OT: Zelensky wants demilitarized zones around Ukraine\'s nuclear power plants...

[Fred Bloggs]

On Tuesday, March 8, 2022 at 7:28:19 AM UTC-5, bill....@ieee.org wrote:

On Tuesday, March 8, 2022 at 10:43:42 PM UTC+11, Fred Bloggs wrote:
On Sunday, March 6, 2022 at 8:43:52 PM UTC-5, bill....@ieee.org wrote:
On Monday, March 7, 2022 at 11:24:15 AM UTC+11, Fred Bloggs wrote:
On Saturday, March 5, 2022 at 1:33:24 AM UTC-5, John Doe wrote:
He should have never given up his job as a comedian...
It was an artillery bombardment, not an air attack. Artillery will not damage those massive concrete structures in the plant. It takes a HUGE amount of HE to break reinforced concrete, and artillery is not it. The whole story is a bunch of mass media hysteria. Artillery is good for destroying all the big transmission distribution network outside of the plant. And that\'s enough. it\'s out of commission either way.
Fred hasn\'t noticed that it was diesel auxiliary generators that failed at Fukushima, not the containment shell. Mess with a complicated system like a nuclear reactor and the results aren\'t easily predictable.

The generators were almost certainly housed in a structurally substantial housing, like underground.
The Fukushima reactors were equally securely housed. It didn\'t prevent local contamination.
The Russians know all too well the consequences of a catastrophic meltdown and never want to repeat it.
As does everybody else. Not wanting to have a nuclear disaster doesn\'t prevent them from happening, and having some military clown take risks he doesn\'t appreciate by shelling buildings around a nuclear reactor isn\'t a great idea.

I\'m pretty sure Russia has a nuclear engineer at the site directing the targeting for the military clown.

The mass media as usual is trying to terrorize the public with as much stupid speculation as possible. They recently reported the radioactivity at the Chernobyl site has been increasing since the Russian occupation. This is not possible unless the Russians compromised that big containment shelter, which they did not. And why Russia would even want to occupy that place, which is a toxic health hazard, or the Ukrainians would want to defend it, is beyond all rational thought. The Ukrainians claimed that \"fierce\" fighting took place there, but the international nuclear inspectors didn\'t find any evidence of fighting.

It is just as likely to send a radioactive cloud into Russia as anywhere else.
You\'ve got to know the risk you are running before you fire the shells fro that to make any difference,
In an old interview with Gorbachev, he described how he found out about Chernobyl when the Swedish government contacted him to inquire about the origins of a radioactive cloud that passed through their airspace. Up to then the Russian nuclear authority was too timid to pass on the news to the highest level of their government. As a side note, France really got doused but good by that same radioactive cloud, and suffered major contamination in the vineyards. But they covered it up rather than take a hit to their industry.
There is no shortage of short-sighted half-wits in any country.

--
Bill Sloman, Sydney

 

[Clifford Heath]

On 9/3/22 4:26 am, Fred Bloggs wrote:
> The mass media as usual is trying to terrorize the public with as much stupid speculation as possible. They recently reported the radioactivity at the Chernobyl site has been increasing since the Russian occupation. This is not possible unless the Russians compromised that big containment shelter, which they did not.

You don\'t reckon driving a few hundred big trucks around might kick up
some of the radioactive dust from surface soil around the site?

 

[server]

Fred Bloggs <bloggs.fredbloggs.fred@gmail.com> wrote in
news:96c8998d-e6e5-464a-83d4-de7e8a965a10n@googlegroups.com:

I\'m pretty sure Russia has a nuclear engineer at the site
directing the targeting for the military clown.

They cannot even keep their dry rotted APC tires filled.

They sprayed some large caliber machine gun fire at the building and
hit a couple external Gas cylinders to scare away the workers there.
Then, they easily occupied the fully functional facility.

