ah ... yes.
Even most people in Switzerland don t know that this happened...
Attention stay away from da Bünzlies!
They have been much smarter than their neighbors, e.g. France and Germany and stopped the madness.
in our canton (bern) is a mandatory piece of history class, I assume is also in others.....vo wo bisch? 😅
@@Peatch13 also wier im wallis hei niä va dem kehrt inner schüäl 😅
@@le0daniel Also ich has nummu us zöäfall ärfahru und has Plainly Difficult sogar vorgschlagu, ob ich där üsleser fär das video bi gsi weisi nid, aber interessant ischs trotz dem gsi
I think you should make a video explaining all the different measurements of radiation that you reference with counterparts of other systems and analogous real world examples. Like this many millisieverts is analogous to this many rems, or this many chest x-rays, or whatever. A dedicated video as well as other in video examples would help a lot of those not versed in the various measurement systems of radiation understand the scale of incidents and the levels of danger.
To accurately measure "radiation" you could just equalize it to it's total energy equivalent, Watts. Problem is, when You have nuclear pollution, You do not only worry about radiation alone, wchich is actually harmless from short distance (like any EM radiation, inverse square law applies)
What is a problem is that various ISOTOPES are released. Carbon, Cesium, Plutonium , Iodine - have high bio-availability.
Cadmium pollutes steel, actually to get non radioactive steel nowadays (f.e. to build scientific instruments) You need to buy it from special reserves created from old , pre-radioactive era ships and other scrap.
So uniform radiation scale is not really telling us anything about disaster, not even rough estimate on type or mass of isotopes released. It is bit like trying to measure farts judging on how loud they are, and arguing over decibells vs spectral analysis of fart sounds...
I need to know it in roentgen
Well, the sievert-to-rem equivalence, at least, is pretty easy, since the rem was retroactively defined as 0.01 sievert in 1976. :)
Measurements max out at 3.6 Roentgens. Not good, not terrible.
You failed to mention a very critical part of the description of the Lucens Reactor design. This particular design, much like the RBMK design in Chernobyl, used two types of moderator material, graphite and deuterated water (H2O also works), a difficult balancing act if there ever was one.
Both types of designs unintentionally incorporated uncharacterized positive void coefficient failure-modes which could allow unaccounted-for excess moderating material near the reactor fuel. Thus, when the coolant, being affected, couldn't maintain fuel temperature stability due to an excess of reactivity from the over-moderation event (keff >> 1), a meltdown ensued.
So it appears that the Swiss had a meltdown of a very similar type to the Chernobyl design, except in the Lucens design they had 1/2 to 1/3 the uranium enrichment level and less overall starting nuclear material that could get into a positive-feedback runaway situation. If this was publicly available knowledge, the Russians might have been able to modify their reactor and avoid a catastrophe.
The Russians new this. The soviet state didn't release its own research into the void physics to its own scientific community.
Russians knew this - they even had accidents in other rbmk reactors before chernobyl, but they did not share information between theimselves
The main problem at Lucens had been the use of magnesium along with CO2 and water in a high temperature environment. Since those charateristics were not present in the RBMK reactors, the Soviets would have considered them to be safe anyway.
It has to be said that the problems of Lucens were even easier to predict than those of the RBMK reactors, since it was well known that the Magnox alloys were rapidly corroded by water (it was for that reason the "magnox" British reactors had no water in the core, and that had not completely saved them anyway) even more since in a CO2 atmosphere water forms carbonic acid. In the original design, the magnesium was not directly in contact with water, but it needed only a small leakage.
Keep in mind, cost-effectiveness was everything for the Soviets. They didn't even build their NPP's with containment buildings, due to cost. I seriously doubt they would accept the cost of overhauling relatively new reactors.
@@Waldemarvonanhalt the pwr reactors where build with an containment building but due to the hot swapping of fuel in the RBMK reactor they didn't want to build one because it would remove that feature
I thought only Tony stark could build a reactor in a cave
last time I was this early the day shift haven't ended yet
😂😂
pff its past bed time for us night shift people here in merica'
thats right, merica'
@@letterslayer7814 i can assure most accidents at some point involves a shift change, here and the CSB videos
The figurines are what always make me chuckle
Me too. We didn't get a "bollocks" this time, but we *did* get an "Oh s*ht" which is on par :)
They always remind me of those illustrations in the foreign language text-books from high-school!
This comment is to boost our friend Al Go-Rhythm.
thx for saving this from 0 views.
