Three Mile Island Documentary: Nuclear Power's Promise and Peril | Retro Report | The New York Times
ฝัง
- เผยแพร่เมื่อ 28 เม.ย. 2014
- More than three decades after the accident at Three Mile Island cast a shadow on the atomic dream, is America again ready to give nuclear energy a chance?
Read the story here: nyti.ms/1kbsca6
Subscribe on TH-cam: bit.ly/U8Ys7n
Watch more videos at: nytimes.com/video
---------------------------------------------------------------
Want more from The New York Times?
Twitter: / nytvideo
Facebook: / nytimes
Google+: plus.google.com/+nytimes/
Whether it's reporting on conflicts abroad and political divisions at home, or covering the latest style trends and scientific developments, New York Times video journalists provide a revealing and unforgettable view of the world. It's all the news that's fit to watch. On TH-cam.
Three Mile Island Documentary: Nuclear Power's Promise and Peril | Retro Report | The New York Times
/ thenewyorktimes
United States Government: we can't send people in here with all of that radiation.
The Soviets: Get on the roof.
Nuclear disasters always include poorer people who have to go into a hot area & get destroyed from the inside out
It's only 3.6 roentgen.
It's over 15,000!!!!!!
@@sakirabbit900 Not Great, Not Terrible.
@@edwardmakabling418 That's actually quite significa-
Three Mile Island: **
Chernobyl: *_hold my Plutonium Rod_*
@@WestSideGorilla1980 it's not 3 Roentgen is 15.000🤤👍
Uranium 235
Chernobyl : Not Great Not Terrible...
Impossible Gameplay no worse than a chest x ray, comrade
Three mile Island didn't have to happen. My father worked on the building of the reactor core. According to him it's wasn't up to specification but deemed ok by The Atomic Energy Commission. Needless to say everyone that worked on the project got layed off and Babcock and Wilcox closed the facility.
3.6 mile island , not great but not terrible.
Epic comment!
love it
Not great, but it's not "HORRIFYING!!!!"......why does everyone get it wrong???
Nailed it
@@WheresTheSauce Dyatlov never says horrifying, he says terrible. You're thinking of Bryukhanov.
The problem with nuclear power isn't nuclear power, the problem is people who don't follow safety protocols and regulations.
People like that shouldn't be trusted with regular power plants much more so nuclear.
That _is_ a problem with nuclear. Over time, and as things spread, things like safety and maintenance will slip. If something can not survive human error, then the thing is not safe.
this is exactly what caused the chernobyl disaster too
Pay the workers more. It will allow you to hire a higher caliber, smarter worker....all jobs that are this important to public safety should come with huge wages. Could you imagine your local McDonalds worker at one of these? There would be daily meltdowns lol..
What about the disposal of nuclear waste? We have yet to figure that one out, which is terrifying, considering the US has nearly 100 nuclear reactors.
Have to wonder how many sock-puppets are in this conversation
We make a huge mistake when we talk about nuclear power as if it were all one technology. That's like talking about fire as if it were one technology. Coal fires power plants, gunpowder fires bullets, propane fires my stove, and heating oil fires the boiler in my apartment building. It's all fire, but we don't talk about them all as "fire power." Nuclear power come in a wide variety of designs, from the tiny power packs used on space probes to the massive propulsion systems on the largest aircraft carriers. In fact, the smoke detector in your home most likely uses nuclear power as well as electric power. Designs exist that can make nuclear-powered generators that are safe for a given location and use.
Chernobyl had numerous engineering and human factors that simply don't exist today (i.e., flaws in the design of the reactor were a Soviet state secret, so no one at the plant was allowed to learn how to deal with them or even discuss them), and Fukoshima was only a nuclear disaster because, in an area that's prone to earthquakes and tsunamis, they decided to put the emergency generator in the easily-flooded basement. All of the redundant safeties worked just fine except a power source for the cooling water when the plant was shut down and the basement was flooded. Consider though, with as many reactors as we have in the world, we have a pretty good track record, even with the utter lunacy of the Chernobyl design (which would never be built again) and the Fukoshima generator location. How many coal miners and oil workers (mariners on tankers, people on oil rigs, ferry pilots, etc.) have died bringing us the fire that is so superior to the atom?
