You kiss container, not the nuclear waste. Thats a big difference.

A lot of bizarre talking points in the comments about "thermal pollution". I think new anti-nuclear lobby buzzword just dropped...

@@rtsp that's the point. The waste is frozen solid so it can't leak, and even if it did it definitely won't be able to break through steel and concrete, same goes for the radiation. It's safe when stored like this

One could say @kylehill found unity through Constellation.

@@aqowamancows8213 not exactly. he kissed the container of the waste not the waste itself. however, because the container is now waste as well you might be able to say that, but i feel it's intellectually dishonest.

I find this hilarious.

@@republicansarepedos2 it has "licking door handle" vibes lmao

And kissing that cask you probably get less bacteria then by getting a drink at a club 😂

That too if you do it deeply................

That’s just a can sir.

not going to lie it actually made me cry a bit just because it's such a good argument and it makes me so irrevocably angry at the fossil fuel cartel and the damage it's done [doing] to our planet.

It’s the natural radioactivity of coal ash that really gives the atmosphere flavor.

*Breathes* Ahhhhhhhh, lung cancer

It was mentioned somewhere else that we should turn it around. Nuclear power is the ONLY type of energy generation that manages its waste, not to mention that "waste" is ~95% unburned fuel and ~4% inert or useful byproducts.

Let's be honest 99% of the argument these days are about how much nuclear and how much renewables should be used. No one is even arguing for more coal. The video entirely misses the point in my opinion because it tries to win an argument that is long over.

I could also survive the same amount of time inside a pool of pure gas yet i still would not die, unless somebody ignited that shit. Yet this stuff is still fucking dangerous as you know. The same thing about water with the differenfe that it is one of the biggest natural murderers of the world. I'd be afraid inside of an acid pool. Some things dont appear as dangerous as they are.

@@BogWarThunder I'm...honestly not sure what point you're trying to make here...

​@@BogWarThunder So its not dangerous unless you lack common sense and you do something really, really stupid? Thats pretty much what we mean with "not dangerous"

@@A-G-F- in that case also bullets are not dangerous and bombs arent too, neither is a bottle of nitroglycerin in the middle of a parade. One wrong action and we have people dying, just like cancer patients that got healed by radiation and later died to that same thing that saved them. These weapons that i counted up are inside a hull of metal, yet the whole world fears these things. Would you fear a nuke bomb when i show it to you or would you start realizing the danger only if i am about to drop it on somebody? War is nothing than fucking around with peoples minds and only the shots are deadly the danger? As long as you dont get hit, no weapon aint do shit to you. As long as the waste is sealed, Kyle can kiss the cask as often as he wants (if there was even waste inside, he didnt tell if i remember right). NOTHING is dangerous if nobody does dumb shit. But if you paid a bit attention around Ukraine war you should have noticed that somebody is crazy enough to shoot a fucking powerplant with warheads and these people wont be afraid to shoot another one, just to use their danger as a weapon.

I visited a decommissioned plant about 4 years after shut down and one of the other people on the tour asked our guide a similar question about how long you’d survive in the pool and the guide pointed to an armed guard and said, “you’d be dead before you hit the water” so I guess maybe it depends on which spent fuel pool you are jumping into 😂

Just out of interest, why would they need to monitor temps?

@@flem6 Radioactive waste (especially highly radioactive waste) naturally emits radiation( edit, to make that more clear: a big part of that is or gets thermal energy = heating). This must be monitored and partially cooled. At least this is a safe job that is not threatened by rationalization (sure? ... spot the error/danger here, hehehe) for many 10,000 years:)

@@dieSpinnt so more of a “just in case” safety check? My (very limited) understanding of this science is that for the waste material to start emitting *more* radiation instead of less over time would be nigh impossible

