37 ms·
Fire extinguished at Ukraine nuclear power plant, Europe's largest
- deleted 5y ago[deleted]
- perihelions 5y agoThe IAEA has been issuing a constant stream of very shrill warnings about Ukraine's NPP's on their press channel here: https://www.iaea.org/news?type=3243 https://www.iaea.org/news?type=3243 ("Press releases")
- rainworld 5y ago
- zeven7 5y ago> Ukrainians who started firing at a Russian convoy with RPGs. The way this is phrased makes it sound like the Russian convoy was minding its own business and suddenly Ukrainians started picking a fight -- which is clearly not the case.
- topspin 5y agoCombat and fires could kill power supply that is actively cooling cores. Unless you have a detailed, up to date design diagram of the entire facility that proves the on-site and/or off-site power supply is not in jeopardy then you don't know what you're talking about.
- ardit33 5y agoRussian puppet accounts even here at HN.
- xdennis 5y agoHonestly, I see more here than, say, Reddit. HN needs to be more proactive about this.
- Mo3 5y agoIf this holds true, that would not be a good development at all. I hope no one gets too emotional now.
- DantesKite 5y ago“Should emphasize there's a LOT of safeguards in place that make a radiation leak unlikely. Still, doesn't seem very wise.” https://twitter.com/inteldoge/status/1499542139155398659?s=21 https://twitter.com/inteldoge/status/1499542139155398659?s=2...
- mkr-hn 5y agoThe account seems credible enough, but there's something weird about citing a military intel account named and themed on a meme.
- ummonk 5y agoIt's just one of many OSINT accounts on Twitter that report / summarize what's coming through via both Telegram users and official sources.
- topspin 5y agoThese are 80's era Soviet VVER PWRs. They are better designs than Chernobyl style RBMKs, but they're not at par with Western PWRs. In particular they lack much of the automation expected in Western designs. The danger here is if these were still operating at power when the Russians rolled in and residual heat is not removed because operators have fled or the power gets cut then the core(s) will melt. Melting cores generate hydrogen gas which then explodes. Also, there is probably a large quantity of spent fuel on site, some of which needs active cooling as well.
- ardit33 5y ago
- woodruffw 5y agoIt'd be nice to have a source for that claim other from a Florida Senator. I don't think he got that information from his Intelligence Committee seat.
- learc83 5y agoHe’s the vice chairman of the intelligence committee. He is one of 4 members of congress who have much more access to intelligence.
- pishpash 5y ago
- bb123 5y agoI don’t see anything in the link suggesting radiation is spiking?
- Trasmatta 5y ago> Radiation is spiking as well Please don't make claims like this without a source
- fortran77 5y agoWhy not just ask for the source?
- deleted 5y ago[deleted]
- perihelions 5y ago- "A government official told The Associated Press that elevated levels of radiation were detected near the site of the plant, which provides about 25% of Ukraine’s power generation." https://apnews.com/article/russia-ukraine-united-nations-general-assembly-volodymyr-zelenskyy-kyiv-moscow-a3092d8e476949ed7c55607a645a9154 https://apnews.com/article/russia-ukraine-united-nations-gen...
- ardit33 5y ago
- jtbayly 5y agoSource?
- ardit33 5y agoBloomberg. Futures are down as well Live feed of the shelling https://youtu.be/fYUT36YGOh8 https://youtu.be/fYUT36YGOh8
- Daneel_ 5y ago“A government official told The Associated Press that elevated levels of radiation were detected near the site of the plant” Closest I could find on Bloomberg, from this page: https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2022-03-03/refugee-count-tops-1-million-russians-besiege-ukraine-ports https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2022-03-03/refugee-c... But also in the same article: “..shells were falling directly on the Zaporizhzhia plant and had set fire to one of the facility's six reactors. That reactor is under renovation and not operating, but there is nuclear fuel inside, he said.” So at worst a small-scale leak.
- dTal 5y agoI'm not sure how you get "at worst a small scale leak" from "fueled nuclear reactor actively on fire".
- gt565k 5y agoit's irresponsible sensationalist propaganda by MSM the IAEA has already confirmed the plant is fine https://twitter.com/iaeaorg/status/1499562515340177416 https://twitter.com/iaeaorg/status/1499562515340177416 "#Ukraine tells IAEA that fire at site of #Zaporizhzhia Nuclear Power Plant has not affected “essential” equipment, plant personnel taking mitigatory actions." I get it's a war, but I can't take the news cycle anymore. Full of unconfirmed BS. Ghost of Kyiv, Snake Island, etc.
- mrtksn 5y agoIt's not just on fire, it has been shelled by the Russian troops and there's a live feed where you can watch it as it happens: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fYUT36YGOh8 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fYUT36YGOh8
- ISL 5y agoYou can see munitions impacts about 2 hr ago as well as somewhat later (will edit in a moment). Flares ~1:36 ago. These timestamps relative to ~1715 PST.
- Zandikar 5y agohttps://twitter.com/AlexandruC4/status/1499546302786510853 https://twitter.com/AlexandruC4/status/1499546302786510853 more recent firing, from about 15minutes ago as well.
- galangalalgol 5y agosomeone elsewhere in this thread wrote that bombing a nuclear plant was considered a war crime, if this is on video, will it likely be used in the current UN investigation of Russian war crimes?
- dragonwriter 5y agoIt will almost certainly be a subject of the current International Criminal Court investigation, I would think. But, there is no shortage of work for that investigation.
- methyl 5y agoThey already commited a lot other of war crimes in past 9 days, it doesn’t really matter for Putin. It seems he has nothing to loose and until his people will stand against him, he will just continue “according to the plan”.
- estro0182 5y agoI would argue that this is a near equivalence of nuclear war with Ukraine. A well-/mis-placed Russian artillery shell could cause a loss of reactor integrity and meltdown, no? EDIT: according to child comments, a meltdown is unlikely/impossible, but spread of radioactive particles due to a direct strike is possible.
- shadowgovt 5y agoProbably not. Reactors generally can't melt down the way Chernobyl did anymore. The most significant risk is a breach of the reactor chamber fragmenting the fuel rofs and spreading radioactive particles around, or a hit to the spent fuel stores doing the same. Neither are good, but they wouldn't be nearly as bad as Chernobyl or a nuclear weapon strike.