Well worded.
Anything and everything related to fusion and fission reactions is grossly misunderstood by almost (at least 95% I think) everyone.
@@davidfortier6976 myself partially but not entirely included.
The problem with the atom is that it is so efficient it keeps burning even when you don't want it to. For centuries under the right circumstances. Chernobyl is Darkly hilarious.
@@razycrandomgirlrazycrandomgirl yeah, heard something about the fuel still emitting heat for years after use, by radioactivity, but could be wrong...
"Three Mile Island Documentary"
Not a single word was spend on how and why it happened. Mkay.
Yeah, so annoying. They spent half the documentary showing lame old commercials/ TV shows. Basically a dumbed down documentary for the american population. It's what they relate to...
Look at who uploaded it.. surprised?
Word
it was, stuck valve
More propaganda from the NYTrash
Does anybody see a slight difference between how the news spread out in America to how it was handled in Chernobyl?
The differences are quantitative not qualitative.
I mean the soviets kinda had the balls on the wall on that one, three mile island took 1 billion to clean, Chernobyl took 18 billion.
Ironwood Livin I honestly think that if chernobyl happened in the US they would have just roped off a huge area around the reactor. The Soviets barely had an issue with throwing men to their deaths until the problem was no more.
@@eseagente if three mile island blew sure about the evac, but we would have been forced to send in men
The the soviets would have gotten away without anyone knowing about chernobyl like they did with the multiple other nuclear disasters that happened in the USSR if it wasn't for the meddling swedes
No one may have died from the incident, but the effect this had on the public's perception of nuclear power will likely result in the death of millions. Just imagine how many more nuclear plants we'd have powering this country today if this never happened. Electricity would be so much cheaper and the world wouldn't be about to have its own meltdown from burning so many fossil fuels.
We aren't on our way to meltdown from burning fossil fuels. If you look at all the climate data back to 1895, it shows a cooling trend. So much, that in the 1970's scientists were worried about a new ice age. In the 1930's temperatures were 1.4 to 1.5 degrees hotter than today, hence the Dust Bowl. Temperatures have actually decreased down to 1.1 degrees above average.
"No one may have died from the incident, but the effect this had on the public's perception of nuclear power will likely result in the death of millions." Can you please explain why? How will a poor perception of nuclear power plants result in the death of millions?
@@petefluffy7420 rtfp
it says that the lack of nuclear plants will result in mass death from global warming.
siuyfaysc I too cane idiotic iniitialisms
The reliance on coal as both a pollutant and as a radioactive fallout kills more people per year than nuclear power has in total. @@petefluffy7420
Fusion und fission are not the same!
been a while since i took a science class so correct me if i'm wrong but aren't they pretty much the opposite?
@@bloodbathbeyond987 Yes they are opposites of each other. Fission splits large atoms like Uranium and Plutonium apart while fusion takes small elements like Hydrogen and merges them together. Both produce large amounts of energy so large that it takes over 700 wind mills to equal your average nuclear reactor
@@AdamSmith-gs2dv i thought it was something like that but didn't want to run the risk of sounding stupid (something i do fairly often) lol.
Fusion is melting two things together.
Fission is what happens when you shake a can of Cola, then open it. Lots of energy forces!
Scorch428 maybe we should open coca cola power plants
Oh yes get rid of that dangerous nuclear energy! Now if you'll excuse me I'm going to go snort some coal.
get rid of all of them. all energy sources must die.
Coal soot makes for good coffee
You mean "clean coal," as 45 stated. The coal is cleaned and it's very clean. What a moron.
@@dresdners54 i was surprised he never suggested pouring soap over coal.
