Nuclear power plant

[jayejayeee]

interesting video and very informative

[jessyjessy4]

i enjoyed this vid

[thejameskan]

very interesting thanks

[0x00000000000000001]

clean, safe? my ass! just an accident, and everything goes hell.

[YujiroTaniyama]

New book "Fukushima 3/11 & Japan's Government. WHY IT SUCKS" (Amazon)is a thoughtful analysis to the 21st century's first nuclear disaster.

[99knight]

I bet US is jealous of China's future and economy, and technology

[uni000ver000sal]

Hi, my name is Homer Simpson and I would like to work for you....

[arekusu1987]

thats not true. Nuclear power plants are extremely expensive...ever thought of the costs for disposal? This technology is not safe. Its time to go another way. It is and will be possible to produce energy completely with solar, wind, water. Look to higly industrial germany. In 2022 there will be no active nuclear power plant. Sure its not possible to shut down all power plants in a few years. But it is realistic to replace them in the next 10-20 years with regenerative energies. IT IS POSSIBLE!

[zeesu619]

I LOVE CHINA :) AND PAKISTAN MY HEART

[RobertsDigital]

Americans like Nuclear

Chinese Like Nuclear.

Russians Just Love it

British love it too.

[HedgehogStudios1]

In case of Chinese nuclear power plants...

RUN LIKE HELL!!!!'

[LaMinaTribeTV]

NO NUCLEAR FUTURE! It can and will destroy the world if we do not put an end to it now! It can't be cleaned up...it can't be washed away...once it spreads...it kills all in its path...nuclear power only takes one mistake!

[YaBaDji]

It's nor clean(nuclear waste disposal), nor safe (an accident is very difficult to control due to radiation danger, the affects of radiation are exponential), and if it isn't clean and isn't safe it can't be reliable...

And if anyone has doubts just ask people that where really affected by radiation during three mile or Chernobyl.. if their still alive...

[CorrineInChains]

@YaBaDji There are people still living in the town of Pripyat and in the village around the Chernobyl nuclear power plant today. They've been there ever since. Nuclear energy is as safe as the people working it.

[EpicButtSecks]

@CorrineInChains If Nuclear energy is safe then being on Fire for 900 years is safe too!

[CorrineInChains]

@EpicButtSecks It's just science. Science is safe in the right hands. As long as we don't have anyone stupid running it, it's fine. Relax.

[1973frassrand]

It's only clean if it's safe.Most people don't realize the amount of equipment involved in those systems.One bad weld,wire,guage.technician....

[MsGreenthings]

Think of the risks and especially of the dangerous waste left behind for thousands of years! Look to Japan to see how silly it was to ignore or to diminish the danger.

No more nuclear power on the planet! - For us and our children. See ...and then learn from what you saw. Never forget. Please.

[BigPimpinAssCurt]

I don't know if I'd want Russia's help after Chernobyl, lmao

[HedgehogStudios1]

Humanity needs to hurry up and figure out how to neutralise radiation.

[train52000]

I wish I had a nuclear reactor in my home, that would be awesome. Just think of the possibilities.

[kingdice3]

i think that if turn to nuclear power as the only source of energy in the world, green house gasses, will be nothing compared to the waste produce by nuclear energy. nuclear power should be mixed with other renewable and clean sources of power.

[bestamerica]

'

shame on ussr russia,,,

russia did give help to china

[Urodzinek1]

HaHa Czarnobyl



[blessthefallmichael]

@Urodzinek1 haha f u. Chernobyl was blown up because people wanted a raise and didnt do the job correctly. And Czarnobyl your affending alot of people. but czar lol

[sandustanBrasov]

SandustanBrasov

Attention! You know who can construct a thermonuclear controlled reactor? Can construct any country which has apparatus of control and apparatus of cooling. Moreover must construct a spherical chamber of combustion formed from two semispherical parts, and from laterally on the horizontal axle let come with two devices for production and introduction to the electromagnetic field flux and by one plasmatron in them central zone for introduction of the fuel in state of plasma.

[Triptab]

No secret China does not know how to make nuclear power plants. The 300MW nuclear power plant they supposedly gave to Pakistan was made mainly by Westinghouse and Siemans. Most nuclear power plants in China are imported. In contrast India has been making nuclear power plants for several decades now. Also China's claims of having nuclear powered submarines are fake. China does have great support of the U.S. Jewish media. So all the propaganda.

[yuri35435]

@Triptab China does have their own pebble bed reactor, which is probally the way nuclear technology should have been developed in the first place, Give china some time, they will either steal the IP or climb any intellectual cliff to get a competitive advantage.