- throwanem 5y agoNobody builds RBMK-style uncontained graphite piles any longer, but that's a long way from saying meltdowns are no longer possible.
- throwawayboise 5y agoThere are 8 RBMK reactors still operating, though all are in Russia.
- estro0182 5y agoOk this is good to know, thanks for clarifying. While not nearly as bad as the two scenarios listed, spreading radioactive particles near a population center of civilians could be grounds to consider this a nuclear war, intentional or not. Not on the same scale as a deliberate nuclear attack of course.
- mdanger007 5y agonuclear scientist @CherylRofer is worried about the ongoing fighting around the administrative building. some highly trained people keep that place from melting down and now they've got bullets whizzing by their head and fires breaking out in their offices.
- ttybird2 5y agoI do not understand, why are they fighting near the reactor? It only makes sense to keep troops of both sides away from something as dangerous.
- kQq9oHeAz6wLLS 5y agoFrom the Russian perspective, taking out Ukraine's power is strategic and demoralizing. Though I think we're seeing the Ukrainians are fierce when cornered, so probably isn't the morale breaker they think it is.
- JudasGoat 5y ago"From the Russian perspective, taking out Ukraine's power is strategic and demoralizing." It would seem to me as though the Russians are living in a glass house when it comes to energy sabotage. The map of Russian petroleum pipelines going through Ukraine is substantial.
- kQq9oHeAz6wLLS 5y agoAt this point it seems as though Putin won't back down for fear of being perceived as weak. He'd rather be seen as a madman. Which may be why some of these choices seem, well...mad.
- ceejayoz 5y agoOne side goes “hey they won’t shoot us if we’re near the plant”. The other side goes “hey no fair”. Things escalate. It’s war, and it sucks.
- trhway 5y agoOne side was unarmed civilians blocking the road to the plant for couple days until Russians started to shoot and wounded several civilians.
- 5y ago
- Gustomaximus 5y agoLive stream from plant: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fYUT36YGOh8 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fYUT36YGOh8 Automated Radiation Monitoring system: https://www.npp.zp.ua/en/safety/arms https://www.npp.zp.ua/en/safety/arms
- jtbayly 5y agoThanks. So what’s the historical norm on those numbers?
- yuliyp 5y agoMost recent wayback machine sample I could find https://web.archive.org/web/20220226013028/https://www.npp.zp.ua/en/safety/arms https://web.archive.org/web/20220226013028/https://www.npp.z... shows comparable to right now
- Gare 5y ago0.1 microsieverts (uSv) per hour is normal background radiation rate. Right now in my apartment (far from Ukraine) the dose rate is 0.12 uSv/h.
- heavyset_go 5y agoIs there a map service you're using to find the radiation levels at your apartment?
- deleted 5y ago[deleted]
- doener 5y ago"BREAKING: Ukraine's energy ministry claims firefighters have been fired at while trying to put out fire at Zaporizhzhia nuclear power plant" https://twitter.com/spectatorindex/status/1499549924610166784?s=21 https://twitter.com/spectatorindex/status/149954992461016678...
- fomine3 5y agoI misunderstood "fired".
- petemir 5y agoIt’s amazing that in this context it could have at least three different meanings: being fired with guns, their contact being terminated, or just been thrown fire (less usual or even grammatically incorrect, I know)
- pksebben 5y agoyeah my brain removed the "at" for a couple of passes and I was wondering, what could they have done to get fired? In some other universe there's a title from a complementary newspaper; "Russian soldiers fired for firing on firefighters fighting fire at nuclear plant".
- megous 5y agoWell, I've been watching the video for a while before the fire started, and there was shooting going on towards the building that's on fire from the units stationed between the parking lots. Then there was/is fire. Then presumably firefighters arrived, were not let through and departed away.
- Some20s 5y agoInteresting twitter space discussion goign on right now: https://twitter.com/i/spaces/1LyxBowlNzoKN?s=20 https://twitter.com/i/spaces/1LyxBowlNzoKN?s=20 speakers seem informed
- Trasmatta 5y agoThis discussion has been very helpful for my understanding of the situation and has been reducing my anxiety, thank you.
- Some20s 5y agoYou are welcome, also I saw you commented about rising radiation levels somewhere else earlier. I think this has been covered perhaps before you chimed in, a physicist claimed that the higher radiation levels, assuming they are actually recorded, could very likely be caused by the weapons used in the are and not reflect the true levels. I unfortunately don't have the necessary expertise to explain that further, but I assume it's simmiliar to smoking a ciggarette into a air pollution sensor. edit: seems like you just asked for a source, I misread the comment chain
- tailspin2019 5y agoGood discussion. Brings some clarity to this and so far it doesn’t sound quite as serious as you might be led to believe given the headlines.
- TheOtherHobbes 5y agoIt's reassuring in that meltdown is very unlikely. But who the actual fuck shells a nuclear plant? That's not reassuring at all. It's also against international law.
- ummonk 5y agoNobody shelled a nuclear plant. Russian forces drove into the parking lot of a nuclear plant, had two RPGs fired upon them from an administrative building and fired machine guns back at the administrative building. There were fires and after some time the fighting was sorted out and firefighters put out the fire.
- 01100011 5y agoGod damn, is the Russian army really this stupid? Is this an act of desperation, ignorance or spite?
- mensetmanusman 5y agoMost likely ignorance, seems like they have soldiers who still think they are on a training mission. Initiation of an actual radioactive disaster near your own border on purpose…
- ianai 5y agoDoes that matter?
- sterlind 5y agohow could any of them possibly still think this is a training mission? they're in a different country shooting actual people and buildings, and actual people are shooting back at them.
- 2OEH8eoCRo0 5y agoWow! These scenario role players are incredible. I'm getting so much training value! They fall down, cry, bleed out, and die just like somebody would in real life!
- decebalus1 5y agoThe 'training mission' trope is as old as the Red Army and it's bullshit. They pulled the same shit in 1956 when they got captured by the Hungarians and in 1968 when they invaded Czechoslovakia: 'We were told it was a training mission'. This is straight-up a survival tactic for the prisoners. They're playing dumb and acting innocent. It's impossible not to know by now where, what and why you are doing in a foreign country, in a fucking military convoy.
- genewitch 5y ago"peacekeeping" "mission"
- mensetmanusman 5y agoIf Russia explodes a dirty bomb that plumes into nato countries, what happens?