@@definitely_notme4112
It’s not a clean source of energy like coal Energy corporations are delusional they think that it is a affective and clean source of energy when it’s not.
I was 9yrs old. I lived in one of the closest houses to TMI. My 3rd grade class was already held in the nuclear shelter in the school. I remember. It was very scary. My narcissist mother would not leave because she was getting media attention. This programed me for a life of anxiety.
I hope one day you can overcome you anxiety. That must have been the worst place to be.
I feel you bro my dad was there to so it must have been scary
@@bkgamerplayz1101 yeah it was.
My parents name are Garnish maybe he heard of them. It was a small town back in the day
Gen X life...
I don't like how they don't get into the details.
I lived close to this plant. When I was in school, they gave our parents permission forms for the school to give us iodine pills in case of a meltdown..the pill would protect our thyroid gland from exposure..the test alarms where always scary to hear everyday..
MoRBiD TWinKY I live near West Point I hear em the first Wednesday of every month
As a former teacher from and currently still living in the Harrisburg area, they still give kids iodine pills I believe
I came home with that same form I remember it. Parents had to sign off on it. Didn't understand why are the time as I was young.
@@queenemma5823 I thought I remembered my kids coming home with that form too. I didn't know if I was remembering wrong but since I read your comment I knew my memory was correct. We are from Elizabethtown so pretty close to Middletown and TMI
There are two important things we must always keep in mind...
1) The engineers at TMI went home to their families at the end of the day and got a higher dose of radiation from their own basements (as a result of naturally occurring radiation that comes from the earth) than they got at the power plant during the meltdown.
2) The least afraid people to walk around at a nuclear power facility are the very same engineers who built and designed the structure.
***** Paid nuclear troll? Now that is a new one. Where is my paycheck? Would it be fair to assume you are nothing more than a paid anti-nuclear troll? I hope not.
Deep breaths man. Fukushima is not 10 times bigger than Chernobyl. Fukushima was bad, but Chernobyl was far worse.
Despite what a few conspiracy websites might say, there has not been a single death from radiation poisoning in the commercial sector of nuclear power. This applies to every country outside the Soviet Union. That is an incredible safety record. (This includes Fukushima, BTW.)
Your distinction between natural and unnatural radiation is odd. Ionizing radiation is the same, regardless of the source. Being exposed to levels above a certain threshold is unhealthy for you, whether that comes from your home basement or at a power plant. In fact, the EPA warns people about radon exposure in their basements and have spent millions on ad campaigns about it.
***** Who is Patrick?
***** Hmmm... I've never watch Sponge Bob. This bespeaks the level of intellectual dept of this conversation.
*****
You said: " France is spilling Nuclear Waste into the Black Sea, daily."
Where are you getting this information. France isn't anywhere near the black sea.
You said: " Here is the industry killing beagles and baboons in tests. YOU ARE FREAKING BUSTED!"
I never killed any beagles. But if you want me to admit that plutonium is toxic, okay then: I'll admit plutonium is toxic. Some puppies died.
Yous said: "Any terrorist with 8 drones can level 8 Nuclear Reactors in the USA, since there is no air defense security. "
Notice that on 9/11, the bad guys didn't fly 747's into a nuclear power plant. Why? Well, it turns out that each reactor has a containment dome around it made of solid concrete. Would it surprise you that they literally design these domes to withstand a direct hit from an airliner? If I were a terrorist, I would not go after a nuclear reactor. There are too many other softer targets that can do more damage.
You said: " Once the Nuclear Plants melt down, they will pretty much radiate all the farm lands and water supplies for the most of the USA."
No. If you will look at my opening comments, there was a real life melt down at TMI and nothing got radiated because of the containment dome around it.
Like I said in the opening, nobody is least afraid to walk around a nuclear power plant than the nuclear engineers (of whom I know many) who work there. Even at TMI and Fukushima, nobody got a lethal dose of radiation from either accident.
