See inside the Nine Mile 2 nuclear reactor
Вставка
- Опубліковано 11 вер 2024
- A tour through the Nine Mile Point Nuclear Station in Oswego, N.Y., offering a rare glimpse inside the reactor during a refueling outage. Video by Lauren Long | llong@syracuse.com
Having worked nuclear shut downs for over 30 years, I can tell you that they are extremely safe. There are back ups for back ups. It was funny to here the description about it being a different world. Seems normal to me. 😀😀
"There are back ups for back ups" Just like Three Mile ?
@@saintq3888, Good comment, because I'm sure many who don't work in the industry, would say the same thing. I will pass along some information. In the United States there are 98, there used to be 119, operating nuclear reactors in use, the first one was put on line in the 1950's. Through the years, from the fifties until today, we have had one incident, TMI. Now think about this, 119 units running for nearly 5 decades with absolutely no issues, partly because of the NRC, but mostly because of design and the integrity of the owners, except for 1, which turns out happened because of a little man who was afraid to lose his job if he shut the unit down. By the time he made the right decision it was almost too late. I say almost because it was stopped in time before any dangerous amounts of radiation was released. Harm to people living in the surrounding area = none. Harm to anyone who worked in the facility = none. Harm to wildlife in the area = none. Harm even to any fish in the water near the unit = none. Should this of happened? No, absolutely not. Have steps been taken to make sure it doesn't happen again? Yes, absolutely.
It was a joke. I liked the movie a lot.
@Damnit Bobby None of my comments were about foreign countries. Japan nor Russia have the NRC.
@Damnit Bobby, Since I don't know you I would say that I don't care whether you trust me or not. That's up to you, but the video proved my information out.
Beautiful, powerful, clean, nuclear power.
that's not a look inside that a look inside the containment building and some of the turbine hall but there's no pictures or videos of inside of the reactor
Obviously you can't look inside of the reactor because it has to be kept under water to prevent lethal doses of radiation from escaping and to keep the core cool. The spent fuel rods would kill the workers if there was no water between the fuel rods and the workers.
It doesn't look exciting - you'll see a hexagonal grid of fuel rod guides and not much else.
the title is misleading, it should be "See inside the Nine Mile 2 *reactor containment building*"
@@acmefixer1 The water would be clear. Real reason is it's a proliferation risk and the IAEA would spit feathers at the US federal government for allowing such a thing. It's literally because it's a no-no. Would be nice to see but if you really want to see it you'd have to get a job working on these reactors. Same type of reactor as the one The Proper People explored if you want to have a good look inside one with no water but a decent chunk of the reactor vessel and piping removed...
You did see the top of the reactor come off of the core!
That toolbox is a mess. I'm surprised there is no tool control like in aviation.
Dude's like "where's the 10mm spanner?"
First thing I thought when I saw it.
Lol I thought the same thing
The need for basic mechanic hand tools is rare. Aviation is nowhere near as strict as a NPP. The FAA is a joke compared to the NRC.
Where did that 10mm socket go.....
Just shows how incredibly well built and honestly - how incredibly safe US nuclear power systems truly are- that despite a state of the art computer telling the operators the water level was low, they not only ignored it, then President Jimmy Carter, a nuclear physicist himself also agreed to lower the water level further, ignoring the computer system. That with a almost bone dry core for several days, the result was a mere 3/4” meltdown and the release of some steam with elevated radiation levels that never caused any issues to anyone in the surrounding area. 3 Mile was a human stupidity issue, not a plant issue. The press overblew the incident and it was a big to do about nothing in the end.
I beg to differ...42% of the core vaporized at TMI. Those deadly vapors went somewhere...the metallic air that every living thing inhaled was most of it.
D Wetick it didn’t vaporize. That statement is categorically false. TMI2 core suffered large amounts of damage in that the fuel rods shattered and were in a pile of rubble at the floor of the reactor casket. Which the reactor casket only suffered a minor 3/4” meltdown to it. It’s 5’ thick.
As for the steam release, the NRC findings showed at the reactor directly the maximum steam release exposure was a mere 100-125 millirem. Outside of the area it dropped significantly. To put that into perspective an X-ray is 6 millrem. They also conducted a 20 year study, no cases of cancer or any birth defects were traced to the steam release.