If the temp rose above a certain level, it indicated that there might be something blocking the ventilation for the natural circulation cooling. The waste is put into a metal drum which is then put into a larger metal drum filled with gas to prevent oxidization, and THAT outer drum is then placed in the concrete drum, but the spent fuel is still really hot temperature wise, so the concrete drums have a natural ventilation system that draws cool air in through the bottom and releases hot air out the top to make sure everything complies with NRC standards, since concrete can start to crumble at certain temperatures due to the water evaporating out of it. It isn't even for the safety of the spend fuel. It's for the integrity of the container that holds the container's container.@@flem6

It’s so much better and I hope we start a system where we re use spent fuel rods, they’re still full of power but instead of re using them they crack and get discarded because they’re not as efficient so they just get stored, taking up more and more space as the years go on, I agree that is better but there’s still that problem I wish we could fix them being this idea to the table as a unbeatable solution, we can use MSR molten salt reactors to use up all of that fuel but…it’s not cost efficient so we resort to dumping the fuel rods taking up more and more space every two years. This isn’t me saying I’m against it I just wish we had all bases covered and we wasn’t taking up so much land over the years storing massive barrels when there can be alternative options

Why are you so focused on what another man does

Wait, let him cook

@@Allmenshouldrespectallwomen I'm joking about this lol 14:45

The waste about to call the FBI 😂

I kinda just imagine him frolicking around and enjoying himself more than most people reasonably would. His excited gesticulation in the video and eventual escalation to skipping and or dancing with confined nuclear waste could be a distraction to power plant operators.

Minor correction - not remote controlled, but safety devices isolated then set in motion by a driver who jumped immediately after it set off

Thanks.

Never heard of that. Please link your sources otherwise it’s a fib

@@danners4302not true either

​@@Allmenshouldrespectallwomen Literally the first google result if you Google "Central electricity board 1984 train test" 🥴

That's really the unfortunate thing. "Nuclear energy" became a big scary word. It fell into the NIMBY zone and it's incredibly hard to convince even the people who fully understand the harms of other power sources to allow a nuclear plant in their area despite our urgent need for them because of the absolutely horrendous PR nuclear energy has.

That and also fossil fuel industries pushing anti-nuclear propaganda and paying off politicians.

I wonder who funded all the nuclear fearmongering

to be fair, the FIRST generation of nuclear waste wasnt handled that well- but i am an old person. my chemistry professor took a group tour of a chemical /nuclear facility with no guards, no safety, no restrictions... it wasnt run well.

​@@calebrobinson6406 Probably the same people who'd take a financial hit unseen since their businesses began if people _weren't_ afraid of nuclear energy...

@@fabricdragon The first, and current generation of fossil fuel waste aren't handled well at all, it's just that you can't cuddle a cloud of sulphur, and when those plants burn away for decades their waste can't all be gathered in one place.

Okay then, let's deposit all the nuclear waste in your peoples gardens, if it's that safe. Cause there isn't even a reliable deposit for all the waste and the time it needs.

Small world! Incredible. Thanks to you and your colleagues for being so accomodating

Thank you! Been a fan for years since before you made this channel!

He's both thor and aquaman

He is the god of nuclear energy....and great hair

Dude gonna die 2 weeks from the kiss 😢

​@@hamnporkgamerand tony

And nuclear power being 'safe' is just as much a fiction as Thor.

Company near me recently got a contract for recycling wings but all it has amounted to is putting them in huge messy piles.

My convincing a couple dozen people that nuclear is safe and a good idea pales in comparison. But we all can play a part.

Going up against decades of pro oil propaganda is an uphill battle but one worth undertaking.

It’s not just oil companies feller

@@Kaiju3301 then why are the people wanting complete abolishment of fossil fuels, selling solar, wind, geothermal, and hydroelectric sorces to power EV cars, also scared of nuclear energy?

​@@Unsensitiveevery person counts!!

and across germany

@@CaptnCrnch honestly internationally

Yeah more mandates!! We hate freedom!!

​@@CaptnCrnchfor real

Yeah, cool unreflected shill propaganda in schools. Wait, the US...yeah go ahead...seems to be about right.

Good people with the experience to put down any ill intended individual. Just as God intended

Thanks for your comment

"taking a swim in the pool? Oh no you will die before even making it to the water!" "Why?" "Well 9mm has very prompt adverse effects to the body so..."