- darkhorn 5y agoCondemn Russia so that Russia doesn't repeat it in the future.
- Koshkin 5y agoThe future is now.
- ch4s3 5y agoFortunately that kind of not a thing. Pulling fuel out of a reactor without special tools and training would 100% kill you, and trying to build a bomb with a fuel rod assuming you got it out would also kill you. Transporting that bomb without thick concrete or lead shielding would also kill you. Blowing it up would put a bunch of heavy dust in the air that would fall out quickly and could easily be washed off of anyone it got on without significantly endangering them as long as they don't consume it. And after all of that, NATO might get involved. TL;DR it would take a concerted effort to build such a bomb without killing yourself only to build a worse bomb that would draw in NATO.
- Aeolun 5y agoI think he is referring to (accidentaly) blowing up the plant in a Chernobyl’esqye kind of way.
- ch4s3 5y agoIf they destroy the containment buildings, which might take more than mortar fire then the reactor would probably SCRAM since it's a PWR. There might be a steam explosion, and maybe some localized radiation leak. Really heavy arial bombardment could, if it broke containment, spread fissile material around the immediate area, cause a huge fire, and throw some radioactive debris into the air. That would all be quite bad, but not Chernobyl bad. Chernobyl was a graphite pile reactor with no containment building, and none of those exist anymore fortunately. I should aadd that VVER's like the reactor in question have missile shields for precisely this reason, and a bunch of other passive features. It shouldn't explode. 2nd Edit: what I’m concerned about is artillery hitting spent fuel containment. I don’t know if they used hardened casks, or if they’re using pools that might be in a less hardened building. Whoever is shelling this thing is insane, or very stupid.
- s5300 5y ago8:07 PM EST 3/3/22 “#Ukraine energy officials telling the media and U.S. officials that elevated radiation levels are being detected at #Zaporizhzhia” - Marco Rubio, Senate Select Intel Committee Put on your glasses boys
- vernie 5y agoMore recent IAEA tweet citing Ukrainian regulators contradicts this.
- sabujp 5y agoplease don't use links that block views! https://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/europe/russia-ukraine-news-putin-war-b2028080.html https://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/europe/russia-ukrai...
- robkop 5y agoGoing through the livestream I may have found the missile that hit [1]. Timestamp is in the top left corner. Seems there were other weapons fired though. Edit: More footage [2] [1]: https://imgur.com/a/W9WbI4m https://imgur.com/a/W9WbI4m [2]: https://twitter.com/aletweetsnews/status/1499547760986509315 https://twitter.com/aletweetsnews/status/1499547760986509315
- deleted 5y ago[deleted]
- csee 5y agoBreaking: Firefighters gain access to nuclear power plant in Ukraine, where an administrative building is on fire.
- doener 5y agoFirefighter have access now: https://twitter.com/bnonews/status/1499555239351005194?s=21 https://twitter.com/bnonews/status/1499555239351005194?s=21 https://twitter.com/nexta_tv/status/1499555095817728023?s=21 https://twitter.com/nexta_tv/status/1499555095817728023?s=21 "According to Andrey Tuz, spokesman of the press service of the nuclear power plant, there is no threat of radiation spread."
- deleted 5y ago[deleted]
- dsabanin 5y agoAnd now Russian forces have entered the building and are fighting inside.
- joshuajill 5y agoApparently Ukrainians have surrendered now. What a nerve wrecking situation. In the heat of the moment deciding when is the right time to surrender. Probably the smartest decision of the day.
- d_silin 5y agoWhere do you get those news? Would you mind sharing the link?
- trhway 5y agoUkraine TV live on YouTube.
- EGreg 5y agoLinks please !
- some_ukrainian 5y ago
- HL33tibCe7 5y agoAllegedly, Ukrainian firefighters were shot at by Russian troops. If true, then that’s another war crime to add to the growing list.
- 21723 5y agoIndeed, which is fucking terrifying. You don't do war crimes unless you expect to get away with it, which means either you're fighting a war that more powerful nations don't care about, or you expect to win it. Putin can't win against NATO but he can make both sides lose. I used to think he was rational and only minorly evil, but now I'm not so sure of the rationality... and clearly he's more than minorly evil.
- veganhouseDJ 5y agoIMO you have to consider there is an information war going on so to me the only rational thing to do is take everything you think you know with a grain of salt. There probably is a tactical advantage from the Russian side to putting out the idea that Putin has gone crazy. Or he really has gone crazy. We can't really know but the fog of war spreading to social media does not seem like a great development.
- Johnny555 5y agoThere probably is a tactical advantage from the Russian side to putting out the idea that Putin has gone crazy. What other explanation is there for invading a European country with close ties to the USA and NATO -- one claim for the invasion is that Putin was worried that Ukraine would join NATO, if they are that friendly to NATO, then he must have known that NATO would help fight.
- colechristensen 5y agoThere are quite a few loyal or sympathetic to Russia in Ukraine, due to propaganda and history, how many is hard to say and colored by your opinions. Hard to think not significantly fewer now than in the recent past. Putin thought he would win quickly, get troops to lay down arms and overthrow the government. For whatever reason he was wrong, it seems clear this is what was expected but pushback has been more effective. Probably in no small way because organizing the logistics of such a large operation is hard and has not gone smoothly.
- ZeroSync 5y agoFor some more clarity: https://twitter.com/nexta_tv/status/1499552483655528454 https://twitter.com/nexta_tv/status/1499552483655528454
- mkr-hn 5y agoThe plant on Wikipedia: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Zaporizhzhia_Nuclear_Power_Plant https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Zaporizhzhia_Nuclear_Power_Pla... And Google Maps: https://www.google.com/maps/@47.5124275,34.5850663,1549m/data=!3m1!1e3?hl=en https://www.google.com/maps/@47.5124275,34.5850663,1549m/dat...
- carrolldunham 5y ago
- smrtinsert 5y agoI am absolutely livid and terrified for the state of the world right now.
- deleted 5y ago[deleted]
- mwattsun 5y agoI was only 4 during the Cuban Missile crisis, but I've talked to people who remember it and this sounds a lot like it.
- bigDinosaur 5y agoOthers have pointed out that, unfortunately, the threat of nuclear war never really went away, we just got better at ignoring it except at times like this.