***** Is that the best you have?
The containment dome is sometimes referred to as a "missile shield," though I should not have said that it will repel a missile as this is difficult to quantify. Either way, they have tested the wall again real life aircraft, and the wall won. The fact that this was done is pretty impressive. Count me in as one who is not worried.
If we are serious about tackling environmental problems, we must look at the nuclear option. When you look past all the hysteria and focus on the reality of our future, we must consider nuclear energy as the leading power source. I will say, without apology, that nuclear energy is one of the most environmentally friendly options out there. The industry has a remarkable history of safety, and produces virtually no CO2 emissions. All of this is easily verifiable.
Meanwhile, as I've stated at least twice already, those who understand the industry the best (i.e. the nuclear engineers) are the least afraid. Stop. Pay attention.
it was quick thinking that turned this "potential Chernobyl into a mere Three Mile Island"
I find it ironic that for once dad's butt prevented the release of toxic ga-BART!
Stupid bird I never should've put you in charge!
Really? I’ve got 3 dead brothers, both parents, a sister a grandmother all dead from different forms of cancer and the rest of us have survived cancer. We lost a peach orchard., cherry tree and two huge white birch trees. We were 19 miles from three mile island
@@TheHamilton26 so they are definately covering alot up then ? Also sorry for your losses :(
These Retro Reports are amazing!
Yes, indeed! Informative and moderate.
Yeah, bc no dramatization crap all over.
It's sad how far this publisher had fallen, isn't it?
@@Kepora1 nah i like it still, i have no issued with the nyt
@@DMSDrummer While it is still a little biased, since the news in these videos are from so long ago, they are much more informative compared to the news of today.
I live right outside the island. I can see the reactors right from my doorstep.
That's creepy yet cool
QUICK GET AWAY THERE IS A MUTANT BUG THERE
Lol not
Same! It is so nice to see.
Cool but creepy
Was anyone there at the time this happened that I could interview for my NHD project? I am going to regionals and I need to modify my project. Hit me up
I would think someone dying of a terminal disease would love the opportunity to die saving untold numbers of people.
M LT if I knew I was going to die I would love to die a hero saving life's rather than a fatfuck on my couch watching Netflix
@@jmdza salty
Critical Mass Massive dose radiation poisoning may be one of the worst possible ways a living being can die. Google the name "Hisashi Ouchi". A powerful dose of radiation kills by destroying your DNA. This is essentially the blueprints for your body and the proteins that make it up. Often after people have had very high doses of radiation, they initially become sick (almost like a stomach flu) but then they become better for a few days before the real horror starts. This is because the cells in your body are still alive. However, your body can now no longer replace them because it doesn't have the DNA to do so. There is nothing that can be done to save you in this state and your body is going to quite literally rot away from under you while you are still alive. Skin turns gray and begins to slide off. Fingertips fall off. The person remains lucid through most of this and they are in incredible pain. So no, given the full facts I don't think any cancer patients would have opted for this and it would be incredibly cruel to even consider it.
@@dacypher22 Some people are willing to sacrifice for the greater good, like the senior citizens doing the cleanup in Japan to avoid letting younger people be exposed to radiation that may effect their future children. If we had legal ethical assisted suicide for terminal patients that could allow them to avoid the suffering of radiation poisoning, then many would be willing to make the greatest sacrifice for the good of their species.
@@whhe11 Well, that is a personal decision for those people and I would never feel good even asking someone to do it. Being a computer programmer, my mind of course goes first to robots and remote machinery for cleanup. I think that is the most humane way forward for radioactive cleanup. The Soviets actually did this at Chernobyl a bit but the technology wasn't really there yet to protect the machinery from the radiation so the project had to be abandoned. But today we can protect machinery from radiation fairly well and I think that is the best option.
On my way to watch The China Syndrome now...
Nakor Isilani looks awesome!!
awesome movie!
It came out like a week before tmi.
This morning in Toronto we received an alert regarding a nuclear incident at the Pickering Nuclear Power Plant about 30 minutes away. It caught our attention.