@@mobiuscoreindustries lol underrated comment!

@@TylerMusgrave9 There's an old XKCD what if on swimming in a spent fuel pool. The ending is pretty similar, "You’d die pretty quickly, before reaching the water, from gunshot wounds.”

forbidden but in the opposite direction than the expected one

@@thadevans1789 That was the image that popped into my head when I wrote the comment.

The build-up to electric everything may push governments to go on a charm offensive for nuclear.

it's not irrational, Chernobyl was no Joke, granted there isn't a need to be as fearful now thanks to all the stringent technological advancements and safety precautions, but those fears are valid, Chernobyl had the potential to cover half of Europe in radiation, that's objective fact

nuclear energy + another reneweable source is the perfect combination to handle unfullfilled promises, lack of energy output of the renewable source and reliability.

@@AH-ms5uv Every single person throughout the entirety of human history has constantly been exposed to ionizing radiation during all, or at least the overwhelming majority of, their lifespan. In fact, pretty much *every living thing* in the *entire history of life on this planet* has been constantly exposed to radiation for their entire lifespans. As a result, we've evolved to be able to handle quite a bit of radiation with little to no adverse effect; it's only at high doses that it becomes a problem. The Linear No-Threshold (or LNT) model that a lot of anti-nuclear fearmongering is based on has been largely discredited at this point - there is little to no solid evidence for it, and there is considerable evidence that it vastly overestimates the risk. For what it's worth, the best estimates of Chernobyl's total death toll - which again was the worst nuclear disaster in history - including long-term radiation deaths come in under 20,000. Fukushima's radiation death toll was... 1 person - a worker at the plant - and they didn't die until years later. For reference, studies indicate *the PM2.5 alone* from fossil fuels kills over 10,100,000 people every year - and that may just be a drop in the bucket compared to the future death toll from climate change - while credible estimates put the death toll of the Banquiao hydroelectric dam failure in the ballpark of 200,000. Nothing is perfectly safe, so of course nuclear energy does have its hazards, but the magnitude of the hazard is low compared to pretty much anything else (in terms of deaths per GWh, reliable statistics show nuclear is safer than wind energy and vastly safer than hydropower) - especially considering the excellent controls we put on it, which should ensure nothing like Chernobyl can *ever* happen again. The Chernobyl accident, it must be noted, took a perfect storm to create - incompetent/poorly-trained operators working under high-stress conditions deliberately bypassing safety mechanisms, a catastrophically flawed reactor design, unknown/poorly understood phenomena, numerous hardware failures, and a general lack of information due to the highly secretive/politicized nature of the Soviet nuclear industry at the time, among other things - and even a modicum of care could've prevented it. Still, we could have a Chernobyl every month and not come anywhere close to the death toll from fossil fuels. There are *a lot* of things we should be far, far more worried about than nuclear accidents.

​@@AH-ms5uvthe lesson of chernobyl shouldn't be that nuclear energy is inherently dangerous, it should be that we need to learn how to mantain it safe, it was an accident caused by the government both using shoddy materials and not properly training and equipping their workers.

I've never been to Quebec but I've recently become somewhat fascinated online by Radisson, Quebec, and how it's one of the most isolated spots in the world from any other real settlement. All because of clean hydroelectric power. 600 km / 7 hour drive of basically 100% wilderness.

I agree, I only know a tiny bit about thorium and it's enough to say we should be using only it. I would absolutely love a video on the topic from Kyle

@@skippy2987 we didnt use it bc you can't make bombs from it but hopefully it'll be used in the future

The nice thing about that is that prior to that, he goes into how safe it actually is to swim in there - that is to say, if it wasn't for the gunshot wounds, you'd probably be fine as long as you don't go below the top of the water. Which says some good things about just how fanatically safe the whole thing is.

I've been to a couple dozen spent fuel pools. I've almost never seen guns in that building. Those buildings have secured access thru other buildings. The guards don't stand by the fuel pool waiting for folks to try to go for a swim.. If you can get to the fuel pool, you wouldn't have trouble making it into the water.