[ChrisPCrunchy]

You mean nuclear extinction !

[LoveForChinaForava]

We just need nuclear power long enough to get fusion power. then we can mine deuterium from the ocean

[Rhapthorne3]

The problem nuclear power is that not a lot of people support it. It is in fact a very clean form of energy and less risky compared to coal.

[platinumbeatZ4U]

very clean???...where do u dump the nuclear waste??? what ur ganna store it..... last i checked it can take up to a 1000 years at minimum for the isotopes in a nuclear substance to erode

[stangbanger91]

yuber779 im right there with yA buddy nuclear is great..my dad works for the NRC Nuclear regulatory commision.. its cheap produces a shit load of power!! the plant wont blow up..they are designed to if they have to melt down to the ground before exploding..but our stupid president is too much of an idiot to see that its so safe and productive that we should use it instead the fool just throws money out the window

[Yuber779]

I love nuclear power, is clean, is safe, is cheap, and is reliable. Solar and Wind, are too expensive to maintain and are not reliable.

[chanel6548]

@Yuber779 clean? safe? you sure about that?

[yuri35435]

@Yuber779 Well i suppose you could say that about wind, but you would have to be a fool to think nuclear has a leg up on solar in the upcomming decade, even now it is about half of grid parity buying the panels in bulk and running them for their lfie expectancy. unclear may be safe now, but that safety comes at a large price, also its effiency and power generation per dollar is fairly stagnant in progress currently.

[diveplane]

@Yuber779 by product waste management is also the downside to nuclear ...also deadly for many thosands of years

[MsGreenthings]

@Yuber779 ..that's so silly. Have a look to France, Japan, Tschernobyl and even to Germany.. and look at all those misfunctions! In some cases it went well, but if it doesn't....

Do you want to be responsible for all those people?

No more nuclear energy on this planet! Find out a way to minimize the risks and to neutralise the dangerous waste or stop it!

[MokomaSusi]

@MsGreenthings

"Do you want to be responsible for all those people?"

Nothing is good enough for greens. Germany is building 80 new coal plants at moment, and that is because windpower needs back up energy source. Is that good enough for greens? Nope. It's total fantasy that windpower or solar could satisfy all needs of the Europe.

You want to live in cave? That's fine. But don't try force me to live in cave too.



[CMDRSweeper]

@MsGreenthings That is already happening.

All those plants that have gone poof have all been what we can call... Old school from the infancy of nuclear powers, and there are also some that you do NOT know of, like SL-1 and another in California that had a "meltdown"

If you compare a nuclear plant from the 50s to one built today, you will be shocked, they are like day and night.

They are built around the same principle as airplanes, one fault should never be enough for catastrophy.

[EpicButtSecks]

@Yuber779 It safe but not clean.

[larrycpo]

@EpicButtSecks Its cleaner

[EpicButtSecks]

@larrycpo nope!

[ChrisPCrunchy]

There is no way to economically viable safely store a substance that is deadly for hundreds of thousands of years

Quote:

The repository for radioactive waste Morsleben is a deep geological repository for radioactive waste in the rock salt mine Bartensleben in Morsleben, in Lower Saxony/Germany that was used from 19721998. Since 2003 480,000 m3 (630,000 cu yd) of salt-concrete has been pumped into the pit to temporarily stabilize the upper levels. The salt dome is in the state of collapse.

[ChrisPCrunchy]

radioactive caesium-137, plutonium and strontium was leaking from the mine since 1988 but was not reported until June 2008.

Germany cant even safely despose of waste for 16 years and it takes them 20 years to even detect a problem with the storage. This is just one ticking time bomb and there are many thousands spread all over the world, so lets cheer on the commissioning of yet another plant manufacturing the products of human extinction. YAAAAAA!

[ChrisPCrunchy]

Way to go china, Poison the planet & render it unhabitable for future generations just to get a temporary benifit.

Nuclear has never and will never be economically viable if you add in the storage, renewing of containment and guarding the waste produced for the tens of thousands of years it is deadly for. However if you except human extinction and environmental degradation in the next few generations Nuclear is the way to go. Lets give the planet a USED BY date & stuff future generations.

[SaunaFinland]

And how come we dont have to guard all the nuclear material as uranium and other radiating stuff that is already stoered in the earth naturally? Nuclear power is much better than coal plants and more safe too. China could never build wind power in a such large scale in many years. This is the way to get rid of coal.

[ChrisPCrunchy]

Naturally occurring radiation is at a low level Uranium has to be enriched before it becomes extremely dangerous. Nuclear is NOT and will never be safe unless we perfect fusion that is. Ideal would be geothermal as it works 24/7 but coal can be made much greener.