I recall when Ontario sent out an erroneous emergency alert saying there was an incident at the Pickering Power Station. Gave the whole of Ontario heart failure. Can't imagine living near a nuclear power plant and the alert being real.
I grew up within 10 miles of a nuclear power plant and this was always in my nightmares. Never happened but was always terrifying to think about.
I was negative 3 years old, but my parents had everything packed and ready to go at a moments notice....and we were about an hour south.
You had every right to be.
I grew up in a village below a dam that held billions of gallons of water for hydro, then later nuclear. We worried more about the dam breaking. We knew if the reactors blew no one would make it.
i live about 10km (6 miles) from a nuclear plant which provides 25% of our country's electricity. In my humble opinion, i think that this is one of the greatest decisions that past government could've made to ensure a clean and independent energy system. the sad part is that there where plants to build a reactor every couple of years but they abandoned it because of the fear that was created in europe after chernobyl. I do understand the fear of an accident because of bad communication by media. But when looking at the facts and actually understanding how this tech works, gives me confidence in how they are operated.
I grew up in the same situation. It never bothered me. My parents always told me that nuclear power was mostly safe (my mother having had her father work at the plant for decades with no ill effects, he died of a stroke in '95). We were more scared that in the event of a war with a major power they'd hit the military base near us. Which at the time (this being well after the fall of the Soviet Union, I was born in 2000) was next to impossible for a variety of reasons.
As I grew up and learned more about the functions and precautions behind it, as well as the details of how various reactor failures happened, I realized that they were right. Nuclear is an incredibly safe power source, and by far the cleanest and most reliable on the planet. Chernobyl was a mess of politics, poorly trained engineers who weren't allowed to learn about the reactor's design flaws, and a lack of redundant systems in a reactor design that would never be built today. Fukushima wase the result of a poorly placed backup generator and a predictable natural disaster that should have been properly accounted for but wasn't. In properly designed and managed reactors like we have today, such events should be impossible, and even with these avoidable disasters considered, the level of environmental damage is still incredibly small compared to either fossil fuel or wind and solar. Not to mention the deaths and illnesses caused by the fossil fuel industry. Both through pollution and accidents.
I still live in this town, and if anything, I feel prideful and secure rather than fearful... Still worried about that nuclear strike on that military base, though...
I live in Pennsylvania and there are 3 nuclear power plants. Limerick peer plant, 3 mile island, and Peach bottom atomic power station. And I've lived here for all my life. I'm not an environmentalist, but atomic energy is what is needed
Nah, we just need all the obese ppl on a giant hamster wheel...
You can not be an environmentalist and not be for nuclear power.
+Joe Diver Well, you can be. You just won't know much of what you're talking about. Which unfortunately seems to be the case for a lot of ppl.
YES!!! Joe Diver, Amen.
I care about the environment. I put my litter in the bin, I recycle what can be recycled, I feed the wild birds. But here in the UK, I can foresee a lack of power one day. We need more plants built to power our little country. Especially when we leave the EU and have to fight for ourselves.
I would argue the opposite. You can not be an environmentalist and support nuclear power.
until you remember nuclear waste exists and we don't have that worked out properly yet
Homer Simpson accidentally pressed the core destruct button
Bird Person does a good job with narration.
My family had lived in Lancaster family for as long as I know, I remember hearing stories from my great grandparents who lived in Lancaster about this
I live in Harrisburg and have swam in the waters directly next to the plant... Nuclear is safe, and actually causes less deaths than coal (due to air pollution)
Public hot tub ;)
Do you have 3 eyed fish swimming around there like on The Simpsons?
BS
@Brickcellent www.scientificamerican.com/article/coal-ash-is-more-radioactive-than-nuclear-waste/
It may be radioactive, but doesn't mean it'd cause more deaths than nuclear if we went nuclear.
