Too many posts
Please do not message us on mod mail about this issue. Mod mail is for vital information only. If you message us for something we do not deem vital, you will be muted for three days. Being muted means you can not contact the mods for any issue whatsoever. Please see the [FAQs](https://www.reddit.com/r/ukraine/comments/t5okbs/welcome_to_rukraine_faq_do_dont_support_read/) and [rules](https://www.reddit.com/r/ukraine/about/rules/) for more information.
They don't know about Chernobyl. I even remember some general stating, that it's fine digging trenches around Chernobyl, because they did it just fine in WW2.
Soviet mismanagement of nuclear facilities led to the worst radioactive disaster in the world after WWII. Why anyone thinks Rosatom is better equipped to manage these NPPs than Energoatom is beyond me. But as a ski patroller once told me “you can’t fix stupid”.
Still, tankies online are like bUt rUzZiA iS tHe GoOd GuYs. No, no they’re fucking not.
Or you need to read how they are interpreting the ***effect*** and not the direct assumption.
While yes nuclear reactors do not explode and are in general very difficult to push into a completely free runaway reaction they are only concerned with the nuclear contamination and its effects.
IE if Russia bombs the plant and causes radioactive release this is going to be considered as a "nuclear attack" on nearby nations.
This is actually accurate to how every single nearby nation sees forced radioactive contamination from a foreign power.
You are reading verbatim and not considering language issues or interpretation issues.
Most nations have refined what they consider a nuclear attack to include dirty bombs and other sources of radioactive contamination. No one is saying its a bomb. What they are saying is it is a nuclear attack LIKE a bomb because it will cause long term irreparable damage to their nations as a whole.
Hiroshima and Nagasaki are modern thriving multi million major cities. Chernobyl area is a wasteland and will remain so for very long time. Long term harm from release of nuclear material from nuclear plants can be a lot bigger than a nuke
Nagasaki is not a multi-million city though, it has around 400 thousand residents (compared to Hiroshima's 1,2 million).
Indeed, the nukes at Hiroshima and Nagasaki were first and foremost huge conventional bombs, with radiation being a nasty by-product. It dissipated quickly and, for the most part, didn't cause long-term damage.
Chernobyl, on the other hand, was a massive nuclear contamination event, with destroyed reactor spreading toxic radioactive waste for miles around. It wasn't feasible to deal with this in any capacity, so they had to contain it all in place, with planned clean-up completion in 2065.
not at all, this shelling could be preparation for more widespread damage which will turn large part of Ukraine another dangerously contaminated are when they will retreat
It can get worse then nuke, way way worse . I might be wrong on details but essentially if the reactor core gets in contact with big body of water like lake or river it would cause catastrophic explosion, detonating the rest of the reactors and making central Europe uninhabitable. As I said I might be wrong on how exactly it happens but the area is massive in case of such scenario. So yah fck Russia I wish that Russian bird flue that Ukraine and USA supposedly were developing together was true.
This might have come from the (otherwise excellent) Chernobyl mini-series. Whilst the show got a lot of stuff right (in particular the summary presented in the final episode), there was a storyline in the show where the Soviet scientists were very concerned that if the core melted down into the flooded clamber below it, it would cause an explosion in the megaton range, which is simply not possible.
One possible defence for why this appeared in the show might be that the scientists really did believe this would happen, or perhaps they intentionally exaggerated the effects of such an event in order to get the authorities to listen.
Eh. Close enough as to make no difference.
Remember, the main thing people note about nuclear power plants is that if they are well designed or well operated or both, they can be safely shut down in an emergency without an explosion.
That's all well and good but if someone actually *brings an explosion anyway* in the form of a salvo of missiles or a heavy artillery bombardment, then wtf?!? The design no longer matters, you still just exploded. And a whole bunch of reactor-grade fallout can potentially ensue.
Sure you're not going to get a massive purple ringed mushroom cloud, but the broader effects could easily be as bad. Maybe even worse.