[SaunaFinland]

How does nuclear waste harm anyone a mile deep inside rock? And if you didnt know, geothermal energy is heat radiation from the nuclear reactions happening deep inside earth. Sort of nuclear energy itself. Indeed it would be ideal, but it costs money obviously, since who wouldnt want free energy 24/7, whitout us having to do anything to get it.

Im glad Finland is investing in Olkiluoto 3.

[ChrisPCrunchy]

Olkiluoto 3. That plant is at least three and a half years behind schedule & more than 50 percent over-budget. Something to be proud of. Do you have any idea of the greenhouse gases produced to make the materials used & in the mining, enrichment and transport of the fuel. Then there is the disposal of the thousands of tons of radioactive material produced during its life then its decommissioning. If your going to excavate 3 miles down to get rid of all the waste geothermal becomes very viable.

[m3141592]

"Ideal would be geothermal "

I agree, but we'll always have nuclear because the military want it.

[MrBS4]

@m3141592

Well, we need it too. The sun, that is a bad ass fusion reactor over our head buddy. Geothermal is OK, but it require a place has both water and geo heat... you are not going to tap deep into earth, don't you?

[m3141592]

@MrBS4

"we need it too"

That isn't what 'need' means.

"The sun [...] is a [..] fusion reactor "

True, but irrelevant.

"Geothermal is OK, but it require a place has both water and geo heat... "

So most places on earth then? In fact any place on earth if you bring your own water and drill deeply enough.

[MalaysianTiger2007]

Japan have 53 power plants, South Korea 40% electrical power from nuclear, Taiwan have nuclear plant just 12km from Taipei, France have 59 nuclear power plants.. all of this is developed countries in this world

[ChrisPCrunchy]

Yes and not one safe way or place to dispose of the waste. Cheap energy now but future generations will pay with their health and their lives.

[polypmaster]

That is ignorant crap. Maybe you should do some research before you spout off your gibberish.

[ChrisPCrunchy]

Yes the use of nuclear is ignorant crap. Once the true cost is know it will be too late and the human race globally will pay with death, mutation, cancer and environmental degradation. Just because you might not live long enough to see it doews not make it any less immoral.

[m3141592]

"Once the true cost is know it will be too late and the human race globally will pay "

You're saying that there are effects of radioisotope pollution nobody knows about?

Are you sure it's not just fear about things you are largely ignorant of?

[sidstille]

Good for them! finally someone who is willing to use nuclear power

[itallbecomesu]

Well, we know who will be responsable for the next nuclear accident......Thanks China.....you want over 40 plants by the end of 2020? Big mistake.

[teemuautio]

so true

[sidstille]

do you even understand nuclear power?

[SaunaFinland]

Nuclear plants wont cause accidents if used properly. Coal plants are more dangerous and not because of pollution. People die in coal mines and plants all the time when accidents happen. If you store the waste correctly, nuclear power is one of the best choices of energy.

[ChrisPCrunchy]

Look at the track record for nuclear waste disposal so far. Look how Russia, Germany, India etc etc etc handle their nuclear waste. For f---s sake live in the real world at least while it is still fit for habitation FOOL!

[MokomaSusi]

Australia is world second largest polluter because you people use so much coal... thanks a lot.

[ChrisPCrunchy]

More CO2 better plant growth, More crops to feed a hungry world. The global warming BS has been exposed for what it is a giant CON JOB.Google east anglia university leaked emails. It was also admitted that predictions of the glacias of everest melting was purely fictional with no scientific data to back it up. Carbon is NOT polution,unlike nuclear waste,it is a natural part of the atmosphere needed by ALL life.The more of it the more life flourishes! So your welcome for all the carbon we supply.

[m3141592]

"Carbon is NOT polution,unlike nuclear waste,"

Burning fossil fuels releases more radioisotopes than nuclear does anyway.

CO2 is a pollutant even if you're a denier of the impact of humans on the climate because it changes the seas' acidity.

You speak out of ignorance. Tool.

[Deelucky84]

how do you think they get uranium??? Its mined just like coal.

[yahoovisitor]

As the time is passing the need for energy and fuel on economic grounds is being felt. New industrial machines are being manufactured consuming less power & raw material and giving out more production. The nuclear reactor on the whole is also a move towards this need of man. If it is allowed to be manufactured by the countries having attained nuclear power certificates & an internationall inspection team for checking its non-disasterous production can work it'll surely help in fast development

[yahoovisitor]

Its wonderful the way China has developed this power generation unit & will surely be heading towards getting the Crown of Super Power soon.