 

[Anthony William Sloman]

On Wednesday, March 9, 2022 at 4:26:50 AM UTC+11, Fred Bloggs wrote:

On Tuesday, March 8, 2022 at 7:28:19 AM UTC-5, bill....@ieee.org wrote:
On Tuesday, March 8, 2022 at 10:43:42 PM UTC+11, Fred Bloggs wrote:
On Sunday, March 6, 2022 at 8:43:52 PM UTC-5, bill....@ieee.org wrote:
On Monday, March 7, 2022 at 11:24:15 AM UTC+11, Fred Bloggs wrote:
On Saturday, March 5, 2022 at 1:33:24 AM UTC-5, John Doe wrote:
He should have never given up his job as a comedian...
It was an artillery bombardment, not an air attack. Artillery will not damage those massive concrete structures in the plant. It takes a HUGE amount of HE to break reinforced concrete, and artillery is not it. The whole story is a bunch of mass media hysteria. Artillery is good for destroying all the big transmission distribution network outside of the plant. And that\'s enough. it\'s out of commission either way.
Fred hasn\'t noticed that it was diesel auxiliary generators that failed at Fukushima, not the containment shell. Mess with a complicated system like a nuclear reactor and the results aren\'t easily predictable.

The generators were almost certainly housed in a structurally substantial housing, like underground.
The Fukushima reactors were equally securely housed. It didn\'t prevent local contamination.
The Russians know all too well the consequences of a catastrophic meltdown and never want to repeat it.
As does everybody else. Not wanting to have a nuclear disaster doesn\'t prevent them from happening, and having some military clown take risks he doesn\'t appreciate by shelling buildings around a nuclear reactor isn\'t a great idea.

I\'m pretty sure Russia has a nuclear engineer at the site directing the targeting for the military clown.

Really? Why?

> The mass media as usual is trying to terrorize the public with as much stupid speculation as possible. They recently reported the radioactivity at the Chernobyl site has been increasing since the Russian occupation. This is not possible unless the Russians compromised that big containment shelter, which they did not. And why Russia would even want to occupy that place, which is a toxic health hazard, or the Ukrainians would want to defend it, is beyond all rational thought. The Ukrainians claimed that \"fierce\" fighting took place there, but the international nuclear inspectors didn\'t find any evidence of fighting.

As Clifford Heath has pointed out., the problem with Chernobyl was that it spread a lot of radioactive junk outside the reactor - some of it got as far as Sweden, the UK and France - before the containment shelter was set up around the stuff that hadn\'t got out. The whole area is contaminated.

It is just as likely to send a radioactive cloud into Russia as anywhere else.

You\'ve got to know the risk you are running before you fire the shells for that to make any difference,

In an old interview with Gorbachev, he described how he found out about Chernobyl when the Swedish government contacted him to inquire about the origins of a radioactive cloud that passed through their airspace. Up to then the Russian nuclear authority was too timid to pass on the news to the highest level of their government. As a side note, France really got doused but good by that same radioactive cloud, and suffered major contamination in the vineyards. But they covered it up rather than take a hit to their industry.

There is no shortage of short-sighted half-wits in any country.

--
Bill Sloman, Sydney

 

[Fred Bloggs]

On Tuesday, March 8, 2022 at 4:21:05 PM UTC-5, Clifford Heath wrote:

On 9/3/22 4:26 am, Fred Bloggs wrote:
The mass media as usual is trying to terrorize the public with as much stupid speculation as possible. They recently reported the radioactivity at the Chernobyl site has been increasing since the Russian occupation. This is not possible unless the Russians compromised that big containment shelter, which they did not.
You don\'t reckon driving a few hundred big trucks around might kick up
some of the radioactive dust from surface soil around the site?

LOL_ so does a wind storm. Now the over-reactors are fretting over the power being cut so they no longer have active cooling for the spent fuel in storage. Everyone is screaming continent-wide contamination.