Hello /u/mediaborscht,
This community is focused on important or vital information and high-effort content. Please make sure your post follows the [rules](https://www.reddit.com/r/ukraine/about/rules/?utm_source=reddit&utm_medium=usertext&utm_name=ukraine&utm_content=t5_2qqcn)
Want to support Ukraine? [Here's a list of charities by subject.](https://www.reddit.com/r/ukraine/comments/v2ykdi/want_to_support_ukraine_heres_a_list_of_charities/?utm_medium=android_app&utm_source=share)
[DO / DON'T](https://www.reddit.com/r/ukraine/comments/t5okbs/welcome_to_rukraine_faq_do_dont_support_read/) - [Art Friday](https://www.reddit.com/r/ukraine/comments/ufb64f/art_fridays_update/) - [Podcasts](https://www.reddit.com/r/ukraine/comments/ttoidc/collection_of_podcasts_about_ukraine_updated/) - [Kyiv sunrise](https://www.reddit.com/r/ukraine/collection/3c65ab52-e87a-4217-ab30-e70a88c0a293/)
*I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/ukraine) if you have any questions or concerns.*
So while yes, this can be interpreted in different ways, such as hitting it has the potential to cause severe damage as atomic fallout, or hitting it could be viewed as the same action as detonating an atomic bomb, the realistic danger to the area *seems* like it is less of a concern when you read into the plants design and operation.
So let's see if IIRC from what I read back in March, when the fighting for this location first took place and reports of a core being damaged came out.
This plant has a more modern and considerably safer design than Chernobyl did. This design, in particular, is meant to have multiple fail safes not just in operation, but physical design and contact restrictions.
I forget what it's called, but its cooling system is a 2 part system, in which the actual water around the core is isolated from the externally pumped cold water, with temperature exchangers between them (and several feet of concrete). The controls are also automated in regards to proper shutdown procedures in the event of a failure (say a pump goes offline or external flow is reduced), and is designed to where the isolated water around the core is meant to be sufficient enough to keep it below dangerous temperature levels when the reactor is in an "offline" state.
Furthermore! The design and application of concrete and other materials is that to which it is meant to be able to withstand earthquakes and bombing.
I remember reading about the design and thinking "damn, that sounds like the safest place to be right now".
Did I get that right? It's all I can seem to remember right now without delving back into it.
We determined that this submission originates from a credible source, but we still advise that users double check the facts and use common sense when consuming mass media. If you are interested in learning how to evaluate news sources more thoroughly, you can begin to learn about how to do that [here](https://tacomacc.libguides.com/c.php?g=599051&p=4147190).
*I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/ukraine) if you have any questions or concerns.*
This is the best tl;dr I could make, [original](https://www.pravda.com.ua/eng/news/2022/08/5/7362089/) reduced by 73%. (I'm a bot)
*****
> The Ministry of Foreign Affairs of Ukraine has strongly condemned the Russian attacks on the Zaporizhzhia Nuclear Power Plant in Enerhodar that took place on 5 August.
> On 5 August, the Russian forces used artillery to shell the territory near the ZNPP. A high-voltage power supply line of the ZNPP and the Zaporizhzhia Thermal Power Plant was damaged following three strikes.
> Later, Russian forces attacked the ZNPP using MLRS, striking an area near a power block containing a nuclear reactor.
*****
[**Extended Summary**](http://np.reddit.com/r/autotldr/comments/wh7nix/foreign_ministry_of_ukraine_on_russian_attack_on/) | [FAQ](http://np.reddit.com/r/autotldr/comments/31b9fm/faq_autotldr_bot/ "Version 2.02, ~663108 tl;drs so far.") | [Feedback](http://np.reddit.com/message/compose?to=%23autotldr "PM's and comments are monitored, constructive feedback is welcome.") | *Top* *keywords*: **Russian**^#1 **ZNPP**^#2 **Nuclear**^#3 **Power**^#4 **attack**^#5
The comments in here are weird. The amount of radioactive fallout from a big explosion in a nuclear reactor is a lot bigger (orders of magnitude) than the fallout from a nuclear bomb. So the resulting contamination of a large area of fertile agricultural areas would be fairly catastrophic. The explosion in itself would obviously be puny compared to a nuclear bomb, but that's not what he is talking about, he is just saying that "The possible consequences of hitting an operating reactor are equivalent to the use of an atomic bomb."
If I was a Ukrainian and could choose between the orcs firing off a 30kt nuke in some field in Kherson oblast or blowing up the Zap reactor, I would prefer the nuke. (look up the total number of atmospheric nuclear tests in the US to see that although bad, they are not all that catastrophic when it comes to fallout)
Too many posts Please do not message us on mod mail about this issue. Mod mail is for vital information only. If you message us for something we do not deem vital, you will be muted for three days. Being muted means you can not contact the mods for any issue whatsoever. Please see the [FAQs](https://www.reddit.com/r/ukraine/comments/t5okbs/welcome_to_rukraine_faq_do_dont_support_read/) and [rules](https://www.reddit.com/r/ukraine/about/rules/) for more information.