​@@MrEscape314so you wrote all that to confirm that in fact you would die from gunshot wounds before reaching the water.

@@MrEscape314 Yeah, but you would likely not make it past security at the gate or the door. That is the point. If you make a run past security they are likely gonna shoot you.

​@@MrEscape314every nuke related place has DOE "SWAT" (I don't know what they are actually called) in a room nearby. I know a guy who used to do that. Yeah, the DOE has special forces whose job is to give you a lead supplement if you try any shenanigans

the biggest danger of nuclear power is the thermal pollution

@@theTavis01biggest danger of nuclear energy is weirdos like you spreading misinformation with nothing to back it up

He doesn't live near a dumping site, he won't get sick. It's the poor people who live on low value land near these industrial facilities who will get sick. Erin Brockovich style.

Honestly you have more to fear from Radon Gas than you do from most anything else. And that is naturally occurring.

@@gladitsnotme I mean, as they said, the waste facilities for nuclear power are safe to live around. Also, poor people around the world already suffer massively from fossil fuels, on a scale which has probably not yet been properly measured.

People twisted that statement to suit their conspiracies.

Nuclear fusion Theoretically

@@asherwiggin6456 Very theoretically lol, we basically have no idea how to make it work on a large scale iirc.

@@ShinyWasTakenTwice We do have ideas and there are several reactors that are currently being built to test those ideas.

Looks like this video is calling out all of us former nukes. When did you have to do your time???

At this point only nuclear fission will get us off fossil fuels the fastest. Fusion will definitely come through I believe in the next hundred years but for now first generation and next generation nuclear are going to take us into the future. The potential is literally limitless.

It is an incredibly powerful statement, words to live by for real

homophobic mfs thatve never met a gay person in their life:

Hope everyone doing good and staying safe. If you need to talk to someone or need help, there are people who care. Sending support and hearts. ❤❤❤

Well, it certainly "looks different" than the genome-warping effects of radiation would have it... Oh, you DON'T have an answer for the radiation? I'm outa here...

420 likes (i ruined it )

And then Fukushima happens

How would those plans have worked out in Ukraine?

@@unklimiteder An earthquake and a tidal wave? And even then, no one died from the nuclear disaster? I think you're proving Kyle's point...

@@a24396that he is

@@fwiffo Since the "we" that Kyle's talking about don't run nuclear reactors overseas, you'll have to ask the people overseas instead. In the US, the plans don't include "fighting off an Army" - but the US Army's plans DO. So it would be fine...

The funny part is, the answer to "if these were inside of the blast radius of a nuke" is nothing. They will remain there, still sealed concrete casks. Unless they are in the direct blast of a nuke that literally atomizes everything, these things will survive. If they were buried like Kyle suggested, if they were hit by 100 surface nukes, they'd probably still be buried in the same spot, totally unaffected.

Along with the fact the core most likely would be atomized before it melts down

The response: "My dude, if our power plants are getting hit with nukes, WE HAVE MUCH BIGGER PROBLEMS AND YOU ARE ALREADY FUCKED ANYWAY SO IT DOESN'T MATTER."

ppl are so dumb

this kitchen knife is safe in the knife holder. but what if you throw a grenade at it?

This is exactly what we need, a new generation of nuclear engineers to run the power plants of the future.

What about oil?

How hard was that major?

I'm honored. Thank you for sharing this with me!

@@kylehill Of course you can kiss a sealed canister. Of course sealing nuclear waste makes it "non pollutant" compared to fossil fuels. That's NEVER been the issue. The issue is what's happening in Ukraine right now. If a terrorist or war time bomb destroys a nuclear waste fancily, then what? America will eventually be attacked. If they only want to hurt the country what better place than nuclear waste facilities to detonate. Who's going to clean that area up? How long will it be inaccessible? How many will die that can't get away? Worse? Who will pay for perpetual inspections and maintenance for the next 1000 years? Before technology can find uses or ways to discard safely in the future? Until then we still have to spend money. Is that expenditure calculated into the cost benefit of using nuclear? Of course not, fuk our kids. If we keep building more there will come a time when costs of maintaining all these waste facilities will be greater than the cost of energy they generated. Who's going to pay for all that? Or you don't care, fuk the future.