[starnautical]

Damn, " from russia to china with love, "

chernobyl.

[usbiker133t]

China has more nuclear power per capita than the us. same with japan, france, germany and many others. Theres a reason there has only been one chernobyl type event, its russia. it was totally operator stupidity. Read the reports.

[henkie666666]

A nuclear meltdown is very rare, and becase many reactors have a negative heathcoeffission, they will simply stop if something happens

[mikiec88]

Nuclear power stations are a total waste of energy. Using nuclear fission to boil water so that you can turn a turbine? That's like giving your granny an F1 car so that she can drive it to the corner store to get her eggs & milk.

[rahulsharma1092]

My friend,

You are truly unaware of the power of the atom. If the nuclear reactors are correctly designed, it is the least polluting source of energy.

Also, only the installation cost is high, but thereafter the cost os nuclear power is extremely less.

A single reactor of 1000 MW can power to 2000000 homes.

[Qwerty48121]

exactly right, nuclear power has enourmous potential

[patie132]

shut the fuck up rahulsharma1092.

and the nuclear waste then hmmmm????

10.000 years underground in bunkers and all that stuf.

+beautiful bunches are to disappear WTF!!!!

FUCK NUCLEAR POWER-PLANTS

[MokomaSusi]

"and the nuclear waste then hmmmm????"

You can use it again.

"10.000 years underground in bunkers and all that stuf."

Hmm?

"+beautiful bunches are to disappear WTF!!!!"

How come? please explain.

It seems that you dont know anything about nuclear power. Well, people normally fear something they dont know.

[usbiker133t]

Your retarded. stop listening to hype and greenpeace.

[Dahliandis]

@rahulsharma1092 And as we are maybe and hopefully not about to whitess, it can destroy even more.

[Lightfromsirius]

@rahulsharma1092

Your calculation does not expect the costs for disposal, storage and insurance. The true cost and risk would be passed on to humans. If you calculate correctly, nuclear power is not affordable. The most expensive and dangerous power in the world. Give up your tickets back.

[DerekAKimbro]

@rahulsharma1092 You could tap a volcano GEOTHERMALLY and power the entire world. Hey, i'm all for radiation exposure, because i'm all for becoming a super hero.

[rahulsharma1092]

@DerekAKimbro The technology needed for tapping energy from volcano is still under development. Further, not all countries have volcanos.

[DerekAKimbro]

@rahulsharma1092 I highly doubt there isn't sufficient technology to tap a volcano. Besides, regardless of volcano location, the center of the earth is HOT. We can tap deep oil but not geothermal energy from underground? Even if we only tapped one volcano, we could turn that energy into reusable power cells, that can be delivered to anywhere. It all boils down to this, at least to me: There is NO acceptable amount of radiation. PCBs flying through the air. Nuclear is a lost cause, and dangerous.

[usbiker133t]

Um, all fossil fuel plants burn fuel to boil water to turn the same turbines. If your so smart, why dont you figure out another way to extract energy from a fission reaction.

[LukeXgamer]

Stop on about fucking resources running out dickheads.

[fireball79058350]

I hope to God that, the reactor is not the same design as the rest of the russian power plants.

[ibphotos]

My thoughts exactly. Reactor+china+russia=OH SHIT!!!

[JonThm]

Building nuclear fisison plants will get your population down in a hurry!Trouble is, tehy will spread deat haround the globe!

[humexavier]

Is this a science fiction idea..Atomic Plant atomic clock. Can be powered and energized by a solar clock but doesn't use sun power but only by laser light which is absorbed in clock's solar panel cells or photo voltaic cells which absorb laser light and sends it to it's atomic plant clock.The reason to use this. Not smart to have any electrical wires any were around atomic things;not fire safe, compared to laser beam which is safe even if cut.

[Thriller501]

HAHA IM SORRY BUT THATS IMPOSSIBLE SIRRRR our technology is not that advance yet maybe a couple more years but not yet

[milofonbil]

everywhere like such as?

[CrudeDude]

LOL! Brilliant!

[HiTekVagabond]

We have 80 years of uranium left given current rates of consumption. Building more nuclear power stations in China, India, France, Japan ... even the middle east will cause the world supply to run out that much sooner. The price of uranium has already gone up ten fold in the last four years. The US has to import uranium.