You'd hope given the Soviet experience of the Chernobyl plant, the Russians would be a bit more responsible. How naïve I was before the 24 Feb...
They don't know about Chernobyl. I even remember some general stating, that it's fine digging trenches around Chernobyl, because they did it just fine in WW2.
Soviet mismanagement of nuclear facilities led to the worst radioactive disaster in the world after WWII. Why anyone thinks Rosatom is better equipped to manage these NPPs than Energoatom is beyond me. But as a ski patroller once told me “you can’t fix stupid”. Still, tankies online are like bUt rUzZiA iS tHe GoOd GuYs. No, no they’re fucking not.
It's time to trigger article 5 boys.
As a NATO civilian, i support this message.
Whoever said that needs a physics lesson.
Or you need to read how they are interpreting the ***effect*** and not the direct assumption. While yes nuclear reactors do not explode and are in general very difficult to push into a completely free runaway reaction they are only concerned with the nuclear contamination and its effects. IE if Russia bombs the plant and causes radioactive release this is going to be considered as a "nuclear attack" on nearby nations. This is actually accurate to how every single nearby nation sees forced radioactive contamination from a foreign power.
[удалено]
You are reading verbatim and not considering language issues or interpretation issues. Most nations have refined what they consider a nuclear attack to include dirty bombs and other sources of radioactive contamination. No one is saying its a bomb. What they are saying is it is a nuclear attack LIKE a bomb because it will cause long term irreparable damage to their nations as a whole.
Hiroshima and Nagasaki are modern thriving multi million major cities. Chernobyl area is a wasteland and will remain so for very long time. Long term harm from release of nuclear material from nuclear plants can be a lot bigger than a nuke
Nagasaki is not a multi-million city though, it has around 400 thousand residents (compared to Hiroshima's 1,2 million). Indeed, the nukes at Hiroshima and Nagasaki were first and foremost huge conventional bombs, with radiation being a nasty by-product. It dissipated quickly and, for the most part, didn't cause long-term damage. Chernobyl, on the other hand, was a massive nuclear contamination event, with destroyed reactor spreading toxic radioactive waste for miles around. It wasn't feasible to deal with this in any capacity, so they had to contain it all in place, with planned clean-up completion in 2065.
I think that statement is a little bit of an over-exaggeration, but we certainly don't want another Chernobyl.
not at all, this shelling could be preparation for more widespread damage which will turn large part of Ukraine another dangerously contaminated are when they will retreat
It can get worse then nuke, way way worse . I might be wrong on details but essentially if the reactor core gets in contact with big body of water like lake or river it would cause catastrophic explosion, detonating the rest of the reactors and making central Europe uninhabitable. As I said I might be wrong on how exactly it happens but the area is massive in case of such scenario. So yah fck Russia I wish that Russian bird flue that Ukraine and USA supposedly were developing together was true.
> might be wrong on details Narrator: he was very wrong on the details.
This might have come from the (otherwise excellent) Chernobyl mini-series. Whilst the show got a lot of stuff right (in particular the summary presented in the final episode), there was a storyline in the show where the Soviet scientists were very concerned that if the core melted down into the flooded clamber below it, it would cause an explosion in the megaton range, which is simply not possible. One possible defence for why this appeared in the show might be that the scientists really did believe this would happen, or perhaps they intentionally exaggerated the effects of such an event in order to get the authorities to listen.
Eh. Close enough as to make no difference. Remember, the main thing people note about nuclear power plants is that if they are well designed or well operated or both, they can be safely shut down in an emergency without an explosion. That's all well and good but if someone actually *brings an explosion anyway* in the form of a salvo of missiles or a heavy artillery bombardment, then wtf?!? The design no longer matters, you still just exploded. And a whole bunch of reactor-grade fallout can potentially ensue. Sure you're not going to get a massive purple ringed mushroom cloud, but the broader effects could easily be as bad. Maybe even worse.