Being afraid of nuclear waste is like being afraid of flying.

Hey Homer, how's it going?

So we can keep that nice safe byproduct at your place?

Astroturfing brings excellent results and doesn't need frequent maintenance.

and he didn't even get into the tech details about how the waste can be reused using special processes for the most part.

That's difficult, I'm not nearly as hot as nuclear waste

@@marcopohl4875 Try to get a fever, that might help

​@@marcopohl4875 Hey now, I'm sure you're just as good at decaying over time.

while also being the least radioactive stuff around, LMAO

Yup Similarly Land Value tax is a win also. Just implementation is needed somehow 😢

It's really funny to think how a nuclear reactor is just a hyper advanced steam engine. All the waste it produces is basically an insert solid material that can be re-enriched to be used again, and the depleted uranium can be used in armor penetrating ammunition.

"Litte waste" With the need to store it thousands of years🙄

@@siddhartacrowley8759 have you even seen the video

We figured out steam engines and were like "yep good enough" and kept using and modifying for the next 300 years@@K_Bogz

Yes 👍👍 the the power plants green energy. I. I am infertile from eating scented candles

I've seen the dead zone near a coal power plant. The fly ash kills everything for a few miles around it. 😢

Not to mention fracking often encounters radioactive material deep in the earth's crust, which makes a huge amount of the waste (which is totally unchecked and unregulated) incredibly radioactive as well.

@@exorcisttypebeat That "Unchecked and Unregulated" part is why nuclear waste is always safer than waste from fossil fuels, The waste from fossil fuels is released carelessly and sometimes not even cleaned, whereas Nuclear waste is regulated and stored in large cylinders strictly guarded in a way where the nuclear waste won't escape for thousands of years.

@doncomputer5931 Exactly. Totally senseless and beyond dangerous

You like listening to his voice you must like him a lot

Scientific Thor covering Thorium. Brilliant!

Also this doesn’t deserve any rewards. I learned about this stuff in school

​@@AllmenshouldrespectallwomenI bet ur fun at parties

@@Jamk14 that one doesn't get invited in the first place 😭

Nah mate, we do have a built-in radiation detector! When you start coughing up blood and your bones crumble, you know you've been irradiated! (/jk)

@@yutahkotomi1195 💀 (literally)

I've had difficulty finding (or understanding) exact figures, but afaik any geiger counter sensitive enough to detect Uranium will also detect Bananas (I don't remember if it's specific to 235 or 238)

@@yutahkotomi1195 I know this is meant as a joke, but it's bad. You can receive a lethal dose of ionizing radiation and not notice until hours (or even days) later as you shit out the inner lining of your intestines and your organs start shutting down as your body rots from the inside out. Of course, chemical waste can be just as insidious a killer, and people are not near as neurotic about that (despite the chemical industry having a history of unsafe disposal that the nuclear industry never had).

@@JeiJozefu would also likely detect background radiation

Agreed strong quote

I mean

​@@kylehillthis is not a suggestion

@@NUCL3AR991 Speak for yourself

it would be watching the same thing happen over and over again. a nuclear detonation would be required to open these (ironically), and at that point youve got a nuclear detonation to worry about lol. the soil you kick up will be just as radioactive as the fragments released. im pretty sure these can withstand being hit by a plane.

They actually did that I think lol; not Kyle but other nuclear engineers They put storage containers for IIRC either nuclear fuel materials or nuclear waste (just the container, not with the radioactive stuffs) onto a truck. - First they crashed the truck. - Then they crashed the truck the second time but harder. - Then they hit the truck with a train. - Then they also did other insane stuffs. TL;DR the container survived XDDD

Concrete is slightly radioactive itself, so some of that reading will be from the cask itself. (probably most of it, as there's a lot of shielding between you and the spent fuel.)

