6 ms·

The radiation numbers look similar to Feb 26 based on Wayback machine's last crawl.

lumost 5y ago
The best containment domes won't survive persistent shelling. I can't conceive of a valid reason for shelling a nuclear power plant.
- hadlock 5y ago
  It's an awfully effective way to distract people from focusing on defending the perimeter of whatever city they're trying to defend
  - dgemm 5y ago
    If they were to spring a leak then it would be impossible to hide their activity from the population at home, so my guess is that's something they would try to avoid.
    - wlll 5y ago
      That almost seems irellevant, even if Putin cared what people think (I don't think he does for the most part), he controls almost all of the media in the country. He can just tell people "Ukraine did it" and they can believe him or not, it doesn't really matter.
      - lumost 5y ago
        A large ecological disaster from an open air uncontrolled nuclear power plant fire would be a European wide concern. The results could be considered a WMD.
        JumpCrisscross 5y ago
        > results could be considered a WMD What rubbish. This looks like Putin found a way to tactically deploy dirty nukes within the West’s red lines.
        adventured 5y ago
        I expect if the invasion is protracted, Putin will at a minimum detonate a demonstration nuke. The downside consequences for Russia are modest at this point, and it'll be very terrifying to the people of Ukraine (and the world generally).
        mulmen 5y ago
        There is no “demonstration nuke”. If Putin sets off a nuke it’s doomsday. The time between Russia being the second country to use nuclear weapons and our current concept of countries becoming totally irrelevant would be measured in minutes. Having said this he might still do it.
        ericd 5y ago
        The rest of the world isn’t going to say “whelp, I guess it’s time to kick off the extinction of our species” and do a full set of city strikes over a tactical nuke being used. That would be absurd.
        twaw 5y ago
        It looks like you are using salami tactics. Salami tactics works in both ways. You say that nobody will went crazy when a tactic nuke will be used against RF army. Right? Can you draw the line, please? When this war between two nuclear states will be nuclear, if even use of tactical nuke is not enough for you?
        ericd 5y ago
        I’m just saying that the US isn’t going to engage in a massive species-ending strike over the Russians using a tactical nuke in a conflict with a non-NATO country. No idea what salami tactics means.
      - dragonwriter 5y ago
        The Russian government has already claimed that Ukraine is seeking nuclear weapons with US aid [0]. If it doesn't find a way to fit it's attack on, the fire at, and any resulting radiation release from the plant into that narrative with massaged details that make it both a heroic action by Russia and a dastardly one by Ukraine compounded by a Ukrainian propaganda effort to blame it on Russia...well, they aren't following the propaganda style they have been this whole invasion. [0] https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.wsj.com/amp/articles/ukraine-isnt-working-on-nuclear-weapons-u-n-official-says-in-rebuke-to-russia-11646242303 https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.wsj.com/amp/articles/ukrain...
    - QuarterReptile 5y ago
      Elevated radiation levels originating from a significant distance away from measurement are not going to be the thing that breaks through the fog of Russian propaganda, for anyone who's along for that ride.
  - dylan604 5y ago
    If it provides 1/4 of the country's power, couldn't they leave the containment domes alone, and just hit the lines coming out of the plant? If you're the invading country, it'd be nice to have that power later when you're in charge, wouldn't it?
    - mbreese 5y ago
      Doesn’t the power has to go somewhere. I don’t know what would happen to a nuclear power plant operating without a load to take the generated power. Maybe the steam just vents? Or bypasses a turbine? Hopefully it can operate without being connected to the outside, but I’m not sure.
      - lumost 5y ago
        Reactors can be shut down gracefully. The generated power can be shunted to ground from the turbines without risk.
      - cesarb 5y ago
        > I don’t know what would happen to a nuclear power plant operating without a load to take the generated power. The same as any other power plant: the generator is automatically shut down by its safety systems (if it didn't shut down, the generator would overspeed and violently break apart). Once the generator shuts down, the safety systems for the reactor itself should either automatically shut down the reactor too, or somehow bypass the steam to the generator and reduce power to idle (I thought they would always shut down, but recently there was a failure on the generator of the nuclear power plant near where I live, and the reactor went to idle instead of shutting down, so it seems nuclear power plants have this mode too). The issue is what happens after a shutdown; as seen at Fukushima, the cooling pumps in the reactor need external power for a couple of days until the decay heat reduces enough that passive cooling is sufficient. Without power from the outside, the emergency generators take over; if these are damaged or out of fuel, and backup generators can't be brought by truck from outside after a couple of hours, disaster happens.
- dragonwriter 5y ago
  > I can't conceive of a valid reason for shelling a nuclear power plant. The classical excuse (see Operation Opera) is that it is part of an enemy weapons program from an enemy intent on nuking you. It would only be a small step from current propaganda for Russia to make this claim, having recently added the claim of an offensive Ukrainian nuke program to their propaganda.
codazoda 5y ago
6:42p Eastern Industrial ground: 0.09 According to the website above. I think “officials” are reporting increased levels, but if the website source above is good, I’m not seeing high values. I didn’t look at Wayback, so it could be “increased”, thus my comment for reference.