- micromacrofoot 5y agoAt all times there are submarines just floating around out there in various oceans waiting to nuke someone with a ballistic missile. They can operate underwater for 3 months without surfacing. Someone can get a call and press some buttons and just vaporize a town filled with people they have never met. I lie awake at night thinking about this a lot.
- JumpCrisscross 5y agoThe Cuban missile crisis seemed far less stupid. Like, shelling the nuclear power plant?
- worldsayshi 5y agoStupid or really nihilistic. Maybe projecting nihilism is a strategy of its own. If I act as if there is nothing I care about except my goal you will never convince me to give up. So you have to give up to spare casualties.
- Thaxll 5y agoOne can wonder what does it takes for the west to military intervene. Sanctions are a long term plan but it won't save Ukraine.
- HL33tibCe7 5y agoThe risks of nuclear war from a NATO militarily intervention are far too high to even consider it. I’m sorry to say, but there is really nothing that could happen in Ukraine that would be bad enough for us to accept the risk of nuclear annihilation.
- merpnderp 5y agoI keep telling people this and people seem bewildered. But how many times has this already happened in the last 80 years? We already know there’s nothing they can do to trigger a war.
- kypro 5y agoIf NATO got involved my guess is that the chance of an all out nuclear war would increase to near 100% because Russia can not win a conventional war with NATO which means nukes would need to be deployed to level the playing field. Once one Nuke is fired it's likely they'll all be because the only real defence against a nation using nuclear weapons against you is to try to wipe them out before they wipe you out. In this situation hundreds of millions would be likely die directly from the attack and a similar amount would probably die from starvation shortly after as the global economy collapses and crops fail on mass. There's just no situation that this is something we'd even want to consider. As much as I'd love NATO to be able to intervene it's just not possible. The best we can do is put pressure on Russia and show other nations that this is not acceptable and not in their national interest because of the harsh economic consequences.
- adrianmonk 5y ago> the only real defence against a nation using nuclear weapons against you is to try to wipe them out before they wipe you out Thankfully, that has been thought of and, as much as possible, planned for. How do you decrease the incentive for a preemptive strike? By building your nuclear arsenal so that it can survive one. There are 3 main things that help achieve this: (1) Put your nukes somewhere where even a direct hit from an enemy nuke will not destroy them. That's why missile silos are underground. (2) Hide your nukes. The enemy can't take out your nukes if they don't know where they are. Fixed-location nukes are bad at this. Mobility is good, but road and rail are not the best forms of mobility. Nukes in planes are better. Nukes in submarines are really good. (3) Have lots of nukes. If the enemy can destroy 90% of your nukes with a preemptive strike but 10% of your nukes would still easily be enough to wipe them out, then a preemptive strike still doesn't achieve its goal. One way to increase nukes cheaply and effectively is with MIRVs (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Multiple_independently_targetable_reentry_vehicle https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Multiple_independently_targeta...), which means one missile has multiple nuclear warheads that can independently hit different targets. Basically, all this was thought out pretty thoroughly during the Cold War. The well-known acronym MAD stands for Mutually-Assured Destruction, and the importance of the assured part has not been overlooked. Source: needed a government credit in college, took a class that was all about nuclear deterrence theory.
- Symmetry 5y agoSafer than the plant at Chernobyl, thankfully, with a real containment building. I'm still worried though. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/VVER#Safety_barriers https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/VVER#Safety_barriers
- deleted 5y ago[deleted]
- paxys 5y agoSubmission title makes it seem like it spontaneously caught fire. Could we change it to the article title please? > Ukrainian nuclear plant, Europe's largest, ablaze after Russian attack - minister
- dang 5y agoI've changed the title to the current title of the article now. It sounds like Reuters might have updated it? Submitted title was "Europe's largest nuclear power plant on fire".
- YeBanKo 5y agoTitle needs to change. Russian army caused the fire. It did not started by itself.
- nomel 5y agoIt's the title of the article, and I don't think a responsible news agency, like Reuters, would put that title. > Reuters could not immediately verify the information, including the potential seriousness of any fire.
- tailspin2019 5y agoReposting this valuable comment with a link to a live Twitter Spaces discussion. https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=30549210 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=30549210 The experts on there are NOT concerned. At least yet. Lots of scope for misinformation and panic here (understandably) as it’s a live developing story, but I don’t think we all need to retire to our bunkers just yet. Would urge caution about reading too much into this until we have a bit more info. Rushing to try and interpret live radiation levels and talk of “this escalates to nuclear war” is a bit premature.
- Aeolun 5y agoAt what point do we consider the risks of letting this continue higher than the potential effects of intervention?
- chernevik 5y agoGiven that the potential effects of intervention run up to nuclear war -- never.
- ABeeSea 5y agoIsn’t intentionally causing a nuclear meltdown during war already nuclear war?
- deleted 5y ago[deleted]
- solmanac 5y agoClearly not
- ABeeSea 5y agoWhy? It’s basically a giant dirty bomb.
- vkou 5y agoNo, it's not. We are arguing semantics.
- ABeeSea 5y agoWhy isn’t it?
- JumpCrisscross 5y ago> Why isn’t it? Because the effects of a nuclear meltdown are closer to that of a chemical attack and far away from that of a thermonuclear detonation. Blurry red lines cease to be lines.
- RickJWagner 5y ago"Russia calls its actions in Ukraine a 'special operation' that is not designed to occupy territory but to destroy its neighbour's military capabilities and capture what it regards as dangerous nationalists. It denies targeting civilians." How very Reuters of them. I should have expected nothing less.
- vernie 5y agoIs that a problem?
- xdennis 5y agoThe problem is treating war criminals like they deserve an equal opportunity to explain their position. It's indisputably a war of baseless aggression. Giving their narrative of it being a special operation to de-nazify is no different than giving nazis equal opportunity to explain their position on the Holocaust: an operation of de-bolshevization (which is what they actually said at the time).
- vernie 5y agoGiven that most of the reporting I see is already strongly opinionated I appreciate that I can also find more neutral coverage.
- mrtri 5y ago
- 0x38B 5y agoThe head of the Zaporizhia local administration said the plant director assured him, “Nuclear safety of the plan has been guaranteed/ensured” - (1) 1: https://facebook.com/story.php?story_fbid=358548829609705&id=100063637723588 https://facebook.com/story.php?story_fbid=358548829609705&id...