You forgot to put the radiation in bananas

And are we hearing pilots dying left and right from elevated radiation exposure over their career spans? That's a nope. If it would be the case, the aviation industry has the blackest belt in information control not letting a single word reach the public somehow. Clearly not a danger factor. It's probably worse when they have a lay-over hitting the beach working on their sun tans

Thanks for this. The one thing that confuses me the most about nuclear stuff is the zillion different units of measure. 💀

@@spindleblood Yeah, they can be SUPER confusing, especially since there are multiple related but distinct ways of quantifying radiation. Thankfully a lot of them are sorta depreciated by now and we have some consolidation, but it is still way too complexly laid out.

Holy crap, it was back in July? I remember my dad telling me about him coming over but I didn't remember it being that long ago

Sounds a bit like when the faux environmentalists at Burning Man oppose geothermal power expansion, they always ask, "well, would you want a geothermal power plant in your backyard", and would always be shocked when I could say, "well, it wasn't exactly my backyard, it was about half a mile away, and there was a creek and a highway between me and it... but yeah, first 18 years of my life had one in my backyard, even moved back and lived in the same neighborhood for another 6 years after graduating college, never once bothered by the geothermal plant... the highway on the other hand..."

(enduring the urge to type in another overused 'glowing Homer Simpson joke' here)

Q How tight is a dophin's butt? A Watertight, duh

I remember that there were plenty of Wind Farms that had to be shut down in order to make coal plants lol

While buying tones of energy from nuclear France because of this, alongside with the increase in fossil fuels plants. Such a cheap, cheesy politics

The government knows that nuclear is actually a dead end in the long run. We already have gravity propulsion, why keep beating a radioactive dead horse when we have better tech coming up

as my dad likes to say (we are germans too btw): "Grün ist Konzept!" ("Green is just a concept") talking about the political party with that nickname btw

@@Blackwing2345635even france is closing down reactors…it’s sad.

Question: Can you drink the water from the fuel pool Answer: No you would die. Not because the water isn't clean, but because they would take you out the second you got close to it, because they don't want your nasty anything touching their clean water.

"Waste Disposal"? Are you talking about our Smokestack?

@@doncomputer5931 To be honest, coal power plants have giant electrostatic precipitators in their smoke stacks to filter out all the fly ash. It's not like back in the 50s that literally everything just got blown into the atmosphere. But the fly ash gotta go somewhere. Waste disposal? You mean those stacks of sheetrock over there? Or that big pile over there? (That really happened - fly ash was and is put into sheetrock/plasterboard and that contaminated many houses with radioactive crap because coal always contains trace amounts of radioactive materials - and they just concentrate so many traces into the fly ash that whoops now we have radioactive sheetrock - but AFAIK now in the western world there are more strict regulations, so if you get radioactive sheetrock it's likely made in china where the fly ash regulations aren't as strict).

Yeah, I'd love to see a tour of a Greek lignite power plant.

They probably wouldn't let him make a video about that…

@@khadrelt yeah, I don't think a coal power plant would agree to let him inside so that he could expose how bad it is for the environment.

If your claims are true. to put it into perspective. It is quite possible you may have been one of the safest men in America during your time on duty.

i am confused, you were a bomb?

Thank you for your service ICBM (in all seriousness thank you for your service)

@@rhubarbdedubarb4232 submariner

@@rhubarbdedubarb4232He was in charge of the nuclear reactor onboard a warship.

Really this came off as a flippant fanboy rant to us. How safe is a place that cannot be filmed and put on public view, needs military guardians and has to have a tank of ultra pure water they guard against a single hair to drop into...

@@instantchow A lot more safe than a place where the chemical residue ends up in your body!

@@instantchow Such an ignorant comment.

It was a very good comment, yours is ignorant @@jayytee8062

​@@instantchowlet me guess, you support more solar panels and wind turbines?

You know what's really sad? That people have to go to KZfaq to get it. Or not get it. Shows what our modern world is like.