The best containment domes won't survive persistent shelling. I can't conceive of a valid reason for shelling a nuclear power plant.

hadlock 5y ago
It's an awfully effective way to distract people from focusing on defending the perimeter of whatever city they're trying to defend
- dgemm 5y ago
  If they were to spring a leak then it would be impossible to hide their activity from the population at home, so my guess is that's something they would try to avoid.
  - wlll 5y ago
    That almost seems irellevant, even if Putin cared what people think (I don't think he does for the most part), he controls almost all of the media in the country. He can just tell people "Ukraine did it" and they can believe him or not, it doesn't really matter.
    - lumost 5y ago
      A large ecological disaster from an open air uncontrolled nuclear power plant fire would be a European wide concern. The results could be considered a WMD.
      - JumpCrisscross 5y ago
        > results could be considered a WMD What rubbish. This looks like Putin found a way to tactically deploy dirty nukes within the West’s red lines.
        adventured 5y ago
        I expect if the invasion is protracted, Putin will at a minimum detonate a demonstration nuke. The downside consequences for Russia are modest at this point, and it'll be very terrifying to the people of Ukraine (and the world generally).
        mulmen 5y ago
        There is no “demonstration nuke”. If Putin sets off a nuke it’s doomsday. The time between Russia being the second country to use nuclear weapons and our current concept of countries becoming totally irrelevant would be measured in minutes. Having said this he might still do it.
        ericd 5y ago
        The rest of the world isn’t going to say “whelp, I guess it’s time to kick off the extinction of our species” and do a full set of city strikes over a tactical nuke being used. That would be absurd.
        twaw 5y ago
        It looks like you are using salami tactics. Salami tactics works in both ways. You say that nobody will went crazy when a tactic nuke will be used against RF army. Right? Can you draw the line, please? When this war between two nuclear states will be nuclear, if even use of tactical nuke is not enough for you?
        ericd 5y ago
        I’m just saying that the US isn’t going to engage in a massive species-ending strike over the Russians using a tactical nuke in a conflict with a non-NATO country. No idea what salami tactics means.
    - dragonwriter 5y ago
      The Russian government has already claimed that Ukraine is seeking nuclear weapons with US aid [0]. If it doesn't find a way to fit it's attack on, the fire at, and any resulting radiation release from the plant into that narrative with massaged details that make it both a heroic action by Russia and a dastardly one by Ukraine compounded by a Ukrainian propaganda effort to blame it on Russia...well, they aren't following the propaganda style they have been this whole invasion. [0] https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.wsj.com/amp/articles/ukraine-isnt-working-on-nuclear-weapons-u-n-official-says-in-rebuke-to-russia-11646242303 https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.wsj.com/amp/articles/ukrain...
  - QuarterReptile 5y ago
    Elevated radiation levels originating from a significant distance away from measurement are not going to be the thing that breaks through the fog of Russian propaganda, for anyone who's along for that ride.
- dylan604 5y ago
  If it provides 1/4 of the country's power, couldn't they leave the containment domes alone, and just hit the lines coming out of the plant? If you're the invading country, it'd be nice to have that power later when you're in charge, wouldn't it?
  - mbreese 5y ago
    Doesn’t the power has to go somewhere. I don’t know what would happen to a nuclear power plant operating without a load to take the generated power. Maybe the steam just vents? Or bypasses a turbine? Hopefully it can operate without being connected to the outside, but I’m not sure.
    - lumost 5y ago
      Reactors can be shut down gracefully. The generated power can be shunted to ground from the turbines without risk.
    - cesarb 5y ago
      > I don’t know what would happen to a nuclear power plant operating without a load to take the generated power. The same as any other power plant: the generator is automatically shut down by its safety systems (if it didn't shut down, the generator would overspeed and violently break apart). Once the generator shuts down, the safety systems for the reactor itself should either automatically shut down the reactor too, or somehow bypass the steam to the generator and reduce power to idle (I thought they would always shut down, but recently there was a failure on the generator of the nuclear power plant near where I live, and the reactor went to idle instead of shutting down, so it seems nuclear power plants have this mode too). The issue is what happens after a shutdown; as seen at Fukushima, the cooling pumps in the reactor need external power for a couple of days until the decay heat reduces enough that passive cooling is sufficient. Without power from the outside, the emergency generators take over; if these are damaged or out of fuel, and backup generators can't be brought by truck from outside after a couple of hours, disaster happens.
dragonwriter 5y ago
> I can't conceive of a valid reason for shelling a nuclear power plant. The classical excuse (see Operation Opera) is that it is part of an enemy weapons program from an enemy intent on nuking you. It would only be a small step from current propaganda for Russia to make this claim, having recently added the claim of an offensive Ukrainian nuke program to their propaganda.

codazoda 5y ago

6:42p Eastern Industrial ground: 0.09 According to the website above. I think “officials” are reporting increased levels, but if the website source above is good, I’m not seeing high values. I didn’t look at Wayback, so it could be “increased”, thus my comment for reference.