The IAEA sees \'no critical impact\' on safety however. I tend to go with them rather than a bunch of career liars and cheats with an agenda.

https://www.reuters.com/world/ukraine-nuclear-firm-warns-radiation-risk-after-power-cut-occupied-chernobyl-2022-03-09/

 

[Fred Bloggs]

On Tuesday, March 8, 2022 at 9:28:23 PM UTC-5, bill....@ieee.org wrote:

On Wednesday, March 9, 2022 at 4:26:50 AM UTC+11, Fred Bloggs wrote:
On Tuesday, March 8, 2022 at 7:28:19 AM UTC-5, bill....@ieee.org wrote:
On Tuesday, March 8, 2022 at 10:43:42 PM UTC+11, Fred Bloggs wrote:
On Sunday, March 6, 2022 at 8:43:52 PM UTC-5, bill....@ieee.org wrote:
On Monday, March 7, 2022 at 11:24:15 AM UTC+11, Fred Bloggs wrote:
On Saturday, March 5, 2022 at 1:33:24 AM UTC-5, John Doe wrote:
He should have never given up his job as a comedian...
It was an artillery bombardment, not an air attack. Artillery will not damage those massive concrete structures in the plant. It takes a HUGE amount of HE to break reinforced concrete, and artillery is not it. The whole story is a bunch of mass media hysteria. Artillery is good for destroying all the big transmission distribution network outside of the plant. And that\'s enough. it\'s out of commission either way.
Fred hasn\'t noticed that it was diesel auxiliary generators that failed at Fukushima, not the containment shell. Mess with a complicated system like a nuclear reactor and the results aren\'t easily predictable.

The generators were almost certainly housed in a structurally substantial housing, like underground.
The Fukushima reactors were equally securely housed. It didn\'t prevent local contamination.
The Russians know all too well the consequences of a catastrophic meltdown and never want to repeat it.
As does everybody else. Not wanting to have a nuclear disaster doesn\'t prevent them from happening, and having some military clown take risks he doesn\'t appreciate by shelling buildings around a nuclear reactor isn\'t a great idea.

I\'m pretty sure Russia has a nuclear engineer at the site directing the targeting for the military clown.
Really? Why?

Because that\'s how they roll. You would be surprised at the kinds of people they put on the battlefield in far less important conflicts. The only question is about the kind of people they call nuclear engineers.

The mass media as usual is trying to terrorize the public with as much stupid speculation as possible. They recently reported the radioactivity at the Chernobyl site has been increasing since the Russian occupation. This is not possible unless the Russians compromised that big containment shelter, which they did not. And why Russia would even want to occupy that place, which is a toxic health hazard, or the Ukrainians would want to defend it, is beyond all rational thought. The Ukrainians claimed that \"fierce\" fighting took place there, but the international nuclear inspectors didn\'t find any evidence of fighting.
As Clifford Heath has pointed out., the problem with Chernobyl was that it spread a lot of radioactive junk outside the reactor - some of it got as far as Sweden, the UK and France - before the containment shelter was set up around the stuff that hadn\'t got out. The whole area is contaminated.

Nothing like reading back what I already told you yesterday...

It is just as likely to send a radioactive cloud into Russia as anywhere else.

You\'ve got to know the risk you are running before you fire the shells for that to make any difference,

In an old interview with Gorbachev, he described how he found out about Chernobyl when the Swedish government contacted him to inquire about the origins of a radioactive cloud that passed through their airspace. Up to then the Russian nuclear authority was too timid to pass on the news to the highest level of their government. As a side note, France really got doused but good by that same radioactive cloud, and suffered major contamination in the vineyards. But they covered it up rather than take a hit to their industry.

There is no shortage of short-sighted half-wits in any country.

--
Bill Sloman, Sydney

 

[Anthony William Sloman]

On Thursday, March 10, 2022 at 7:37:03 AM UTC+11, Fred Bloggs wrote:

On Tuesday, March 8, 2022 at 4:21:05 PM UTC-5, Clifford Heath wrote:
On 9/3/22 4:26 am, Fred Bloggs wrote:
The mass media as usual is trying to terrorize the public with as much stupid speculation as possible. They recently reported the radioactivity at the Chernobyl site has been increasing since the Russian occupation. This is not possible unless the Russians compromised that big containment shelter, which they did not.
You don\'t reckon driving a few hundred big trucks around might kick up
some of the radioactive dust from surface soil around the site?