- not2b 5y agoPlease change the title: the linked article is entitled "Fire at Ukrainian nuclear plant outside perimeter".
- dang 5y agoYes. Changed.
- anshumankmr 5y agoWhy not sign a pact saying "Nuclear Power Plants are Off Limits. Anyone caught messing around will be court martialled." It's quite naive I know but if you make the consequences very clear and extremely bad for the troops, it might really deter them. Or Russia is implementing a something similar to a scorch= the-earth policy.
- acdha 5y agoRussia signed a pact guaranteeing Ukrainian sovereignty in exchange for their portion of the Soviet nuclear stockpile [my misremembering, this was incorrect: and a large amount of money]. You can see how much signatures are worth with Putin.
- sundarurfriend 5y ago> sovereignty in exchange for their portion of the Soviet nuclear stockpile and a large amount of money The money went the other way - "guarantee" of sovereignty plus financial compensation, in exchange for the nuclear weapons.
- acdha 5y agoYou’re right, thanks for correcting that.
- ajross 5y agoThis wasn't "messing around". For sure, that Russian unit was sent to capture the reactor. Wanting to control infrastructure like generators is an obvious and (fairly) rational strategic goal. Presumably the commander that ordered it felt it was worth the risk. That may not be a correct analysis (we'll see, I guess), but it surely wasn't done on a whim.
- mcguire 5y agoThe 1949 Geneva Convention bans attacks on nuclear power plants, dams, etc (with some conditions).
- 5y ago
- neonate 5y agohttps://archive.ph/NTefh https://archive.ph/NTefh http://web.archive.org/web/20220304012532/https://www.reuters.com/markets/europe/top-wrap-1-europes-largest-nuclear-power-plant-fire-after-russian-attack-mayor-2022-03-04/ http://web.archive.org/web/20220304012532/https://www.reuter...
- yk 5y agoGreenpeace wrote a report about nuclear power plants in Ukraine two days ago.[0] The short summary is, that a npp needs to be managed after shotdown, and the most likely scenario is a loss of offsite power like happened in Fukushima. Additionally, there is quite a bit of spent fuel on the site outside of the containment. [0] https://www.greenpeace.org/static/planet4-international-stateless/2022/03/6805cdd2-nuclear-power-plant-vulnerability-during-military-conflict-ukraine-technical-briefing.pdf https://www.greenpeace.org/static/planet4-international-stat...
- xibalba 5y ago
- vernie 5y agoAh that plant must have been operated by neo-Nazis.
- paulpauper 5y agoStock futures plunged because of fears of a meltdown, I presume. For that to happen requires a specific chain of events, not just a fire at some non critical part of the plant. Nuclear power plants are designed to withstand a lot. Likely the plant was shutdown anyway. Now stock futures have recovered almost all losses, would have been a good buying opportunity based on this fear. Shows how having an knowledge advantage helps greatly when trading based on headlines.
- ttyprintk 5y agoThe reactor was under renovation, but fueled.
- colechristensen 5y agoOh then it doesn’t really matter. If the reactor is off the concern is very low.
- deleted 5y ago[deleted]
- deleted 5y ago[deleted]
- stubish 5y agoUkraine is an electricity exporter according to https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_electricity_exports https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_electrici... . Is targeting electricity production a de-facto attack on EU infrastructure? Would taking out Ukraine's electricity generation increase its dependence on Russia (who could sell it), and significantly increase the EU's dependence on Russian gas?
- megous 5y agoUkraine is not connected to EU grid, I believe. There was some agreement to connect it next year, recently.
- crote 5y agoNo, Ukraine disconnected from Russia on 24 Feb (almost accidentally, interestingly) and has been running in island mode since. Physical connections to the EU have been constructed, but they are not in sync so the actual connection has not been made yet.
- gt565k 5y agonews spreading about "elevated radiation levels near the power plant" and the plant being on fire are also fake https://twitter.com/iaeaorg/status/1499562515340177416 https://twitter.com/iaeaorg/status/1499562515340177416 #Ukraine regulator tells IAEA there has been no change reported in #radiation levels at the #Zaporizhzhia Nuclear Power Plant site. anyways, the news cycle nowadays and the misinformation is insane CNN literally reporting "Ukraine's Zaporizhzhia nuclear power plant is on fire, according to the mayor of a nearby town." Which again, sensationalist title the plant itself is not on fire. CNN and FoxNews literally saying it's another Cherynobyl - "Fears of disaster greater than Chernobyl as Putin's forces attack largest atomic plant in Europe" Idk man, I get it's a war and shit is serious, but the information overload of propaganda from all sides is insane and is really fucking with people's anxiety and mental state.
- bstar77 5y agoI get what you are saying, and you are right stuff is sensationalized, but there is video of the facility getting shelled. The fire didn't start itself. People need to be anxious about this shit. The sad part is that we don't need any sensationalism to be anxious right now.
- lenkite 5y agoThe Russians shelled an adjoining building from where they were being fired upon. This was captured on video and heavily sensationalized to an eye-rolling extent. Frankly, I am not sure why Ukraine/West feel the need to broadcast propaganda - its not even necessary.
- carrolldunham 5y agoThe hackernews crowd wants to pretend they are smarter than the facebookers who fall for fake news. But this is exactly what they do. Even though the original article is now updated to show the fire was not in the plant but outside its perimeter, you are downvoted and I was flagged for saying so. Even with ghost of kyiv nonsense making it extremely clear, western media/online nerds cannot accept that Ukraine is spewing out fake news. Out of desperation? understandably? Sure maybe. Still fake and you're still stupid for swallowing it
- downvotetruth 5y ago
- hexo 5y agoEh, no, bombing nuclear power plant is a warcrime.
- chrsig 5y agoI mean, I agree that it'd be an incredibly inhumane thing to do, and a very bad idea that shouldn't occur ...but war crimes seem like they should only really be applicable to an aggressor. How can we tell another nation how it's allowed to defend itself? If you don't want to suffer inhumanity from an aggrieved nation, perhaps stop invading it.