It took those engineers ~16 hours to figure out that they needed to add more coolant to the overheating reactor. It's almost like someone left Homer Simpson in charge.
DirtyBlastard - Jimmy Carter or Homer Simpson... same thing. I seriously believe Mr Peanut purposely wanted that reactor to fail. For a Nuclear physicist- he sure didn’t seem to know the basics of nuclear power plant design.
That's dishonest. The people were not aware that there were several oddities in how the control room was designed. For instance many believed that one light indicated that water was running into the reactor when in fact it meant that the writer pump was running. It just wasnt optimised. It wasnt really anyone's fault
As I understand it, you can actually see the real core right through the water when doing this. I'm disappointed that the video did not show this, per the title - all they had to do was tilt the camera down, and presumably there were some underwater lights.
That's not be fun, the RPV has a lot of neutron reflectors, with the little camera knowledge I have the camera may well not function from the decay heat and natural reactivity of the fuel.
(Plus I'm pretty sure a lot of this is just released footage from the plant and approved tour routes)
Jess : What I am saying is that when refueling, you have the reactor lid removed, and the top is covered in lots of clear water to stop the radiation. You send a device down on a crane to grab the top of each fuel assembly you want to remove, pull them up, and slide them over to a cooling off spot in the spent fuel pool. During this whole time, the real core can be seen right through the water. The water blocks the neutrons, so the camera should work fine.
You're right, ive worked these outages before. you can see straight down into the cavity and see 15 cameras inspecting different parts of the reactor.
agree. an awesome opportunity utterly wasted.
here's a MUCH better video -> ua-cam.com/video/IoCfapqYy00/v-deo.html
I came here to see the insides of a reactor, I was massively disappointed, thanks 👍🏼
Great video, excellent narration too. Would have quite happily watched loads more video inside the reactor 😁
The allowed dosage that workers have is still much lower than NRC standards
So depressed Indian Point had to be shut down. The stigma in politics against nuclear is saddening.
It doesn't jibe with the NWO for the bourgeois to have access to plentiful, affordable energy. Remember Hussein Obama saying that electricity rates would "necessarily skyrocket"? Doesn't affect them.
@@dannywilliamson3340
Yeah they couldn’t care. Nine Mile Point is great, and more modern looking. Happy that upstate has three plants. Though, Cuomo who fought to shut down Indian Point also had saved Fitzpatrik beforehand which is great. Switching ownership from Entergy to Exelon.
I remember going there on a field-trip back when I lived in Rome NY, back in '68. Interesting to see what is beyond the visitors center and compare that to what an A4W Naval reactor looks like.
Show the public how the rods are moved from the reactor to the spent fuel pool !
Are you asking how or do you want others to see? It never surfaces, it goes through a tube in the cavity(pool) and over to the spent fuel pool outside of the containment structure
It's kind of like pulling a Twizzler from the package.
@@KirkHermary But through a hole in the package while the package is under water.
I can't see any graphite looks like I'm delusional 😔😔
That’s because there isn’t graphite, there are no graphite moderated reactors in the US... they all have a PVC and can’t be used due to safety.
Matt Patt you missed the joke buddy
YOU DIDN'T SEE IT BECAUSE IT'S NOT THERE!
Its not there, litterally
Very interesting. I would appear from this limited material that these technicians are working under an abundance of safety measures. Obviously this is very dangerous work requiring proper training and caution on the part of the employees. The need for electricity is paramount and nuclear energy seems the most cost effective way to provide it.
20 years ago we had spots for our hands to each go into separate evaluation areas. I don't see this on this video!
What a carry on CANDU refuels on load as did the Magnox and AGR
As a fan of the walking dead, I always wondered what happened to the nuclear reactor power stations after the collapse. The TV show never explored this to my knowledge but curious if they went to fail safe or leaking somewhere in that fictional but real world.
wonniewarrior everyone would develop cancer and earth would ve poison within years
wonniewarrior If you insert all control rods, which is what happens in the event of say, and earthquake, automatically, then the reaction is basically nullified. I'm not too sure long term how well that holds up, but in cases like Fukushima or Chernobyl (not a nuclear disaster but a lack of necessary safeguards disaster), inserting control rods when fission rates are very high will not have a very significant affect, to my knowledge.
As others have said. They'd just put control rods in, and in the candu reactor they would poison the fuel so the reaction is immediately stopped. They question remains how would they keep cooling water circulating. As backup power wont last very long.