LOL_ so does a wind storm.

It might. Have you any evidence that it ever has?

Now the over-reactors are fretting over the power being cut so they no longer have active cooling for the spent fuel in storage. Everyone is screaming continent-wide contamination.

The IAEA sees \'no critical impact\' on safety however. I tend to go with them rather than a bunch of career liars and cheats with an agenda.

They don\'t see any immediate threat. It takes while for spent fuel to warm up enough for life to get interesting.

> https://www.reuters.com/world/ukraine-nuclear-firm-warns-radiation-risk-after-power-cut-occupied-chernobyl-2022-03-09/

\"Systems monitoring nuclear material at the radioactive waste facilities at Chernobyl in Ukraine, which were taken over by Russian forces last month, have stopped transmitting data to the U.N. nuclear watchdog, it said on Tuesday.\"

If it does get warm enough, we won\'t get a lot of warning.

--
Bill Sloman, Sydney

 

[Anthony William Sloman]

On Thursday, March 10, 2022 at 7:43:18 AM UTC+11, Fred Bloggs wrote:

On Tuesday, March 8, 2022 at 9:28:23 PM UTC-5, bill....@ieee.org wrote:
On Wednesday, March 9, 2022 at 4:26:50 AM UTC+11, Fred Bloggs wrote:
On Tuesday, March 8, 2022 at 7:28:19 AM UTC-5, bill....@ieee.org wrote:
On Tuesday, March 8, 2022 at 10:43:42 PM UTC+11, Fred Bloggs wrote:
On Sunday, March 6, 2022 at 8:43:52 PM UTC-5, bill....@ieee.org wrote:
On Monday, March 7, 2022 at 11:24:15 AM UTC+11, Fred Bloggs wrote:
On Saturday, March 5, 2022 at 1:33:24 AM UTC-5, John Doe wrote:

He should have never given up his job as a comedian...
It was an artillery bombardment, not an air attack. Artillery will not damage those massive concrete structures in the plant. It takes a HUGE amount of HE to break reinforced concrete, and artillery is not it. The whole story is a bunch of mass media hysteria. Artillery is good for destroying all the big transmission distribution network outside of the plant. And that\'s enough. it\'s out of commission either way.

Fred hasn\'t noticed that it was diesel auxiliary generators that failed at Fukushima, not the containment shell. Mess with a complicated system like a nuclear reactor and the results aren\'t easily predictable.

The generators were almost certainly housed in a structurally substantial housing, like underground.
The Fukushima reactors were equally securely housed. It didn\'t prevent local contamination.
The Russians know all too well the consequences of a catastrophic meltdown and never want to repeat it.
As does everybody else. Not wanting to have a nuclear disaster doesn\'t prevent them from happening, and having some military clown take risks he doesn\'t appreciate by shelling buildings around a nuclear reactor isn\'t a great idea.

I\'m pretty sure Russia has a nuclear engineer at the site directing the targeting for the military clown.
Really? Why?

Because that\'s how they roll. You would be surprised at the kinds of people they put on the battlefield in far less important conflicts. The only question is about the kind of people they call nuclear engineers.

I might be surprised at what they\'ve done in the past. I\'m pretty surprised that they were silly enough to shell a working nuclear reactor. The whole Ukranian invasion is pretty silly, and does suggest a fair bit of high level lunacy.

The mass media as usual is trying to terrorize the public with as much stupid speculation as possible. They recently reported the radioactivity at the Chernobyl site has been increasing since the Russian occupation. This is not possible unless the Russians compromised that big containment shelter, which they did not. And why Russia would even want to occupy that place, which is a toxic health hazard, or the Ukrainians would want to defend it, is beyond all rational thought. The Ukrainians claimed that \"fierce\" fighting took place there, but the international nuclear inspectors didn\'t find any evidence of fighting.

