วีดีโอ

Ignalina NPP nuclear reactors were of the type RBMK-1500 and not RBMK-1000

1.5 time

well dude we dont want you in the toilet for to o long but yeah sure

Lol u dont know a thing I dont knew we had gulags

Because ting goes boom and then u dead

@@unitforce7417 not with upgraded rbmk’s

Agreed, it was a solid plant. Different from Chernoybl

The trouble is that the RMBK could not be upgraded to meet Western safety standards the Soviet PWR types could be with significant upgrades to containment, controls and safety systems.

It was EU decision to shut it down. It could have operated for over 15 years and the plant could have payed for its decommission

@@user-py9cy1sy9u lol you are funny. It would never have payed for decommission because of corruption in country. And now is not better, shity laws let everyone from government steal and never get caught.

@@andridcore8042 There can be a separate fund that power plant pays into for every MW/h sold and that money could only be spent on decommissioning. Thats how USA does it.

@@user-py9cy1sy9u in my country the money is for stealing not for using it for projected causes.

EU demanded shut down of the plant as part of Lithuania’s accession to it. Ignalina NPP could have continued running for at least another 20 years. This is false information you said.

Haha... 🤣🤣🤣🤣

Me to

or build a 2 to 4 unit AP1000 power plant.

or maybe they forced the shutdown because it's the shittiest design in the world but whatever fits your propaganda agenda i guess

Watch out, that nice tinfoil Jester's hat has started to slip!

@@subadanus6310 Talk about propaganda. I suppose you think it's a bad design cause you saw a TV show? They fixed the original design flaws and every other RBMK has operated safely since Chernobyl. Safer than say, the BWR in Fukushima. But who cares right? Why actually learn anything about anything when you can just overreact because you get 100 percent of your opinions from a television.

@@blackhawks81H hey buddy, i hate to break your narrative, but i've been studying this shit for like 6 years, long before the shitty non-accurate HBO series came out if you think this is a safe design you're a rusaboo or stupid

@Artūrs Šilaks You mean VVER, MKER is a development of rbmk which fell out of favor after well you know.

@Artūrs Šilaks VVer is good disain.

but ist it politcali good disain?

Should've kept running for about 16 years more in my opinion, this power plant was pretty safe and Lithuania would have more electricity.

@@vervluukt yea and meanwhile now in russia and some other places in the world you can find this chernobyl type of power plants soo

@@probasketspec5025 The operational ones are all in Russia, Leningrad 1 (The first RBMK ever built) was shutdown december last year.

@@vervluukt Yeah and then there would be another Chernobyl type of disaster. Ignalina is a sister power plant to Chernobyl. It actually had a mini accident even before Chernobyl had one. There's no way this power plant was safe.

@@esclove3707 The RBMK-1500 was safer than the RBMK-1000. Yes, i know the mini event at Ignalina, it had a small power surge when starting up reactor 1. They noticed this at the Leningtad NPP in 1975, and it happened in Ignalina aswell. And that was one of the contributors to the Chernobyl disaster. And, Ignalina isnt a sister plant, it uses a different RBMK, therefore, it does not classify as sister. If you want to see the sister of Chernobyl NPP, go to Kursk NPP.

Those problems aren't there anymore.

Almost all of the RBMK still in operation have replaced their graphite tip control rods with a better and safer design. It is also further improved and upgraded with more emergency safety devices. Only three I think still remain with the tips made of graphite. But I don't know if currently the remaining are now being dismantled or further improved.

@@jannadrielcervo7753 The remaining are getting further improved.

@@jannadrielcervo7753 sometime you just can't improve a poorly designed system, plants using graphite as a moderator are inherently unsafe that's why they were never used in the US except for enrichment purposes, maybe you should tear out some engineering books and do a little more research before making claims, poorly designed reactors should be done away with, decommissioned put small bags and plastic barrels and buried and a safe location where will not affect the people or the water table...

@@vervluukt the entire rbmk design is faulty it is a cheap fast way of making power that is inherently unsafe the design the graphite used as a moderator, bwr and pwr are much safer, and have very good safety procedures in place as long as the operators follow them...