Not to be confused with my proto-internet electronica synth group, the Al Gore Rhythms 😎
@@duhluth They invented the internet!
That's such a sad and premature end to what could have been a marvellous piece of technology and engineering.
Reactors in caves may have problems, but it still seems like a better idea than how Chernobyl was built.
You do realise that after the accident in 86 the other 3 reactors continued operating till 91,96,2000 respectively and there are still another 10 operational.
There's nothing wrong with RBMK-1000 reactors so long as they are operated according to spec. Plus the remaining had modifications post 86.
Is chernobyl was in the position, the power of the blast would have demolishes the entire side, without the capability to dose of the 🔥... the core would have polluted the underground water traveling towards the lower points
Spicy Wolf Why would the RBMK-1000 design need to be modified after 1986 if there was nothing wrong with it in the first place? 💀
If it was a man made cave and properly sealed. I would highly advise against using an existing cave without proper engineering. Caves are formed through years of water running through and carving the cave. So there are many paths for any nuclear mishap to disperse.
@@Zonda1996 they added more safety measure to the control computers and changed a few mechanical feeds. The reactor design itself was unchanged.
They even used the same design and scaled it down to make 30MW mini reactors
Magnesium in a reactore core, plus cooled whit CO2, ingres of water.
If that isnt concerning go a head and turn reactor on.
Nuts...
Overheat magnesium and it burns in CO2, water reacts whit Mg at room temps realisin H2 (at Mg melting temp thats explosive), CO2 disolved in water is a weak acid but its more than fast at coroding Mg, product is carbonate that acts as a calk.
Nice desighn, nuts...
I remember as a kid seeing a demonstration on a tv science show how, something impossible could happen - a metal burning! They squirted some water on magnesium powder and it burst into flames. I also remember when Honda started making magnesium engine covers for some of their motorcycles, and mechanics quickly learned not to weld near those magnesium parts. How do you fight a magnesium fire? You hose down everything near by so it won't burn, and let the magnesium burn itself out. This reactor probably was a brilliant design, but only when everything goes right. Like all high tech, when things aren't within specs, things tend to go wrong quickly and catastrophically. The higher the level of technology, the less 'robust' (less able to withstand out of spec excursions) the device.
@@jfan4reva Sand, cement, that kind of stuff will mostly snuff a magnesium fire.
Rb - the amphibious element ("ribit" - frog)
I'll show myself out.
🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣👍
The one character I let die on purpose.
Nuclear humor.
@@BrilliantDesignOnline Atomic-mirth?
"unless you're Sayano-Shushenskaya" - hmmm, a hint for a future video????
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sayano-Shushenskaya_Dam
If you want dam accidents, should probably go with one of the worst in modern times, en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vajont_Dam
"The control room experienced 10 times the maximum admissible concentration for occupational exposure... Rb 88 which has a short half-life of around 18 minutes". That's still 5 times the maximum admissible concentration tho
10:04 For as much of a shame it is this facility ended up being a write off, abandoned structures are one of my favorite things to learn about and explore, and this sequence of shots here is absolutely breathtaking. My artsy side loves this.
Don’t have time to watch right now, pre liking and commenting how excited I am.
Thank you!
One little thing: hydroelectric is actually much less safe than fission, many more people are killed in hydroelectric disasters and the environment is often much more affected.
That’s why you don’t have to worry about melting fuel if your fuel’s already melted msr
As much as I enjoy your weekly disaster content, I honestly enjoy your animations the most that's what truly makes the videos. Keep up the awesome work cheers
I’ve always appreciated, and watched your nuclear reactor videos. They’re all very informative, and well made.
Thank you
Amazing video man, Could you please do the West Lake Landfill next? I know all about it already but I think we all love your style of covering disasters!
Really enjoying the videos. Keep up the good work
Thank you
Hi, random comment. I only just found your channel a few weeks ago. I've been going through all of your disaster videos days straight now. Keep it up!
Thanks again for educating us! 🤓🥸🤠😎
Always clear and informative....I enjoy the work, thank you.
Love this channel. The only bad thing is the videos aren't long enough
The thing about hydro is you're still putting potential millions at risk downstream and even more if vital crop fields and ranches downstream are at risk should the damn fail as well, causing food shortages and severe short term economic repercussions. In addition, dams greatly disrupt the natural ecosystems they are built upon, requiring expensive work arounds to hopefully allow fish to migrate about but that still don't exactly replace a continuous river that is safe and easy for aquatic life to move up and downstream within.