As Clifford Heath has pointed out., the problem with Chernobyl was that it spread a lot of radioactive junk outside the reactor - some of it got as far as Sweden, the UK and France - before the containment shelter was set up around the stuff that hadn\'t got out. The whole area is contaminated.

Nothing like reading back what I already told you yesterday...

So how come you don\'t seem to have understood it?

It is just as likely to send a radioactive cloud into Russia as anywhere else.

You\'ve got to know the risk you are running before you fire the shells for that to make any difference,

In an old interview with Gorbachev, he described how he found out about Chernobyl when the Swedish government contacted him to inquire about the origins of a radioactive cloud that passed through their airspace. Up to then the Russian nuclear authority was too timid to pass on the news to the highest level of their government. As a side note, France really got doused but good by that same radioactive cloud, and suffered major contamination in the vineyards. But they covered it up rather than take a hit to their industry.

There is no shortage of short-sighted half-wits in any country.

--
Bill Sloman, Sydney

 

[server]

Fred Bloggs <bloggs.fredbloggs.fred@gmail.com> wrote in
news:dad01bb1-5d6f-4b16-9b6c-0ff7a2a89ff9n@googlegroups.com:

On Tuesday, March 8, 2022 at 4:21:05 PM UTC-5, Clifford Heath
wrote:
On 9/3/22 4:26 am, Fred Bloggs wrote:
The mass media as usual is trying to terrorize the public with
as much
stupid speculation as possible. They recently reported the
radioactivity at the Chernobyl site has been increasing since the
Russian occupation. This is not possible unless the Russians
compromised that big containment shelter, which they did not.
You don\'t reckon driving a few hundred big trucks around might
kick up some of the radioactive dust from surface soil around the
site?

LOL_ so does a wind storm. Now the over-reactors are fretting over
the power being cut so they no longer have active cooling for the
spent fuel in storage. Everyone is screaming continent-wide
contamination.

The IAEA sees \'no critical impact\' on safety however. I tend to go
with them rather than a bunch of career liars and cheats with an
agenda.

https://www.reuters.com/world/ukraine-nuclear-firm-warns-radiation-
risk-after-power-cut-occupied-chernobyl-2022-03-09/

Send Elon Musk over there to have a nice big dinner served in the
containment room on a bench that has been there this whole time. He
says... no big deal.

 

[StupidAs StupidGet]

On Wednesday, March 9, 2022 at 7:36:54 PM UTC-8, DecadentLinux...@decadence.org wrote:

Send Elon Musk over there to have a nice big dinner served in the
containment room on a bench that has been there this whole time. He
says... no big deal.

And us, FFF, with him.

 

[Fred Bloggs]

On Wednesday, March 9, 2022 at 10:03:26 PM UTC-5, bill....@ieee.org wrote:

On Thursday, March 10, 2022 at 7:43:18 AM UTC+11, Fred Bloggs wrote:
On Tuesday, March 8, 2022 at 9:28:23 PM UTC-5, bill....@ieee.org wrote:
On Wednesday, March 9, 2022 at 4:26:50 AM UTC+11, Fred Bloggs wrote:
On Tuesday, March 8, 2022 at 7:28:19 AM UTC-5, bill....@ieee.org wrote:
On Tuesday, March 8, 2022 at 10:43:42 PM UTC+11, Fred Bloggs wrote:
On Sunday, March 6, 2022 at 8:43:52 PM UTC-5, bill....@ieee.org wrote:
On Monday, March 7, 2022 at 11:24:15 AM UTC+11, Fred Bloggs wrote:
On Saturday, March 5, 2022 at 1:33:24 AM UTC-5, John Doe wrote:

He should have never given up his job as a comedian...
It was an artillery bombardment, not an air attack. Artillery will not damage those massive concrete structures in the plant. It takes a HUGE amount of HE to break reinforced concrete, and artillery is not it. The whole story is a bunch of mass media hysteria. Artillery is good for destroying all the big transmission distribution network outside of the plant. And that\'s enough. it\'s out of commission either way.