Probably the reason why British Magnox and AGR are considered the safest designs going although not highest powered 800Mw at most.. In the event of complete power failure and circulation pump failure The Carbon Dioxide gas used to cool these reactors would naturally circulate through heat convection alone. Slowing plenty of time for repaired to be made. They also have the added advantage of being able to be hot refuelled, meaning they don’t need to be shut down whilst refuelling takes place...
@richard mccann what?
Why does it have to be every 2 years?! I thought this had to be done every 100 years. This is a massive maaaasssive difference.
You're probably thinking of decommissioning. This is when the fuel is swapped over to new positions (kind of like rotating your tires so they wear evenly) and if it's been in for 6 years, then it's replaced.
There is actually plenty of fuel left in the rods after 6 years. You can recycle it into something call MOX and reuse it, but right now it's cheaper to mine fresh uranium and the used stuff is stored.
Navy reactors on Aircraft carriers and submarines last 20-30 years.
@@letsburn00 I must be thinking about the subs. It seems reasonable for 2 years, but I've just never given it much thought. Seemed like an amazing number to think at least 20-50 years service life and just be all wow about it. Seems dangerous to just store nuclear waste.
@@joblessalex it's probably in it's safest position in when in storage. It just sits in the bottom of a pool, slowly becoming less radioactive.
Ideally, we would recycle all the fuel, but the price of uranium is low enough that they don't. Sadly, the coal industry spread enough fear about nuclear that we stopped building reactors.
I left Syracuse in 1988, after 26 yrs... my dad’s construction firm had a number of long term contracts with the firms and agencies that ran the 9M operations... I was of the understanding that the entire 9M operation was shutdown and taken out of service, yet here I see a 2016 video of refueling?
J PR that facility is still online ..... there was talks of shutting Fitzpatrick down.... but not so
It's been continuously online since 1988 - including an uprating. It's a very well safely run facility.
You may be thinking of the Shoreham Nuclear Power Plant on Long Island that never achieved commercial operation. Similar design to NMP 2.
@@thomasmcnicholas8656 It was bought by Exelon in 2017 and still running.
are all workers drug and alcohol tested regularly? is there anybody that can answer my question please (nothing personal or disrespect ), this is the most powerful and devastated invisible force that the man created, if not used right
Yes - each nuclear power plant, it's employees and contractors are under a federally mandated "fitness for duty" program that includes pre-employment, random and for-cause drug/alcohol testing. Confirmed positive results generally mean the end of a career in nuclear power. I've even been called up for a random while working on the weekend.
The upper lid of the reactor must be super radioactive, how are they not removing it under water. Instread they keep the lid right beside near the workers. That very lid actually covers the core where nuclear fission takes place. How are they even taking it out of the water? Strange
It's never in water... the waterline is below the reactor pressure vessel head (the 'dome'). Between the head and the core is a steam separator and a steam dryer. Those are always kept under water in a laydown pool adjacent to the reactor cavity as they are right above core where the fuel is. The only radioactivity the reactor pressure vessel head receives is from the steam generated by the boiling water. The radionuclides from the steam have a very short half-life so they don't stay radioactive for very long (minutes). That said, there is still some minor exposure to radiation - but they all practice ALARA - As Low As Reasonably Achievable - dose exposure. Time, distance, shielding to sources of radioactivity determine your exposure - and the radioactive work permits when they sign in to the plant determine what your maximum exposure may be for the task you are doing. During outages, there is an aggregate dose exposure goal to stay under for the entire outage for everyone. ALARA waiting areas are marked by signs / flashing green lights where people wait until they're needed to perform a task as these areas have little or no dose. Generally dose exposure goals are met or exceeded through rigorous safe work practices, ALARA behaviors and other means to mitigate exposure through shielding and maintenance of the reactor internals during outage.
Not Great, Not terrible!
All of these huge, dramatic, costly productions are necessary because we insist on staying the course with outdated, wasteful light water moderated fuel cycles. We should have moved over to molten salt reactors decades ago.
Arent breeder reactors the way to go anyhow... they make their own fuel
@@tdgreenbay There are at least two companies working on fast spectrum molten salt breeder reactors. Bill Gates is financing one. I think they will be extremely efficient, but they're probably at least 10 years away from commercial operation. Current pressurized water reactors are quite excellent too, so we should build lots of those in the meantime.