@@chakko007 I think I am guilty of that myself. The way education worked @ school was... well.. I've learned more about history by listening to sabaton an being intrigued by them to discover more and same is true for Channels like Kyle's.

@@schlossgoldftw There's surely a lot of misinformation these days, also at school. I was lucky enough to have a father who explained these things to me, in a rational and factual way. I remember how he once told me that he went to a nuclear power plant with a Geiger counter, and measured nothing out of the ordinary, while studies of course "proved" that there is an increased number of leukemia cases in the vicinity of nuclear power plants... He also was IN a nuclear power plant, and got told by the people who work there how "strongly" radioactive material, like the ballpens they used there, had to be disposed of in castor containers. I just hope the employees don't have to be disposed of in castor containers as well. Nowaydays, more than ever, these are things you are not allowed to talk about. You also are not allowed to say that 20.000 people died in Fukushima, by cause of the flood, not by cause of nuclear contamination. It's forbidden. Also, don't ask about investigation into Covid, and what it has done to people, and how many people actually were affected, and died in the process. Never ask such things, or you are an inhumane, cruel individual. It's sad, because, that way, we will never find out what really happened with this disease, how harmful it was, and what we can do next time to avoid harm to the people, and, I also include the mental harm, the harm of isolation, due to being rejected, and the harm of isolating people by measures which might not be the least appropriate.

@@chakko007 Let's not get around the bush here. I dont feel old being thirty, but social media really came around in my youth and I was having none of it, because it annoyed me and it still does. What are people watching and reading nowadays constantly? Brainmelting stupidity on facebook and else. You see exactly what it's doing with them. They see some stupid post and assume it must be real.

This! I am all for nuclear power, but the only argument i can agree with and understand is the human factor. Many people against nuclear power are people that think chernobyl would happen again

Not just nuclear, very sad to see how humans are generally just horrible at one of the most important tasks there is. Assessing risk vs reward. Just think of how many graves wouldn't be occupied if it hadn't taken fifty years to get us to just fasten our damn seat belts. And radiation is definitely causing plenty of harm. Only it's the ever so natural radon and ultraviolet from everyone's favorite reactor, the one they are oblivious to.

I worked on naval trainer reactors in both Charleston, SC and Ballston Spa, NY and it was wild how many long time residents didn't even know the plants were there. My assumption is that, since the plants are pretty important military installations - nothing short of divine intervention is going to convince the DoD to relocate, making 'de-nuclearization' of the area a hopeless political stance. Ergo, the media doesn't care and people whose lives are completely unaffected by the plants don't complain because... there's nothing to actually complain about (besides the rowdy junior enlisted). Also, just generally speaking (and this is anecdotal of course) I have never experienced any negative interaction with someone in all my years of working on nuclear powered aircraft carriers. I've seen people protesting the military in general (mostly in foreign countries), but never its use of nuclear power. Even Japan lets us park nuclear ships in Tokyo bay.

When you realize Springfield is in Illinois (Homer Simpson lives there)

@@shadowwolf9823 IIRC, there are 41 towns across the us named "Springfield" and as such it's considered a generic name that could be anywhere, and that's why it was chosen as the name for the Simpsons' town.

@@MagsonDare: We as not just a nation, but an entire species, positively _suck_ at naming things. If you were to do a tour of all the places on or near the US/Mexico border that are named Nogales, there would be no fewer than 6 stops, on _both_ sides of that border. Expand that to include all locations formerly named Nogales, and that number more than doubles. Again, on both sides.

My school actually did that. Not in person, but they explained to us and made us read about how nuclear waste is handled.

Yep... get'm young

Yup, that's why the word "nuclear" got dropped from "nuclear magnetic resonance imaging" (NMRI, now known as MRI)... even though semantically it was a rather crucial part of the name (magnetic resonance of _what_ ? oh, atomic nuclei)

@@MatthijsvanDuin good to know.

@@MatthijsvanDuin Bingo. That didn't have anything to do with nuclear power or bombs but yeah. Stigma is a thing and there's lots around that word. Trying to get people to not be scared of a single word is tough.