[aflacduky]

your right a french company is recycle some of the spent fuel rods but this is risky so say the least to much fuel for some stupid idiot to use in a bad way i dont give it 80 years i would guess it will 45 years before no profit line will be reached

[Bleezz]

yea, 80 years of uranium that we can be sure of. We stopped actively surveying for uranium in the 70's because of how abondent it seamed to be (and at the time, we had already discovered over 100 years worth of the stuff). what did people say about oil reserves in the 70's? I do not consider uranium supplies even a remote problem. but lets say its the worst case scenario, uranium runs out in 30 years. almost all current reactors can be adapted to use thorium 233 (much, much more abundant)

[milofonbil]

We stopped surveying for Uranium here in the US because we had found where it is all located. It's radioactive which makes it much easier to find than oil, coal, or gas.

I would not call 4 times more much, much more abundant. 90% is in India.

[fireball79058350]

I thought that most of the Uranium comes from Austrailia.

[donlightbody]

well, while I am all for nuclear power, I do have 2 thoughts on this, 1: russia has shown they are quite good at managing nuclear power plants (sarcasim) and 2: we know china builds wonderful quality products(sarcasim), wonder if they'll use lead based paint on the walls. lol

[ibphotos]

Scary stuff no doubt.

[patie1234]

thanks china

thanks to blow the world to h*l

[MokomaSusi]

"thanks to blow the world to h*l"

How come? there has been nuclear power in finalnd, already 30+ years....none of then ever exploded.

I'm happy infrom to you that worlds largest reactor will complete in Finland 2009.

[liltibet]

"blow the world to h*l"

Dumbass go learn about nuclear fuel before opening your mouth faggot.

[21Panzer21]

yes .. even the disaster at chernobyl wouldn't have happened if they let the senior staff to do teh test , and even so , the reactor itself had many critical design flaws... nuclear power is the future ... we have a nuclear powe plant in romania ... and till 2010 it will produce 40% of the power... using 3-4 ADAVANCED CANDU REACTORS

[alvagingra2]

man you need only 1 dumbass to do a nuclear meltdown so dont play with that and 2 where are you gona put all these nuclear waste?not evryone is recycling this

[mmysama]

Nevada.

[evilcruelty31]

Actually, modern breeder reactors produce fissionable materials (an amount more than consumed), so it wouldn't do it justice to call it "waste." Also, this "waste" is estimated to be able to power nuclear plants for several thousand years.

[evilcruelty31]

and might I add that the chances of a meltdown are extremely low, contrary to Homer Simpson's situation, they employ QUALIFIED people to run them.

[mattmatt115]

The CANDU reactor is by the far the safest of all the designs. Canada has never had one accident with them, they dont require enriched uranium like the anti-clean energy nutjobs trolling this video claim.

Right now, today, nuclear energy is the way to go, if you deny it then you are displaying your ties to oil company shares.

[firemanstud1981]

China a country that puts lead in toys and dumps chemicals in its drinking water. Russia fomer Soviet Union- Chernobyl, K19 submarine. Yea I feel a lot safer.

[gsxjimg]

Graphite moderator, Water moderator. I am happy they are using a BWR.

[mattmatt115]

US the country that drops nuclear weapons on cities, the country that invades others PREEMPTIVELY to make the world safe? Yeah i feel a lot safer. The only problem with what your saying is since the 60's, Russia and China have came a long way in terms of change. The USA has done nothing but become more corrupt to the point where political families rule the country.

Ever herad of Bohemian Grove? Perhaps you should look into why the worlds leaders go there to practise mock child sacrifice.

[xiec]

Thats a VVER! Russia's current generation of reactors are so unsafe!

[sidekick3iskool]

if tht shit blows up than the world will never be the same.

[madeleine185]

No... not china + RUSSIA O.O

[sotos2004]

2000MWatt????? That will do one hell of an explosion!!!!

[gsxjimg]

It is geometrically impossible for a powerplant to blow up like a Bomb. The PWR (Pressurized Water reactor is the safest design available

[edge5862]

bwr are just as safe if not safer they are designed to down power without the use of control rods if needed. Fission is not possible if neutrons are going to fast and if certan pumps are taken off line the neutron will move to rapidly to create fission and the plant will down power without intervention.

[gsxjimg]

I am pro Nuclear, but BWR's are dirty. Turbine maintanance, need I say more... Who's smart idea was it to circulate all that core water around the generating components. BWR's save money only.

[edge5862]

Dirty is not the right word they are not dirty like a coal plant. They are more difficult to workin the turbine without rad concerns but over the years they have figured it out. The new design for the two future plants in texas are BWR. They plan on building where there are currently to PWR reactors. If PWR where better I would thing South Texas would know.

[edge5862]

And do not forget about Davis-Besse

[kbredfire]

Moron. With the two brain cells you've got rubbing together, you stand a better chance of creating enough friction to cause a reaction worthy of an explosion.

[sonofjihad]

GO! CHINA YOUR THE BEST