@@phamnuwen9442 there is nothing wrong with pressurized water reactors we know more now than ever
@@tdgreenbay Yes, I know. Like I said, the best energy source on Earth, by far.
Yeah, I hear they don't even bother making steam in an MSR plant. There are just giant electrodes on the sides of the reactor vessel to hook up the jumper cables. So simple a caveman could do it.
Model T ford, reactor designs..............less than 1% of the fuel is actually burned up.
There's probably no tool turn in due to the tools being contaminated. Put in barrels and burried.
Nope. If they can't be decontaminated, they're stored until the next time they're needed in a contaminated area. The radiation from these things is minuscule, but since it's measurable, they can't be released to the outside world.
To make things clear: So the reactor is a giant drum filled with water (or heavy water) and there are euranium and control rods submerged into it?
The neutrons bounce from one rod to the other rods or is the fission happening inside the rods and the neutrons only hit other atoms inside the same rod?
It's just magic.
Neutrons from one rod, if they're captured at all, are captured by uranium atoms in another rod. It's like that because the neutron's energy level has to be reduced (thermalized) before it can be captured by another atom. That happens by bouncing them off the hydrogen atoms in the water.
The neutrons moving though the water at faster then light speed excite the water molecules. The excited protons give of the b
lue glow called Cherenkov
I find it amusing the toolbox the repair guy is working from is just as disorganized as mine. So I can say the my toolbox is just as organized as a nuclear technicians!
That probably wasn't HIS toolbox. It was probably a communal toolbox for everyone on the job. You know how messy something can get when everybody owns it, but nobody is responsible for it.
with all those employees and extra help they need to refuel it does this plant ever turn a profit? all the clothes and tools they use is nuclear waste and cant be thrown in the trash so how much does that cost and where does it go?
Uhhh... The video title said we'd see inside the reactor. We didn't even get a view of the water or fuel rods. Downvoted for lying and click bait. Also, as an aside, that work area looked like a friggin mess.
Is the music that plays at the end from Halo?
They have to dismantle the reactor to remove spent fuel rods and add new ones? That sounds crazy inefficient
They don't dismantle the whole thing. They just remove the closure head and move it off to the side. This exposes the fuel cells which are easily removed by an overhead crane.
if my memory serves me right the fuel rods just moved sideways from the reactor vessel to a swimming pool next to it. And when I say swimming pool it's actually swimming pool with so many feet above the fuel rods to protect you against radiation you can actually look down into it.
They only have to do this once every 6 years or so. Calling nuclear energy inefficient is laughably false. If you look at the energy density for uranium you see it doesn't even come anywhere close to any other existing methods. So this is actually crazy efficient.
@@Thumbsupurbum They never said anything about nuclear energy being inefficient, they said the design was inefficient. Most reactors can be refuelled without dismantling them, some can even be hot-refuelled, aka refuelled while still in operation.
2:19 that guy is not inspiring me with confidence !!! He needs kaizen foam or just tidy up your station!! Hope he found the right size and doesn’t round them reactor head bolts!!
If you swim in that water can you glow in a dark?
Mighty Jedi - do your research
No radiation or radioactive materials are glow in the dark except one or two rare elements are glow in the dark. Those decay fast though so they are hard to study. - W.D. Gaster.
Paul u already got ur answer by "do your research" ^^
@paul klein Fluorescence? No. Cherenkov radiation is common on powering up reactors. It's not Fluorescence, but a physical effect of radiation moving faster than the speed of light of the medium. Heavy water slows light, so Cherenkov radiation is charged particles moving faster than would otherwise allow.
@paul klein Blinded by my own intelligence... Oh boy starting out pretty agressive for someone getting their pop culture wrong. In an open reactor startup it would Glow blue, which is why many believe it should glow in the modern day. Not to mention heavy water in such plants has an unnatural color.
Yes, many isotopes exhibit fluorescence. However those aren't exposed to be seen glowing here. Some wine glass from the 60's isn't the main reason why that myth started. It was more likely from radium dials self-illuminating than it was UV light cast upon uranium. Radium dials were highly sought after during this time.
Really, Dunning Kruger effect? This is coming after you assert that the green glow myth was started by uranium glass. You wouldn't dare see fluorescence at a nuclear plant. You would however see Cherenkov radiation on UA-cam videos of test reactors which is why I mentioned it.
