Conversation
Hannah (Rest in piece memdmp 
)
hannah@moonserver.yorha.nexus
@kaia@brotka.st Do not press AZ-5!
0
0
2
@kaia there is graphite on the roof btw
0
0
2
🌿 
accidently triggered a nuclear meltdown
@kaia the control rods are cat pictures, and the federation is reactor number 4
0
0
2
Late Stage Mall-Emo Realism
EmoIsDeadAndSoAmI@ljs.social@kaia german Mastodon server janny room
0
0
1
@N33R I still remember the times where I got triple digit repeats.... but those times are gone 
2
0
3
@kaia Sometimes I think about how wrongly the Chernobyl reactor was operated and designed and all the clean and safe energy generation it prevented.
>Want to run reactor loss of coolant test.
>First we stall the reactor and fill it full of neutron poisons (all you can and should do before you can increase power again is to wait several days for the poisons to burn off).
>Oh wait, the test instructions note not to run the reactor test at low power (as the poor design was known to be unstable in that configuration).
>Better increase the power, but pulling out the rods isn't doing much?
>The rector computer is preventing our command to pull out more than the maximum allowed amount of rods? Better go disable that and pull out almost all of the rods.
(The chain reaction has started).
>Oh nice, the power level the test requires has been reached and it looks stable enough, although we're having a hard time keeping the reactor coolant tanks full? No matter.
>Time to cut external power to the coolant pumps and see how long they keep running from power from the spinning-down steam turbines.
(The chain reaction accelerates, as while water, especially heavy water absorbs neutrons quite well, superheated steam barely does anything).
>Test is done? Hit that SCRAM button to put all the rods into the reactor (that wouldn't be a bad idea considering the questionable state the reactor was in if it wasn't for a tip surprise).
(The rods were graphite tipped to poke into the reactor and moderate the reactor at full removal, thus what was left of neutron absorbing water was displaced by whoops, all neutron moderators)
>The power output has suddenly shot up massively, then exponentially?
>Massive steam explosion?
>Containment building would take that right? Wrong, there was no containment building, just containment walls, plus a nice flammable bitumen roof and turbine hall.
>Even then, few people died compared to the direct and indirect deaths of the numerous coal plants required to get the same amount of of power output.
TLDR; The Chernobyl disaster was the reactor operator equivalent of accelerating a car with no functional crumple zone up to 10,000km/h, then mostly cutting the power to the master brake cylinder and then deciding to yank the defective handbrake.
>Want to run reactor loss of coolant test.
>First we stall the reactor and fill it full of neutron poisons (all you can and should do before you can increase power again is to wait several days for the poisons to burn off).
>Oh wait, the test instructions note not to run the reactor test at low power (as the poor design was known to be unstable in that configuration).
>Better increase the power, but pulling out the rods isn't doing much?
>The rector computer is preventing our command to pull out more than the maximum allowed amount of rods? Better go disable that and pull out almost all of the rods.
(The chain reaction has started).
>Oh nice, the power level the test requires has been reached and it looks stable enough, although we're having a hard time keeping the reactor coolant tanks full? No matter.
>Time to cut external power to the coolant pumps and see how long they keep running from power from the spinning-down steam turbines.
(The chain reaction accelerates, as while water, especially heavy water absorbs neutrons quite well, superheated steam barely does anything).
>Test is done? Hit that SCRAM button to put all the rods into the reactor (that wouldn't be a bad idea considering the questionable state the reactor was in if it wasn't for a tip surprise).
(The rods were graphite tipped to poke into the reactor and moderate the reactor at full removal, thus what was left of neutron absorbing water was displaced by whoops, all neutron moderators)
>The power output has suddenly shot up massively, then exponentially?
>Massive steam explosion?
>Containment building would take that right? Wrong, there was no containment building, just containment walls, plus a nice flammable bitumen roof and turbine hall.
>Even then, few people died compared to the direct and indirect deaths of the numerous coal plants required to get the same amount of of power output.
TLDR; The Chernobyl disaster was the reactor operator equivalent of accelerating a car with no functional crumple zone up to 10,000km/h, then mostly cutting the power to the master brake cylinder and then deciding to yank the defective handbrake.
2
0
1
@Suiseiseki @kaia
> we stopped using the magic rocks after they exploded that one time
This feels like intentional sabotage somehow.
> we stopped using the magic rocks after they exploded that one time
This feels like intentional sabotage somehow.
1
0
1
@neopolitan @kaia It is impossible for the magic rocks to explode as reactor-grade fuel is never enriched to a state where it can go supercritical - thus even a fizzle is impossible.
The explosion was steam being heated to tens of thousands of degrees and having nowhere to go and therefore blasted holes through the reactor to escape explosively.
Later it appears that there could have possibly been a secondary hydrogen explosion, as 2H₂O + a shitload of heat gives you in; 2H₂ + O₂
It wasn't sabotage, it was simply a reactor designed wrong (with known flaws), no containment building and very wrong operation (with operating instructions that didn't explain how to avoid the known flaws).
The explosion was steam being heated to tens of thousands of degrees and having nowhere to go and therefore blasted holes through the reactor to escape explosively.
Later it appears that there could have possibly been a secondary hydrogen explosion, as 2H₂O + a shitload of heat gives you in; 2H₂ + O₂
It wasn't sabotage, it was simply a reactor designed wrong (with known flaws), no containment building and very wrong operation (with operating instructions that didn't explain how to avoid the known flaws).
1
0
0
@redneonglow @kaia @N33R There's certainly less conflict since they all blocked us already.
I kinda miss bullying that one OBSESSED black guy who never ever shuts up about how everyone is racis
I kinda miss bullying that one OBSESSED black guy who never ever shuts up about how everyone is racis
0
1
2
Taylan (GNU+Feminism Cat)
taylan@feministwiki.org
@redneonglow @kaia @N33R
Fediblock is indeed a scourge. Fake liberal zealots destroy everything they touch.
Fediblock is indeed a scourge. Fake liberal zealots destroy everything they touch.
0
0
2
@Suiseiseki @kaia @neopolitan conspiracy theory is that it was blown up to cover up the non functional over horizon radar nearby. there is a movie about this, "russian woodpecker" from 2015.
1
0
0
@bonifartius That seems like a extreme stretch when there would have been many less expensive ways to cover up a non-functional radar.
If that was the case, they would have announced that there was an accident, rather than trying to desperately cover it up until small amounts of unusual radioactive isotopes wafted over to nuclear power stations in other countries and were picked up by extremely sensitive detectors.
If that was the case, they would have announced that there was an accident, rather than trying to desperately cover it up until small amounts of unusual radioactive isotopes wafted over to nuclear power stations in other countries and were picked up by extremely sensitive detectors.
0
0
0
@kaia I just realized that the part about what neutron absorbing water is incorrect, but pretty much the graphite tipped rods displacing the water made the chain reactor even faster.
0
0
0