Just like the huge floods going on in china that no ones been talking about.
There is no harmless human activity. We just try to minimise the harm where we can. Sadly the "I'm against that brigade" realised that there is always a down side to any activity and latch on to that to achieve their nimby aims. I know of an offshore windfarm that was not developed because it might interfere with the life cycle of some bird that no one has ever seen on the sight. As a result you could argue that we delayed the closure of our older coal burning generators for a number of years more than we might have. Despite this, the activists responsible will count themselves great heroes of the environment!🙄
Humans are basically an infestation on an otherwise rather pleasant planet and that is the long and the short of it. If we all tried to do our bit for the environment rather than blaming everyone but ourselves, then we might do a lot better better.
Every large damn results in a major environmental mess. In theory, these issues are mitigated. In practice, that's not really the case. Wind and geo-thermal seem to be better in terms of environmental impact.
@romaneeconti02 I'm going to assume that was sarcasm. It's not liberals who would see a complete end to red tape and regulations.
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Environmental_policy_of_the_Donald_Trump_administration
They first had planned to build it in Zürich (big city in Switzerland). Lukily they decided to build it elsewhere.
Another interesting and informative video. Enjoyed it thoroughly! Thanks!
Love your videos ! Keep up the good work
Thank you!
very interesting video i have been waiting for. keep it up! greetings from Switzerland!
Thank you!
Good video mate
Thank you
The last time I was this early, the reactor chamber was still spewing radiation
This is very educating, keep it up!
When it comes to nuclear reactors, Murphy's Law always applies.
Another amazing video.
"it's all mine" made me giggle
😬
Keep up the fantastic work on your great content Plainly Difficult!
Talking about Dams, could you do any Dam failures? That would be sweet
There’s a couple videos soon 😉
Plainly Difficult YESSSSSSSSS
He already did Johnstown.
nice, I can't get enough of these
I love your vids, fascinating stuff
Loved the animations!
One thing I've learned from this channel is that there have been a frightening number of accidents related to nuclear power.
There's a lot of accidents related to generating electricity period to be honest, coal and natural power plants don't have a spotless safety record either but death by boiler explosion or being buried in a coal pile avalanche isn't as slow and unpleasant to look at as death by acute radiation syndrome.
I really enjoy your work. Kudos to you.
Love this channel!
Thank you
Why did the safety rupture disk vent the coolant into the reaction chamber? I mean it would not take that much extra effort to provide an "overflow tank" since in case of an accident the coolant would be (and was) contaminated. If the unit is suffering an overpressure accident it would be a risk.
This really put the nuclear bomb on Switzerland’s nuclear program!
I’ll show myself out
Nice channel, love disaster analysis.
Thank you
Always eat my lunch while watching your vids!
Commenting for the algorithm cuz these videos are dope
LOOK AT THAT INTERACTION
They didn't learn: 2014 it became public that workers put 6 holes in the primary containment at nuclear power plant Leibstadt /Swiss. Reason: they wanted to put fire extinguishers there.... Thank you for your great videos!
Swiss: "We'll make cheese, but put a bunch of holes in it."
Also the Swiss: "We'll make Reactors with Graphite, but put a bunch of holes in it."
aaah, finaly, ive searched for this a while back on this channel ;) thx alot!
btw. we have still the oldest reactor in use in switzerland....hope nothing happen there 🤔
@@Peatch13
Beznau , 51 years in use...!
INTERESTING PLACE IDEA: I don't know the full details but there is a place in Kent (UK) called St Mary's Island which has a history of buried nuclear waste with a housing estate on top, apparently the first residents had to take iodine tablets? Not sure of whats rumor or fact but definitely worth looking into. Love your channel BTW.
Is that a cue mark before ad breaks? I'm new to the channel and I must say that I love that and although it's small it is a nice thing to make this channel stand out a bit
Thanks for sharing!
Great start to my YT visit, a meltdown!
I would say the location saved a whole load of contamination from being released into the atmospher. If only it was above ground, they could have just let all the radiation escape, opps, we wont do it again. lol
Another super good video 👍 😁
Nicely informative video.
Having a test reactor built underground actually is quite brilliant if you ask me.
"Hydroelectricity is safer"
The list of biggest power plant disasters has determined that that is a lie
As always; don’t forget the human factors...
Well when a hydro disaster happens, things arent ruined for a thousand years. Thats a uniquely nuclear problem
Water destroys everything,okay,but you can reuse the flooded lands right after.