@paul klein 1) Yes no insults or ad homs were used, rather the tone is directly confrontational, which given the context is pretty agressive. I never mentioned hostility. You're continuing to jump on strawmen.
There are many things that glow green in UV. I pointed out 2 separate things that perpetuate the stereotype.
A) Cherenkov radiation would be the most likely. Your original statement is beside the point and jumping on this further is counterproductive.
B) The "glow" became a popular portrayal due to radium dials, not uranium.
Nothing I said about the above was incorrect. You took my comment to you out of context.
2) sentence wasn't botched. Fuel rods are clad in zirconium alloy, thus are not exposed.
3) Rather than asking for clarification you decide to assume and assert. I'm not one to fill out essays on the internet anymore so if I left anything out it's purely because it isn't worth my time.
Oh and my name? Once again you decided to assume. It's a carryover from when I was a Christian. I'm no longer religious. Was that so hard to ask? This exemplifies the problem with this conversation. Miscommunication and assumptions. Needless to say I won't be furthering this. Goodbye
1:49 bro 🗿
Wonder where the high level (lethal dose in one second standing in front of) spent fuel bundles will end up? Other nations reprocess.. this sparks fears of nuclear proliferation (the spent bundles are full of Plutonium 239 just waiting to be separated and converted into weapons. Scary and fascinating technology we are stuck with. Great report here 👏
Looks like a hospital.
Disometer ha ha ha.
Dosimeter.
Time to update reactors to genIV.
In this old gen2 reactor type fuel becomes contaminated by fission products and only 0.5% of the potential energy is used in the "spent" fuel. Liquid fuel allow removal of xenon and actinides. Look into molten salt reactors and molten lead reactors. No water and 2000 psi pressure vessels.
6 years. Not great, not terrible
2:21 You'd think they would get better quality tools than those cheap gearwrench wannabes.
i want to work in nuclear plant
Is it a disemeter or a dossimiter?
Dossimiter
dosimeter
2:24 I'm a bit surprised. Areo dose rate 5-15 mrem per hour? That's about 50 times background... Is that standard in these procedures?
There is still some minor exposure to radiation - but they all practice ALARA - 'As Low As Reasonably Achievable' - dose exposure. Time, distance, shielding to sources of radioactivity determine your exposure - and the radioactive work permits when they sign in to the plant determine what your maximum exposure may be for the task you are doing. During outages, there is an aggregate dose exposure goal to stay under for the entire outage for everyone. ALARA waiting areas are marked by signs / flashing green lights where people wait until they're needed to perform a task as these areas have little or no dose. Generally dose exposure goals are met or exceeded through rigorous safe work practices, ALARA behaviors and other means to mitigate exposure through shielding and maintenance of the reactor internals during outage.
Oooo scary music
SoUp TiMe
Посмотрел я на всю эту хрень и стало ясно, что реакторы РБМК хоть и имеют ряд существенных недостатков в обслуживании всётаки намного проще и технологичнее чем эти ВВЭР . Зря их так говном поливали, хоть и к Долежалю и есть вопросы, но стоило довести до ума их конструкцию чтобы не лазать по пояс в радиоактивной воде. РЗМ всё это делает автоматически и дистанционно не останавливая реактор и не разбирая его.
Тем не менее, с графитовой деформацией проблем куча. В идеале, если делать канальный энергореактор, то лучше делать его с тяжёлой водой, по типу CANDU или КС-150.
Get cobalt magnets and a semicircle stainless steel bowl. Surround the magnets around the bowl on outside.. Then cut a small hole on bottom. Get a 100 watt only heat rod from amazon for 10 dollars. the 100 Wat rods go about 280 degrees normally (safe) however put the rod in the hole on the center of bowl. Then attach a 4 ft nickel rod that cost 5 bucks. a nickel rod can support 1500 degrees. after attaching nickel rod to 100 wat heat rod. plug it in. The cobalt magnets will force a curie effect. all of the sudden under 5 seconds the 100 watt rod is reaching over 1200 degrees because the magnetic field is going nuts with friction.. and also the field is being forced after the explosion back to center because the magnets are pulling it back like the sun. You now have over 1000 watts of energy at only 100 watts.. cost to make is about 50 dollars. Now put that over 1000 degree nickel rod in a water tank to boil water or make steam (free heat almost).. And screw the energy department. YOu might want to get a giger counter to check because it might not need uranium to have safe effect (as hint). When vibrating electrons and heating material the effects are the same as a small reactor. I built it by accident a couple years back looking to make heat on no energy. Here is you easy stop guide.. and screw the system.dsdsf
Waste of time!