- EthanHeilman 5y agoWar crimes do and should apply to a defender. The main idea behind a war crime is that it is an act which has limited military utility or in many cases is counter productive from a military standpoint but causes human suffering. That is, it is a clear and unnecessary act of violence. For instance killing prisoners of war since it is often more beneficial for a military to accept a surrender than to offer no quarter. Most ethical systems argue that human beings have a right to protect their own life with deadly force, but if during a self defense encounter you intentionally go out of your way to execute bystanders you can not use self-defense as a justification. This is because in that case you are just using self-defense as a cover to murder people.
- xdennis 5y agoBut a warcrime means nothing to a country with nukes.
- Nextgrid 5y agoI don't understand why? Are you saying that they needed to melt it down now because they can't do it later, even though you then say that it'll be a prime target for future bombing which will most likely lead to a meltdown? Or do you mean that "meltdown" is a safe state that would secure the reactor against future bombing?
- boringg 5y agoSo, aside from the obvious nature of messing around with Nuclear generating station being an idiotic move. From a tactical move for Russia - clearly they want the generating station offline to cause further chaos in Ukraine and that it supplies 1/6 of the power I believe(?). Was the generating station fighting to say online / not surrender or did Russia just show up guns blazing? It's clearly a tactically important source of energy for Ukraine. Also - wouldn't it just be easier for Russia to destroy the substations nearby? I assume there would be some problems with all that excess power being generating if the substations were blown. The whole thing is pretty nuts. I can't imagine being the ISO trying to balance the grid or ISO equivalent of the grid over there right now (amongst other impossible jobs/positions people are in Ukraine right now).
- jliptzin 5y agoIsn’t one major problem with nuclear is that it’s hard to shut down when you don’t need it? Hopefully they understand that
- cmeacham98 5y agoMy understanding is that it's relatively easy to shut down, but costly/time consuming to start back up.
- redwall_hp 5y agoUsually they have fail safes that will more or less immediately shut them down. On any reactor designed in the last 50 years, they pretty much default to a safe state, as they require power to keep the failsafes open. Starting back up after is the slow part.
- necheffa 5y agoThe one snag is that even with the reactor shut down (just drop all the control rods in) you still have to deal with the decay heat. Which, in the case of a controlled manual shut down shouldn't be a problem.
- wnevets 5y agoYes but nuclear power is the solution to all of the world's problems if we just ignore war, earthquakes, tsunamis, corporate greed and waste disposal!
- MichaelMoser123 5y agohttps://www.pravda.com.ua/rus/news/2022/03/4/7328008/ https://www.pravda.com.ua/rus/news/2022/03/4/7328008/ (link in Russian, that's a big newspaper in Ukraine) the units of chechen warlord Kadyrov are fighting inside the building of the power station, and are said to be laying mines, as a means of exerting pressure. What could go wrong... This kadyrov is totally mad, they introduced Sharia law in their chechen republic, and putin doesn't want to interfer with this madness, as he fears to provoke them and also needs them for his military adventures... https://www.pravda.com.ua/rus/news/2022/03/4/7328011/ https://www.pravda.com.ua/rus/news/2022/03/4/7328011/ Zelensky made an announcement, if the power station explodes, then that's the end for Europe, the thing is six times bigger than Chernobyl.
- formerlurker 5y agoThank you for pointing out that the plant is 6 times bigger. I watched the HBO series Chernobyl and it opened my eyes to the dangers of a nuclear meltdown. I hope the new containment tech is enough to avoid a disaster.
- fallingknife 5y agoThat show was basically fiction. https://www.historyvshollywood.com/reelfaces/chernobyl/ https://www.historyvshollywood.com/reelfaces/chernobyl/
- nl 5y agoThere is no "new containment tech" that contains a reactor breach. Things like the (non-existent) molten salt reactor try to reduce the risk of a runaway meltdown, but do nothing to stop the danger if the reactor itself is broken open.
- KingOfCoders 5y ago"and putin doesn't want to interfer with this madness" Putin installed Kadyrov. "On 2 March 2007, following Putin's nomination of Kadyrov as Chechen president, the Chechen parliament approved the nomination." Wikipedia
- yabones 5y agoThis has been a real reckoning for me, as somebody who has historically been very pro-nuclear. Quite simply, humanity is too good at screwing things up to harness such a fundamentally powerful and dangerous source of power. It requires a commitment to long lasting peace and stability that we're just not capable of.
- cmrdporcupine 5y agoThis has always been my fear about nuclear. We don't think on the timescales to make it work well, nor with the engineering consistency and quality to keep it maintained. However, abandoned oil refineries and other chemical plants are also toxic nasty messes for potentially hundreds of years, too.
- revscat 5y agoThis touches on why I think humanity will not survive for much longer. Global warming continues to be a civilization-ending level threat, and yet it continues to be more or less ignored. Vast swathes of the population believe that their egos can determine reality, no matter the actual physical reality they so hubristically ignore. > we’re not capable of I don’t think so, either. This sentiment tends to be met by the techno-futurists on this site with swift downvotes, though, so is not a popular one to espouse here. Nevertheless I believe it to be true based on the evidence at hand: humanity is too short-sighted to prevent its own doom. I believe nuclear power is essential to the survival of humanity. I also think you are likely correct: humanity cannot be trusted with nuclear power. If true, this is yet another data point against our survival.
- worldsayshi 5y agoIf we can make energy storage simple and cheap enough I do not see why nuclear power would have any upside left except maybe for when traveling outside the solar system. Regarding survivability of humanity I have similar fear but my current hope is that while weapons will continue to be more attainable their relevance might diminish. Why fight your neighbor if you have everything you need? But warlords create a problem of their own because they seem to exist to attain superiority for its own sake.
- archibaldJ 5y agoI gradually stop seeing this as a war just for the freedom of the Ukrainian people. This is a war for the progress of humanity. A war between the new and old worlds. With more breakthroughs in nuclear fusion energy and policies [1], the gradual adoption of nuclear (as well as EV tech) will soon mark the end of old world. The implication of this is beyond anything anyone can conceive as we do not truly know what becoming a Tier 1 civilisation means. This could also mean new military tech that would render all existing fossil-fuel-based weapon systems inefficent things of the past. In this new world social mobility would mean different things too (as energy gets cheaper (which is the cost of pretty much every basic thing a modern industrial society depends on), things get more decentralized), old status quos will crumble as the cost-to-transform skyrockets. Systems that come with top-down execution structure always optimize for cost-to-execute and not cost-to-transform [2]. This would give you advantages eg in a Nash equilibrium, etc, but it also means losing touch with the every-changing reality that is the world now. [1]: https://hn.algolia.com/?dateRange=pastYear&page=0&prefix=true&query=nuclear&sort=byPopularity&type=story https://hn.algolia.com/?dateRange=pastYear&page=0&prefix=tru... [2]: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=28331939 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=28331939
- onlyrealcuzzo 5y agoEven if ITER finished today and worked - aren't we still AT LEAST 15 years away from Fusion energy being cheaper than solar? It seems like the current renewable trend will phase out most fossil fuels BEFORE the most optimistic timeline for Fusion energy being a viable alternative.