I love Nuclear Power it is a Great Power Source and 21 Century Power is Cleaner and Much Safer. We can use Thorium and that is not as Radioactive and cannot have a Meltdown
Uh, Thorium is bred into Uranium before it ever makes a bit of heat. It absolutely can melt down, depending on the type of reactor. You need to be more specific. Liquid Fluoride Thorium Reactors can't melt down although the could have a criticality incident. Solid fuel reactors, absolutely can melt down but it's far less likely if you use liquid metals for cooling, instead of water.
Agreed. But environmentalists will push back as hard as possible to avoid the proliferation of modern high tech nuclear. But by default, their alternative is simply to continue to cook the planet with fossil fuels. You can almost blame them more than anyone else for CO2 emissions since the proliferation of other forms of energy will be slow to take place due to all the lawsuits and lobbying against nuclear.
At one time we actually had a thorium reactor at Indian point. Unfortunately, the fuel didn't live up to expectations of it's core life so it was switched over to uranium dioxide. It shut down in the 70's because the emergency core cooling system didn't meet regulatory requirements. Due to this and the expenses for processing the thorium made it infeasible so commercial power stations abandoned the idea. Unit one at Indian point only had a nameplate capacity of 257 megawatts compared to the 1,040 megawatts of both of the other units (2,060) between the two of them. In other words it was costing more money than would be made and when you're running a business that's not good to be loosing money. This and the chance of a reactor melting down have made nuclear energy too risky a business and fossils fuels are cheaper and safer. Plus now there are a growing number of solar farms and small rooftop arrays along with wind turbines that are producing power fairly cheap and modern technology has made it pretty reliable. This with power storage systems are sort of balancing out the need for newer nuclear power plants. At least than a dollar per watt of power solar panels are relatively cheap and can be installed anywhere the sun shines. With the price of metal and everything else through the roof I don't even want to think about how much a new nuclear power plant is going to cost. Just the copper in the turbines alone would be able to pay for a solar farm
Well why don't you go to live Fukushima or Tsernobyl then if you love Nucleare so much?
My family lives in a suburb of Harrisburg, and after that, we have to have nuclear meltdown drills in our schools. It really sucks because mistakes happen in everything. Nuclear is safe!
Nuclear is safe until it isn't. Then it's a centuries long worldwide disaster. You want nuclear power, we have the largest reactor in space 93 million miles away. All nuclear does is generate HEAT. Solar power can do the same thing.
Huh mistakes happen in everything doesn’t make nuclear safe.
Will you get CANCER first...
To the locals who live just around 3 mile island we just see it as another power plant. Much like talen energy/brunners island. No one here is generally scared of the plant but the warning sirens found in every town here is a reminder of what could happen. It is very odd to see 2/4 towers without being used and until recently I had never known why. It’s an interesting area and I don’t think many of here are worried about this happening again
They moved to Peekskill NY for many years....now I think is closed
Me and my mom drove past that place a long time ago. My mom said something like, “people there have three arms” and I was so confused. Now I know.
And those with 3 arms are 25 percent more productive
Lol funny but untrue now the Susquehanna river and it's inhabitants is a different story
Montgomery Burns says it's safe
Is it no Coincidence that there is a County called Montgomery County in PA?
Because he has the best safety inspector in sector 7-g
There must be some mistake. He makes cookies, Mr burns old fashioned good time extra chewy cookies.
I worked at the VC Summer nuclear plant in Jenkinsville, SC for nearly 3 years, eventually they overshot their budget and construction was stopped altogether. I also worked at the Vogtle plant in Agusta, GA. I'm glad everything went well while I was there.
I think the issue still is the choice. You either risk the possibility of nuclear catastrophe or a constant increase of CO2/air pollution. I think without nuclear energy there will be no real solution to stop global warming and air pollution since wind/solar cannot simply replace coal based electricity. But how to regulate nuclear is another issue. Again, just escaping nuclear hell into another carbon hell is not a responsible policy.
nuclear fission with lftr (liquid fluoride thorium reactors would be the safest way to produce power until fusion comes around and both of them produce no co2
More than 14% of Denmark's total energy output comes from windmills.