Pripyat isn’t destroyed but tauted up
@@jebes909090 Pripyat isn't ruined. We could always use more nature conservatories!
@@RipleySawzen Scientists also found a fungus in the area affected by Chernobyl that decomposes radioactive materials. It eats it then turns it into energy.
I like this channel great job keep it up. The nuclear stuff is awesome. Im curries about the hydroelectric incident you mentioned though towards the end. What was the name?
Speaking of hydro power being so ultra safe...can you do an episode about the St. Francis Dam failure in California in 1928? It happened close to my hometown.
Oh man I can’t wait to see a video about my meltdown
If an incident (not full-blown accident) might be of interest, you might look at the water hammer incident at the Ågesta reactor outside Stockholm.
The reactor was eventually closed, but most of it is still there today.
Well thats a weird one, usually the Swiss are very very careful about what they do. I also was taken aback by what I would have thought was a safe configuration doing the Swiss no good at all.
Bravo. Always fun.
I always have the feeling you use a different unit for radiation every time. I always need to calculate to a unit a have a feeling for.
Critic on a very high level. I enjoy your videos very much!
Your feeling is probably correct since at different times different units were used by people controlling those stations
Interesting. I had not heard of this reactor before.
Fantastic. 🙂
I would like to draw your attention to the small building in front of the dam at 1:14 - This is, in fact, a 9-story building.
The dam is the Grande Dixence dam - at 285 meters, it's the tallest building in Switzerland.
With the 15 million tonnes of concrete used for the dam, you could build a wall around earth's equator 1.5 meters high and 10 cm thick.
@5:01
"In December ninteen-sixty **EIGHT**"
Hehe
Merci beaucoup. Ce Video etait tres interessant.
A video on the MSRE would be a good idea.
I highly recommend agains talking about pressure in "mpa"
It is unclear whether you mean milipascal or megapascal, both being written either mPa or MPa.
The swiss built something into a mountain. Let me put on my surprised face.
I would like to ask you what you do for work? I've been watching you for a long time. Could for maybe do a live stream Q&A or maybe a pre recorded Q&A
Thanks for the idea!
The contaminated heavy water was dealt with efficiently. By tipping the contamination into the nearest river it was able to flush away to the ocean allowing nature to deal with it effectively by having sea salt and sunlight neutralising it very quickly.
Notice him algorithm-senpai!
😬
Calling hydro safer than nuclear is not really looking at the actual deaths per amount of energy produced. Hydro is actually one of the worst offenders!
When you consider that EVERY person who has touched water has, inevitably, died!
Are there any non-corrosive cladding options? Or corrosion inhibitor additives that could be used? Like, make the whole thing as "passively" safe as possible. Maybe cooling fans that are directly core-heat-powered (more heat = more cooling, and no external power issues)?
Curious 'Plainly Difficult', but what do you base your scale on?? Just curious, and thanks for the vid.
Curious for some time about the classical intro, PD, sounds like Sibelius?
I would love an in depth Chernobyl video, from the building of the reactor and town of Pripyat to the remnants left behinde due to nuclear stupidity. I'd love that!
More like remains of pathological management system typical to totalitarian regimes.
As for remnangs due to anti-nuclear stupidity - whole Earth is rapidly moving towards becoming onem due to climate change
Small note: the flag you used was the marine flag. The „proper“ Swiss flag is square.
99% likes! Hell yeah! Love this channel and its quarks! (All pun intended)
Thank you!
Something makes me think, that they didnt consult any experienced reactor designers before building this fiasco.
If magnesium burns in blocks of DRY ICE, using magnesium alloys in CO2-cooled reactors would seem to make perfect sense to me! 😬🔥
When you get one of those minecraft mods with a nuclear reactor in it and you start building it not knowing how it goes together
Do you have an explanation of your disaster scale anywhere? I've watched a few videos but I'm still not sure if 9 or 1 is the worst
1-10, with teen being a gift from hell. So the worst
It'd be cool if you could cover Lake Karachay
I love watching your videos while i eat, because these nuclear disasters are the only to be worse than my cooking skills, so they distract me from my disastrous meals xD
Great vid again, thanks!
what level on the plainly difficult disast'o'meter was the meal today?
@@xiro6 6. I got lucky today, the flavor didn't killed me. But with time I start thinking that the meltdown is about to come. The emergency venting might be harmful to the ecosystem.