- archibaldJ 5y agoWell.. Do not underestimate the incompetence blighting this world and the potentials and ingenuity in people that want to change. That's what I like to remind myself in uncertain times.
- ck2 5y agoIt's less a war than a temper tantrum by the world's only mafia-country trillionaire, facing his own guaranteed death soon turning 70 And he doesn't have to "win" via occupation, all he has to do is destroy the place setting it back decades. If any country undoes all the sanctions and seized property while he's still alive, he's "won". He doesn't care about the lives on either side and there will never be justice for that even if he ends up hung by his own people (impossible fantasy outcome). Imagine how even more destructive he'd be if he had unlimited "free" power via fusion, I am really certain fusion will initially cause more war than stop them because the money saved will go into military spending and once you have that buildup, someone always wants to put it to use.
- vlunkr 5y agoVarious sites are reporting that it's under control now.
- joij32 5y ago
- MilnerRoute 5y agoWashington Post: “The United Nations’ nuclear watchdog soon said the blaze had not affected ‘essential’ equipment and that Ukraine’s regulator reported no change in surrounding radiation levels.” https://www.washingtonpost.com/world/2022/03/03/nuclear-power-plant-fire-ukraine-zaporizhzhia/ https://www.washingtonpost.com/world/2022/03/03/nuclear-powe...
- deleted 5y ago[deleted]
- af412sa 5y agoA better article is here: https://apnews.com/article/russia-ukraine-war-a3092d8e476949ed7c55607a645a9154 https://apnews.com/article/russia-ukraine-war-a3092d8e476949... Aside from the obvious "knocking the power plant out to cripple the city" argument there are probably better ways to do this than blowing it up. For example, controlling the area and literally turning it off. It seems wild, even by Russian doctrine, to do such a thing. On the other hand, the Ukranian military has every reason to "salt the earth" with a potentially critical reactor in order to do as much damage to a Russian occupation as possible. Are the Ukranians this crazy? Well, to do this they wouldn't have to be much more crazy than Russians shelling it. Something doesn't smell right here. In the article there is this quote: > In an emotional speech in the middle of the night, Zelenskyy said he feared an explosion that would be “the end for everyone. The end for Europe. The evacuation of Europe.” “Only urgent action by Europe can stop the Russian troops,” he said. “Do not allow the death of Europe from a catastrophe at a nuclear power station.” The undertone of this seems more threatening than fearful. Especially given Zelensky's overall response to NATOs lack of response. Additionally, Zelensky isn't much less corrupt than putin (https://worldpopulationreview.com/country-rankings/freedom-index-by-country https://worldpopulationreview.com/country-rankings/freedom-i...). I do not intend to sound like a Russian apologist here but rather be the devil's advocate. This doesn't make sense inside either country's war doctrine. It seems more like it's being used as propaganda by one side or the other. Very suspicious indeed. I don't think Russian conscripts are stupid enough to blow a reactor to turn it off. I also don't think Ukraine is stupid enough to use this to salt the earth. Yet, I find the official story fairly hard to believe.
- TeeMassive 5y agoThat's one of the biggest concern of this war. Ukraine is outnumbered and outgunned, and that's with Russia avoiding critical infrastructure and not leveling cities to the ground. For all practical purposes they're on their own. A nuclear incident is pretty much their only (unlikely) hope to get some kind of foreign or NATO involvement.
- oort-cloud9 5y ago[dead]
- oort-cloud9 5y ago[dead]
- SebastianM 5y agoAnother reason to stop saying that nuclear power plants are save...
- shmde 5y ago*Safe.
- squarefoot 5y agoThey have no intention of bombing the plant of course, or doing so in a way that would cause any serious destruction, especially when Putin's clear intentions are to take the entire Ukrainian territory; to me this is just psychological warfare to fuel the fear among other nations about nuclear dangers, so that both leaders and the public opinion will be against going at war with them. In theory, we (as EU) could intervene with traditional weapons so that the burden of escalating it further would still be on them; not an easy decision though.
- roschdal 5y agoGood thing the nuclear reactor isn't allowed to run Java...
- devoutsalsa 5y agoOr SQL Server... https://web.archive.org/web/20110705230730/http://news.cnet.com/2100-1001-270351.html https://web.archive.org/web/20110705230730/http://news.cnet....
- oddmiral 5y agoNope. We are not surrendered and have no plan to do that. Tell that to your Russian friends.
- gambiting 5y agoI'm pretty sure he means the Ukrainians inside the nuclear plant, not Ukrainians in general.
- twaw 5y agoOperators of nuclear plant are civilians. They are not part of force. Civilians can be captured, they cannot surrender, because nobody asks them to do that. I never heard that police or army asks somebody unarmed to surrender.
- gambiting 5y agoReally? You have never heard anyone ever describe regular citizens surrendering to the invader? I feel like you are arguing a technicality here - if you are faced with people with guns of course you'd say "I surrender" even if technically that's not what you're doing.
- seanhandley 5y agoWelcome to HN. The home of "Well, technically".
- teekert 5y agoYeah, it’s why I feels so at home here and the primary source of my relationship issues.
- selfhoster11 5y agoWell, technically that's Reddit and not HN.
- MisterMower 5y agoPutin is an evil genius. He attacks a nuclear plant and creates the risk of a meltdown. The result will be to remind the EU about how scary nuclear power is and ensures public opinion stays firmly against the one power source that can wean them off Russian oil. Also, it has strategic value as limiting power to the rest of Ukraine makes it harder to wage war. No power, less internet and communication, slowing the stream of awful (for Putin) pictures and videos of his brutal war. And capturing it would be a propaganda coup at home. Putin stopped the evil Ukrainians from blowing up a massive dirty bomb. Pure evil genius.