Nuclear source isn’t too bad but if we invest a bit more in solar and wind sources, it could work. They aren’t lethal, but they are expensive and we do need methods to make it cheaper and more efficient. Nuclear is still better than coal and the older methods.
@@madzi9574 Solar Energy actually has a large carbon footprint. It's better than coal and will definitely be part of the solution but it's not the answer
How about consuming less energy?
As of September 2018, China has 44 nuclear reactors in operation with a capacity of 40.6 GW and 13 under construction with a capacity of 14 GW. Additional reactors are planned for an additional 36 GW. China was planning to have 58 GW of capacity by 2020.
so fallout is basically if 3 mile island wouldnt have failed
No. Three mile island would *never* have caused a nuclear explosion.
It would be like adding a half cup of blackpowder to a five gallon home depot bucket of sand and expecting it to explode.
am I the only one here because of the Chernobyl miniseries
Aquabreeze nope you’re not alone
Aquabreeze nope lol
Wasn't great, wasn't terrible
Craig McPartland okay guy with no taste
@@aquabreeze7612 was a reference to the quote about 3.6 being, not great, not terrible either
“Something your parent’s talked about and worried about”... see this is the problem. I’m technically a millennial, just one of the older ones. I remember my parents had a good grasp of history, as did all their friends. They knew about things that happened before they were born. And they talked to me about those things. I talk to my kids about things from before they were born too. The hyper-individualist era we live in is a problem in that way. Those who fail to learn from history are doomed to repeat it. We are all connected
What's not so clear is: right now could you go fishing safely on the Susquehanna river?! : )
I’m so happy they at least momentarily mentioned thorium albeit all too briefly. Honestly, what did they give it, a whole two seconds? It’s simply baffling when thorium legitimately presents a completely safe and energy rich solution to every single one of our problems be they monetary, environmental, nuclear waste, and even our global-political positioning in relation to superpowers rising to challenge our dominance such as China (and to a far lesser extent India).
Thorium is ridiculously energy rich; as in yielding exponential measures of energy in comparison to conventional nuclear reactions and reactors, it’s readily available and therefore not constrained by any laborious refining or mining requirements to obtain and amass large quantities of the element due to how unbelievably plentiful and ubiquitous it is. But by far most importantly it’s laughably safe due to its inert nuclear reaction where there is no risk for thermal runaway like there is with conventional nuclear reactions involving plutonium or uranium.
If the U.S. would switch to thorium reactors and retire our current reactors whose technology and construction date back to over half a century, it would catapult us to oil independence and unquestionable technological supremacy on a global scale; not to mention it would give the American economy a surge like its never seen before, making the lunar missions (supposed lunar missions, am I rite or wut bois lol) and the ensuing boost to morale and the economy it ushered in seem less noteworthy than give or take a fraction of a point on the Dow Jones
Yup, I'm doing my graduate thesis on thorium nuclear energy. I really hope other countries learn from India and once it's fully developed we can start replacing uranium plants with thorium. It's a lot safer and a better fit for energy production without risks of use in bombs
Your stupid comment regarding lunar landings completely destroyed any credibility you might have. You did a great disservice to thorium technology. Bye.
Hysteria is what kills nuclear power.
Not just that. According to the WHO, nuclear power kills more through hysteria than through radiation. Estimated deaths from evacuation, panic and stress from Fukushima: 1600. Estimate deaths from long term radiation exposure: 400. ourworldindata.org/what-was-the-death-toll-from-chernobyl-and-fukushima
And politicians with no scientific knowledge
@@ryanp6267 Like the ones preventing Yucca mountain from being properly utilized in Nevada, thus leaving our nuclear waste stored at the powerplants throughout the country instead of safe deep underground behind layers of concrete and lead and 4 different closed loop ventilation systems.
no, just the poison that it is
I hope common sense does. Or will you bury nuclear waste in your garden for the next few million years?