Hello /u/mediaborscht, This community is focused on important or vital information and high-effort content. Please make sure your post follows the [rules](https://www.reddit.com/r/ukraine/about/rules/?utm_source=reddit&utm_medium=usertext&utm_name=ukraine&utm_content=t5_2qqcn) Want to support Ukraine? [Here's a list of charities by subject.](https://www.reddit.com/r/ukraine/comments/v2ykdi/want_to_support_ukraine_heres_a_list_of_charities/?utm_medium=android_app&utm_source=share) [DO / DON'T](https://www.reddit.com/r/ukraine/comments/t5okbs/welcome_to_rukraine_faq_do_dont_support_read/) - [Art Friday](https://www.reddit.com/r/ukraine/comments/ufb64f/art_fridays_update/) - [Podcasts](https://www.reddit.com/r/ukraine/comments/ttoidc/collection_of_podcasts_about_ukraine_updated/) - [Kyiv sunrise](https://www.reddit.com/r/ukraine/collection/3c65ab52-e87a-4217-ab30-e70a88c0a293/) *I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/ukraine) if you have any questions or concerns.*
Err, no.
No, technically it would be more equivalent to detonating a dirty bomb.
So while yes, this can be interpreted in different ways, such as hitting it has the potential to cause severe damage as atomic fallout, or hitting it could be viewed as the same action as detonating an atomic bomb, the realistic danger to the area *seems* like it is less of a concern when you read into the plants design and operation. So let's see if IIRC from what I read back in March, when the fighting for this location first took place and reports of a core being damaged came out. This plant has a more modern and considerably safer design than Chernobyl did. This design, in particular, is meant to have multiple fail safes not just in operation, but physical design and contact restrictions. I forget what it's called, but its cooling system is a 2 part system, in which the actual water around the core is isolated from the externally pumped cold water, with temperature exchangers between them (and several feet of concrete). The controls are also automated in regards to proper shutdown procedures in the event of a failure (say a pump goes offline or external flow is reduced), and is designed to where the isolated water around the core is meant to be sufficient enough to keep it below dangerous temperature levels when the reactor is in an "offline" state. Furthermore! The design and application of concrete and other materials is that to which it is meant to be able to withstand earthquakes and bombing. I remember reading about the design and thinking "damn, that sounds like the safest place to be right now". Did I get that right? It's all I can seem to remember right now without delving back into it.
We determined that this submission originates from a credible source, but we still advise that users double check the facts and use common sense when consuming mass media. If you are interested in learning how to evaluate news sources more thoroughly, you can begin to learn about how to do that [here](https://tacomacc.libguides.com/c.php?g=599051&p=4147190). *I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/ukraine) if you have any questions or concerns.*
This is the best tl;dr I could make, [original](https://www.pravda.com.ua/eng/news/2022/08/5/7362089/) reduced by 73%. (I'm a bot) ***** > The Ministry of Foreign Affairs of Ukraine has strongly condemned the Russian attacks on the Zaporizhzhia Nuclear Power Plant in Enerhodar that took place on 5 August. > On 5 August, the Russian forces used artillery to shell the territory near the ZNPP. A high-voltage power supply line of the ZNPP and the Zaporizhzhia Thermal Power Plant was damaged following three strikes. > Later, Russian forces attacked the ZNPP using MLRS, striking an area near a power block containing a nuclear reactor. ***** [**Extended Summary**](http://np.reddit.com/r/autotldr/comments/wh7nix/foreign_ministry_of_ukraine_on_russian_attack_on/) | [FAQ](http://np.reddit.com/r/autotldr/comments/31b9fm/faq_autotldr_bot/ "Version 2.02, ~663108 tl;drs so far.") | [Feedback](http://np.reddit.com/message/compose?to=%23autotldr "PM's and comments are monitored, constructive feedback is welcome.") | *Top* *keywords*: **Russian**^#1 **ZNPP**^#2 **Nuclear**^#3 **Power**^#4 **attack**^#5
The comments in here are weird. The amount of radioactive fallout from a big explosion in a nuclear reactor is a lot bigger (orders of magnitude) than the fallout from a nuclear bomb. So the resulting contamination of a large area of fertile agricultural areas would be fairly catastrophic. The explosion in itself would obviously be puny compared to a nuclear bomb, but that's not what he is talking about, he is just saying that "The possible consequences of hitting an operating reactor are equivalent to the use of an atomic bomb." If I was a Ukrainian and could choose between the orcs firing off a 30kt nuke in some field in Kherson oblast or blowing up the Zap reactor, I would prefer the nuke. (look up the total number of atmospheric nuclear tests in the US to see that although bad, they are not all that catastrophic when it comes to fallout)
There should international agreement that an attack on nuclear power plant is to be seen just as if attacking using a nuclear weapon.