@@Paladwyn same goes for Hydrogen, people still say "Hindenberg" whenever the possibility of hydrogen use is on the table

It's also super frustrating when the people championing green energy the most don't want to look at nuclear, even though it's one of the best (if not the best right now) energy sources to curb pollution.

Personally, I like Vitrification, It's an easy way to deal with nuclear power by turning it into glass and easily sealing it away in completely safe steel and concrete structures.

He does really does do it in a way even the layman can understand. It's why we need people like him pushing the need for nuclear power, and videos like this on national television. Not just KZfaq. Nuclear power is by far the cleanest and safest form of green energy period.

In disguise?

yeah, he's not your stereotypical nerd, don't think too hard on it lol@@Desasteroid

You went to a nuclear plant! in 7th grade! Man I wish I had a fun field trip like that

I took a tour of the braidwood plant 7ish years ago. For reference, dresden (the plant in the video), lasalle, and braidwood are 3 plants all grouped up in an hour radius

same

I would do the translation for free, no question, I think it is just a big disgrace, shutting off all nuclear reactors and then buying from France who increases their Nuclear Power produced... hypocritical, financially stupid af and makes us dependent on a third party.

You don't. Most of germany's population understand enough english to understand this vidéo. German just didn't listen. Maybe the ukraine crisis changed some opinions but i doubt it.

They'd never watch it anyways, they're fanatics.

@@deanwong6565it won't, though. It is obviously better to fuel war machines of oil- and gas-rich countries that hates you, than nuclear reactors

Ever wondered why nuclear costs so much to construct? It is not intrinsic to the tech…

That quote alone makes me want to punch the air. I swear if anyone says that around me

I want this quote on a shirt

A simple yet powerful sentence.

@@bmalloy0 I would buy it

@@Allmenshouldrespectallwomenyou wont do anything.

Germany is in an absolutely horrible state politically with the "green party" pushing for coal lol. Germany shutting down its reactors was absolutely moronic and funnily enough made it far more dependent on Russia for energy.

Can confirm, we are back in the Stone Age again.

The situation in Germany is a bit more complicated. 5-10 years ago, I've also been saying, that nuclear energy is preferable to coal. But nowadays, after all of this back and forth of shutting down nuclear, then not shutting it down and then shutting them down again, the existing reactors are just not worth to keep running. We'd have to build new reactors, but there's just no point in doing so, when building a new nuclear power plant would take ~10 years. Renewables are cheaper and faster to build. We can get to 70-80% renewables in 10 years even without nuclear energy. And if we're doing so, we'll be needing adjustable power plants, instead of inflexible nuclear reactors. The last 20-30 percent will be challenging, but doable witch a Power-to-Gas infrastructure.

I mean it is better than coal, but it's still not good.

Fusion is ideal but for now fission is the best we have.@@sociallyresponsiblexenomor7608

"stop gap measure we need" too bad radiation is such a KILLER for humans...

​@user-yp2ps3gn3x except it doesn't kill us with radiation, cause of the safety procedures.

​@user-yp2ps3gn3x so what's your solution then? Using it as a stopgap isn't saying that nuclear is without harm, it's saying that it's the best harm reduction in comparison to things like fossil fuels until more widespread adoption of clean energy

@@dreadwolfrisingif you actually care about the environment, nature and humanity you would not support nuclear power. In nature there are volcanoes and wildfires but not nuclear meltdowns leaving corium that could poison the water supply of an entire continent for thousands of years. The risks are evacuating entire states all the way up to extinction. I have hopes for fusion power, what we have now is dirty expensive obsolete technology

A degree from where? Trump university?

It's amazing to think that the biggest opponents to nuclear power have been Democrats. I grew up in Seattle and I was deemed a "right winger" just because I was the only kid in my school who looked up the stats. It's scary how the Democratic Party has gotten away with normalizing anti-environmental misinformation in the past 20 years. By their own rules, they have blood on their hands. Why was I shamed for supporting "Republican anti environmental movements" by so many people, including teachers?