It's so messy omg.
This is only way to provide cheap power.
So true
No Nukes !
Wasted 3min of my life. Change the title to “Inside a reactor building”.
To me they just look far to expensive and dangerous to maintain and de-commission.
See, in canada we dont have to turn off our reactors to put new fuel in them. Bwr are so un safe.
Nuclear should be banned world wide
Why? It's the safest energy source we have.
ourworldindata.org/what-is-the-safest-form-of-energy
I strongly support that 'motion' : nuclear power stations should be banned gradually and mercilessly . Nuclear power : NO THANK YOU. Firstly, the cost of that industry.....secondly, the secrecy about it? Why ? I smell a rat there.
@@paulraymondmargeot9680 Your nose is broken.
Then how could we make cancer meds without it?
3 mile
No. Nine Mile is in New York State on Lake Ontario. Three Mile Island is near Harrisburg, PA. There are 2 other plants closer to Philadelphia.
Still not something id live near. Im very glad australia never went this way.
Its crazy that despite the abundance of produced power, nuclear power stations dont make electricity cheaper...
I had the opportunity to work at an outage at unit 2 a number of years ago. thank god i did the place has unbelievable safety record and would have no problem of living next to the plants as in yes there are 3
You can thank the fossil fuel industry for the price of those kilowatt hours.
Natural gas is cheap - until it isn't. Prices are subject to market forces (supply & demand) and can fluctuate wildly. Nuclear generation costs are generally stable. Fuel is purchased every 2 years.
Dinosaurs obsolete over expensive over cost overrun
Get cobalt magnets and a semicircle stainless steel bowl. Surround the magnets around the bowl on outside.. Then cut a small hole on bottom. Get a 100 watt only heat rod from amazon for 10 dollars. the 100 Wat rods go about 280 degrees normally (safe) however put the rod in the hole on the center of bowl. Then attach a 4 ft nickel rod that cost 5 bucks. a nickel rod can support 1500 degrees. after attaching nickel rod to 100 wat heat rod. plug it in. The cobalt magnets will force a curie effect. all of the sudden under 5 seconds the 100 watt rod is reaching over 1200 degrees because the magnetic field is going nuts with friction.. and also the field is being forced after the explosion back to center because the magnets are pulling it back like the sun. You now have over 1000 watts of energy at only 100 watts.. cost to make is about 50 dollars. Now put that over 1000 degree nickel rod in a water tank to boil water or make steam (free heat almost).. And screw the energy department. YOu might want to get a giger counter to check because it might not need uranium to have safe effect (as hint). When vibrating electrons and heating material the effects are the same as a small reactor. I built it by accident a couple years back looking to make heat on no energy. Here is you easy stop guide.. and screw the system.dsf
Get cobalt magnets and a semicircle stainless steel bowl. Surround the magnets around the bowl on outside.. Then cut a small hole on bottom. Get a 100 watt only heat rod from amazon for 10 dollars. the 100 Wat rods go about 280 degrees normally (safe) however put the rod in the hole on the center of bowl. Then attach a 4 ft nickel rod that cost 5 bucks. a nickel rod can support 1500 degrees. after attaching nickel rod to 100 wat heat rod. plug it in. The cobalt magnets will force a curie effect. all of the sudden under 5 seconds the 100 watt rod is reaching over 1200 degrees because the magnetic field is going nuts with friction.. and also the field is being forced after the explosion back to center because the magnets are pulling it back like the sun. You now have over 1000 watts of energy at only 100 watts.. cost to make is about 50 dollars. Now put that over 1000 degree nickel rod in a water tank to boil water or make steam (free heat almost).. And screw the energy department. YOu might want to get a giger counter to check because it might not need uranium to have safe effect (as hint). When vibrating electrons and heating material the effects are the same as a small reactor. I built it by accident a couple years back looking to make heat on no energy. Here is you easy stop guide.. and screw the system.sdfdsdsf