Fred hasn\'t noticed that it was diesel auxiliary generators that failed at Fukushima, not the containment shell. Mess with a complicated system like a nuclear reactor and the results aren\'t easily predictable.

The generators were almost certainly housed in a structurally substantial housing, like underground.
The Fukushima reactors were equally securely housed. It didn\'t prevent local contamination.
The Russians know all too well the consequences of a catastrophic meltdown and never want to repeat it.
As does everybody else. Not wanting to have a nuclear disaster doesn\'t prevent them from happening, and having some military clown take risks he doesn\'t appreciate by shelling buildings around a nuclear reactor isn\'t a great idea.

I\'m pretty sure Russia has a nuclear engineer at the site directing the targeting for the military clown.
Really? Why?

Because that\'s how they roll. You would be surprised at the kinds of people they put on the battlefield in far less important conflicts. The only question is about the kind of people they call nuclear engineers.
I might be surprised at what they\'ve done in the past. I\'m pretty surprised that they were silly enough to shell a working nuclear reactor. The whole Ukranian invasion is pretty silly, and does suggest a fair bit of high level lunacy.
The mass media as usual is trying to terrorize the public with as much stupid speculation as possible. They recently reported the radioactivity at the Chernobyl site has been increasing since the Russian occupation. This is not possible unless the Russians compromised that big containment shelter, which they did not. And why Russia would even want to occupy that place, which is a toxic health hazard, or the Ukrainians would want to defend it, is beyond all rational thought. The Ukrainians claimed that \"fierce\" fighting took place there, but the international nuclear inspectors didn\'t find any evidence of fighting.

As Clifford Heath has pointed out., the problem with Chernobyl was that it spread a lot of radioactive junk outside the reactor - some of it got as far as Sweden, the UK and France - before the containment shelter was set up around the stuff that hadn\'t got out. The whole area is contaminated.

Nothing like reading back what I already told you yesterday...
So how come you don\'t seem to have understood it?
It is just as likely to send a radioactive cloud into Russia as anywhere else.

You\'ve got to know the risk you are running before you fire the shells for that to make any difference,

In an old interview with Gorbachev, he described how he found out about Chernobyl when the Swedish government contacted him to inquire about the origins of a radioactive cloud that passed through their airspace. Up to then the Russian nuclear authority was too timid to pass on the news to the highest level of their government. As a side note, France really got doused but good by that same radioactive cloud, and suffered major contamination in the vineyards. But they covered it up rather than take a hit to their industry.

There is no shortage of short-sighted half-wits in any country.

More of your pat insulting bullshit. You\'re the only one around here having trouble understanding anything. You like to think of yourself as this complex thinker but you\'re not. Since Chernobyl occurred 36 years ago, its fuel rods are long past requiring active cooling The Ukrainians must be storing recently spent fuel rods there. Loss of remote temperature monitoring does not mean loss of monitoring.
Nothing going on in Ukraine is critical:
https://www.nature.com/articles/d41586-022-00660-z

--
Bill Sloman, Sydney

 

[Anthony William Sloman]

On Friday, March 11, 2022 at 9:05:32 PM UTC+11, Fred Bloggs wrote:

On Wednesday, March 9, 2022 at 10:03:26 PM UTC-5, bill....@ieee.org wrote:
On Thursday, March 10, 2022 at 7:43:18 AM UTC+11, Fred Bloggs wrote:
On Tuesday, March 8, 2022 at 9:28:23 PM UTC-5, bill....@ieee.org wrote:
On Wednesday, March 9, 2022 at 4:26:50 AM UTC+11, Fred Bloggs wrote:
On Tuesday, March 8, 2022 at 7:28:19 AM UTC-5, bill....@ieee.org wrote:
On Tuesday, March 8, 2022 at 10:43:42 PM UTC+11, Fred Bloggs wrote:
On Sunday, March 6, 2022 at 8:43:52 PM UTC-5, bill....@ieee.org wrote:
On Monday, March 7, 2022 at 11:24:15 AM UTC+11, Fred Bloggs wrote:
On Saturday, March 5, 2022 at 1:33:24 AM UTC-5, John Doe wrote:

He should have never given up his job as a comedian...
It was an artillery bombardment, not an air attack. Artillery will not damage those massive concrete structures in the plant. It takes a HUGE amount of HE to break reinforced concrete, and artillery is not it. The whole story is a bunch of mass media hysteria. Artillery is good for destroying all the big transmission distribution network outside of the plant. And that\'s enough. it\'s out of commission either way.