- sschueller 5y agoThere is no way to predict where exactly the toxic cloud will go[1] and it can affect Russians as much as the rest of Europe. Just settings part of an outside structure on fire is too risky and is not "Pure evil genius" but total insanity or military incompetence. I would be happier if they blew up Chernobyl again as at least there is no more pressure cooker that can blow this shit high into the sky a seconds time. [1] https://gdb.rferl.org/94D46F09-409D-415F-B87D-836E88607ECF_w1071_s_d3.jpg https://gdb.rferl.org/94D46F09-409D-415F-B87D-836E88607ECF_w...
- jskrablin 5y agoI am quite sure he's just evil. A nuclear disaster as a result of russian shelling will for sure result in a direct NATO involvement. And despite all of it's propaganda, Russia cannot win a conventional war against NATO and nobody wins in nuclear confrontation. So I'll call him an idiot, because there's no wining this one. It's just stupid bully tactics.
- MisterMower 5y agoWhat makes you so certain a meltdown would result in NATO involvement? The USSR survived Chernobyl. It’s a very risky move, but not necessarily a stupid one.
- matesz 5y agoFor those interested to see how the situation is portrayed in Russian most watched TV channel Rossiya 1 -> http://www.freeintertv.com/view/id-3163 http://www.freeintertv.com/view/id-3163
- locallost 5y agoRemember this situation the next time you hear somebody say that nuclear plants could be built cheaper if not for too much safety regulation.
- zhdc1 5y agoI don't think I've ever heard this argument. I have, however, heard the opposite argument: nuclear power plants are now extremely safe because of safety regulations, so we should build more of them.
- locallost 5y agoIt's actually quite common, I've experienced it personally many times because I am interested in the topic. Their price is basically uneconomical, and the argument in the end always boils down that the danger aspect is overblown, thus making them safe to an unnecessary degree. Example, first sentence in the article: > Should any discussion of nuclear power go on for long enough, it becomes inevitable that someone will rant that the only reason it has become unaffordable is a proliferation of safety regulations. https://arstechnica.com/science/2020/11/why-are-nuclear-plants-so-expensive-safetys-only-part-of-the-story/ https://arstechnica.com/science/2020/11/why-are-nuclear-plan...
- keymone 5y agoThis wouldn’t have happened if the world stopped buying oil and gas from Russia and used more energy from nuclear power plants.
- locallost 5y agoRight, if only the world would have thousands of nuclear plants more, the danger of one blowing up in a war would decrease substantially.
- keymone 5y agoWhat kind of sick mind one needs to have, to push this anti nuclear bullshit when the real issue is a fucking fascist invasion of Russia into Ukraine? For fucks sake..
- Markoff 5y agonice thread (this account is good to follow) disproving Ukrainiang propaganda, Western media saying Russians attacked nuclear power plant and put it on fire, while Russians entered without any shooting and then were shot at by Ukrainians causing fire in administrative building, so much for relying on Western media making money on causing panic and spreading misinformation https://twitter.com/ASBMilitary/status/1499531572055318529 https://twitter.com/ASBMilitary/status/1499531572055318529
- xdennis 5y agoUkrainians blew up their own power plant? Fuck off nazi troll.
- Markoff 5y agono power plant was blown up, there was fire in administrative building and it wouldn't be first time in this invasion for Ukrainians to destroy something and claim Russians did it also we are here in HN where people discuss in civil manner, if you can't do it you should seek different venue
- dll 5y agoIt appears that EURDEP (European Radiological Data Exchange Platform) data isn't being shared with the public at the moment. I'm not sure if this is because of the war, this attack in particular, or if they're having problems with their infrastructure due to people like me wondering what's going on. Their simple map (https://remap.jrc.ec.europa.eu/Simple.aspx https://remap.jrc.ec.europa.eu/Simple.aspx) shows the last update as being 03/03/22 22:00 UTC, but selecting a station doesn't give any current or historic readings. The advanced map (https://remap.jrc.ec.europa.eu/Advanced.aspx https://remap.jrc.ec.europa.eu/Advanced.aspx) doesn't display any data for me.
- ukraineally 5y agoAt what point do you as the nuclear plant operator consider chernobyl 2.0? You know Russia would ultimately take the blame.
- asdswe 5y agoI highly recommend this lecture by Finnish army intelligence expert to those looking to understand the deeper roots behind Russia's actions. Lecture in Finnish, but it has English subtitles. Truly wakening stuff, it really helps you to understand the situation much better. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kF9KretXqJw https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kF9KretXqJw
- sdfgdfghj 5y agoWhat do you recon are the key points for people who don't have 1h to watch with subtitles. Specifically related to the nuclear power plant news from today.
- Demiurge 5y agoThe key points of this terrible demagoguery, from what I could tell: 1) Russians have been conquered a lot and are very insecure 2) They're part Mongols and inherited fear and lies as state of being 3) Russians only respect strong Tsar and let the Tsar do whatever he wants as he appears strong and manufactures the fear through the lies 4) Russians are stupid and not capable of creating anything, only destruction. They stole anything technologically worthwhile. 5) Russia is a terrible autocratic imperialist country that is completely geopolitically irrational. Any person taking this video at face value should conclude that Russia should be suppressed and destroyed, that would be a great service to the human kind. Yes, everything makes sense now.
- justshowpost 5y agoRisking to be heavily downvoted… but does nobody question the story line at all? It makes no sense for Russia to start shooting at a useless office building. If they wanted, they’d drop a few bombs on the critical infrastructure and that’s it. Maybe the rumors Ukrainian forces evolved them into an attack and planted the fire has some substance? This news is the perfect headline to further lure in the west to help, without any actually critical damage to your own land.
- lowkey 5y agoGentle reminder that the fog of war is in full effect and both sides of this conflict are guilty of spreading propaganda and misinformation. It goes with the territory but a dose of healthy skepticism is the best course of action for observers. In times of war, the first casualty is the truth. P.S. According to Reuters/MSNBC/US Official - There is no evidence Russia attacked nuclear reactors in Ukraine. https://www.reuters.com/article/ukraine-crisis-usa-nuclear-energy-idUKW1N2U401C https://www.reuters.com/article/ukraine-crisis-usa-nuclear-e...