You don't know what the fuck you're talkin about the rbmk reactor is a bad design to begin with having graphite on the ends of the control rods plain and simple but the rods in you got a reaction graphite is a moderator increases reaction...

@@trentvo2736 "don't know what the fuck you are talking about" These problems got fixed later, a chance of Chernobyl happening again with a RBMK is practical nihil, those problems were wiped out by the fixes, do more research matey.

@@vervluukt the Ignalina discovery was silenced by KGB. Because Lithuania was then part of a country that has an obsession against being humiliated. Lithuania should have followed Britain in exiting the EU. And if EU was Wise, one improved RBMK be left to operate, until newer, safer and as powerful Western designed Light Water Reactors take over energy and employment needs of the Ignalina area.

@@h.cedric8157 I agree.

@@h.cedric8157 I worked for Atlantic nuclear services at SONGS, working with Bechtel and Westinghouse on the first attempt to resleeve steam generators in unit one, unit one went critical in 1968, & operation until 1980 when it was temporarily off line for approx 1yr for the resleeving project. And went critical for approx 8 years until it was decommissioned. So research was not necessary, but the Russians are cheap and the rbmk reactor is the cheapest way to make a lot of energy, in a unsafe manner, that's why we do not use them for power we use BWR, & PWR for power, graphite moderated reactors like the rbmk is strictly used for enrichment purposes have a nice day knucklehead

EU prostitutė Auštrevičius

Jei saulė sprogtu...

Auštrevičius

I've the last few days been watching documentaries about Chernobyl. One, a BBC documentary, outlines the conversations among those directly in charge of the plant. The main investigator of the accident, in a conversation with another gentleman whose name I haven't caught, reference Ignalina where apparently an incident occurred similar to what happened at Chernobyl--that the rods were not in fact dropped back in, only the tips. I'm still searching about what happened at Ignalina. Just how much was known along the way, known and kept under wraps.

The heads of the power plant ignored these warnings and put safety second while money came first.

@@mole62ssf The bbc one was the only one actually shot there. unit 3s control room was used as fours Adrian edmondson refused an award for playing the part and that was never announced in the media daniel sandford was there at same time as me doing a 25 year ago special wich says when i was there.

@@rumbler900 Which documentary? The ones from the BBC look like the switchyard control room, absolutely not the units control room. The exterior on those documentarys from the BBC arent RBMK exteriors.

@@mole62ssf it is only partially right though. At Ignalina there was once an incident (unfortunately I can't recall how it particularly was caused) where they had to press AZ-5 (the emergency shut down) like they did at Chernobyl right before the reactor blew up. As at Chernobyl they were detecting a rise in power right after pressing AZ-5 before the reactor shut down. Luckily at Ignalina the control rods could be inserted because the reaction was not as overcritical as it was in the Chernobyl accident when the rods were inserted. At Chernobyl the peak of power caused the rods to get stuck so they could not break the reaction anymore, indeed increasing its power even more so, that it eventually blew up.

😂😂😂

They are not RBMK reactors , they have Advanced Gas Cooled reactors (AGR's) that have a graphite moderated core, and are still in use today. I think theyre at Heysham and Hunterston to name a couple.....

Thank christ for that although i think a graphite moderator is a bad idea anyway. Especially with boron or graphite tips on the control rods. It caused an incedent at ignalena and again at chernobyl. Visited the latter in 2010 with a party of 13 planning a revisit now the new containment is in place !! i want my close ups!!. Thanks for the info on the 2 you named for me. I shall set about poking my pc`s nose where it dont belong... again lol

Just looked at heysham god that is one ugly building jeez pripyat looked better than that.

oops www.theguardian.com/environment/2014/aug/11/nuclear-reactors-offline-fault-power-plants

Ignalina never had an accident, these monster units had a superb safety record. Of course the dictatorial EU had to force it's closure when Lithuania joined the club. nothing to do with safety in my opinion, purely political which forced the country to buy it's electricity from elsewhere.

I hate the project it looks like chernobyl nuclear plant and i live in lithuania

i used to live there

Same