Fred hasn\'t noticed that it was diesel auxiliary generators that failed at Fukushima, not the containment shell. Mess with a complicated system like a nuclear reactor and the results aren\'t easily predictable.

The generators were almost certainly housed in a structurally substantial housing, like underground.
The Fukushima reactors were equally securely housed. It didn\'t prevent local contamination.
The Russians know all too well the consequences of a catastrophic meltdown and never want to repeat it.
As does everybody else. Not wanting to have a nuclear disaster doesn\'t prevent them from happening, and having some military clown take risks he doesn\'t appreciate by shelling buildings around a nuclear reactor isn\'t a great idea.

I\'m pretty sure Russia has a nuclear engineer at the site directing the targeting for the military clown.
Really? Why?

Because that\'s how they roll. You would be surprised at the kinds of people they put on the battlefield in far less important conflicts. The only question is about the kind of people they call nuclear engineers.
I might be surprised at what they\'ve done in the past. I\'m pretty surprised that they were silly enough to shell a working nuclear reactor. The whole Ukranian invasion is pretty silly, and does suggest a fair bit of high level lunacy.
The mass media as usual is trying to terrorize the public with as much stupid speculation as possible. They recently reported the radioactivity at the Chernobyl site has been increasing since the Russian occupation. This is not possible unless the Russians compromised that big containment shelter, which they did not. And why Russia would even want to occupy that place, which is a toxic health hazard, or the Ukrainians would want to defend it, is beyond all rational thought. The Ukrainians claimed that \"fierce\" fighting took place there, but the international nuclear inspectors didn\'t find any evidence of fighting.

As Clifford Heath has pointed out., the problem with Chernobyl was that it spread a lot of radioactive junk outside the reactor - some of it got as far as Sweden, the UK and France - before the containment shelter was set up around the stuff that hadn\'t got out. The whole area is contaminated.

Nothing like reading back what I already told you yesterday...
So how come you don\'t seem to have understood it?
It is just as likely to send a radioactive cloud into Russia as anywhere else.

You\'ve got to know the risk you are running before you fire the shells for that to make any difference,

In an old interview with Gorbachev, he described how he found out about Chernobyl when the Swedish government contacted him to inquire about the origins of a radioactive cloud that passed through their airspace. Up to then the Russian nuclear authority was too timid to pass on the news to the highest level of their government. As a side note, France really got doused but good by that same radioactive cloud, and suffered major contamination in the vineyards. But they covered it up rather than take a hit to their industry.

There is no shortage of short-sighted half-wits in any country.

More of your pat insulting bullshit.

Such a polite observation.

>You\'re the only one around here having trouble understanding anything.

Dream on.

> You like to think of yourself as this complex thinker but you\'re not.

By which you mean that you can\'t follow the complexities that I mention?

> Since Chernobyl occurred 36 years ago, its fuel rods are long past requiring active cooling.

The problem with Chernobyl isn\'t the fuel rods. In case you have forgotten, the Chernobyl reactor fell apart, and large chunks of it\'s contents got spread far and wide. Some of it got to the UK, Sweden and France (as you have mentioned). More of it hit the ground fairly close to Chernobyl, and that\'s why the area is kept closed off.

The Ukrainians must be storing recently spent fuel rods there. Loss of remote temperature monitoring does not mean loss of monitoring.
Nothing going on in Ukraine is critical:
https://www.nature.com/articles/d41586-022-00660-z

Not at the moment. The Nature article does make the same point that I did - you do need to keep coolant circulating even after the reactor is shut down. Flinging artillery shells around can interfere with that.

--
Bill Sloman, Sydney