Anyone else watching Chernobyl tv show
Yeah it was amazing. TH-cam the old US news reports on Chernobyl if you get the chance
"...to WORRIES about nuclear wastes..." WTF! That's a bit of an understatement given it's a problem that has never been adequately addressed during the entire history of nuclear energy.
I live less than 10 miles away from Fermi 2 nuceler power plant and I have absolutely no worries.
I love in york
Its very interesting... keep doing this ... you are good at this...
9:02 Lol..Smoke another joint sparky.
It isn't an exaggeration. In fact it's probably an underestimate.
My social studies teacher was a little boy when this happened, he used to tell us stories about how in the schools near the plant they had to do drills incase of a nuclear explosion. Scary stuff, man.
Nuclear power plants can't cause nuclear explosions, that's a Hollywood fantasy.
Lance Combes thank you
He's wrong at @11:00, Fukushima is not US reactor technology. Not at all. They were better designed than the soviet Chernobyl reactors but they still were of a very outdated and relatively unsafe design.
Yes they were US reactors. They were designed and built by General Electric
plus the Japan tsunami EQ was start by EMLP Electro Magnetic Laser Pulsation device - harrp
Sincere and neutral. Kudos!
These short retrospective's are addicting. Thanks for these.
I don’t know anyone who is not particularly sceptical to radiation.
probalby becaws radision is bwad?
jk, I get your point, as to what you are trying to say. There is something so eerie and unsettling about nuclear energy, its potential but invisible potential hazards. I can even admit as a pro-nuclear energy individual.
@@Potatoverynice likewise brother.
I really like these Retro Reports, but mentioning fusion as one of the novel new nuclear technologies being researched is lazy journalism in my eyes. There are plenty of fission technologies available for implementation in the short term, but fusion is fundamentally different and is essentially still a science project at this stage.
I was going to.college about 10 miles from TMI. We got two weeks off. I was working at Hershey Medical Center at the Animal Research Lab and was told.to go their lead room if they had a complete meltdown. That was comforting. Meanwhile my poor mother back in New Jersey was hysterical and wanted me home. She called the dean. When I got back to the dorm, she had called about 40 times.
she was having a meltdown of her own
"The first casualty of this accident may have been trust."
That's how an RBMK reactor explodes.
who else came for google classroom
in the Patrick star show it outright confirmed that the SpongeBob universe was created by mutations from radioactive fallout effecting SeaLife it called it knuckler testing, but the truth is clear that all the sea life was mutated by radioactive fallout creating the SpongeBob universe
I was an evacuee. I was ten. I've been suffering from thyroid cancer and thyroid tumors ever since.
I really liked this documentary about 3 mile Island because the information was balanced, not backed by money from pros or cons: journalism as it schould be in my humble opinion..
The real question is: Is accepting a few nuclear meltdowns worse than keep adding CO2 to the atmosphere?
Especially taking into account that modern reactors are better, and Fukushima was poor place to build nuclear reactors in the first place.
Nuclear power is a tiger-by-the-tail situation, and the waste is a major problem. Renewables are just better, period.
Adrie G No they arent, you know how many wind mills you need to equal ONE 1 Gigawatt nuclear reactor? 700! And considering most nuclear plants have two or three reactors that means you need 1400-2100 windmills to equal ONE nuclear plant! Think of all the land you'd have to use to do this compared to the land taken up by a nuclear plant, thats alot more forests and habitats for animals destroyed just because the public thinks nuclear is Satan incarnate and that windmills are cool
No they are not. Waste is extremely easy to contain forever!
Nuclear waste can be recycled
"Patrolling the Mojave almost makes you wish for a nuclear winter"
Patrolling the comments section almost makes me wish for a better joke.
with a big iron on his hip
I wonder why this document doesn't mention movie that came literally week before crisis - "China Syndrome", which drew most of journalism and public response. And why "American Molten Salt Experiment" from 1960s was not mentioned.
Here in NH , we have Seabrook Nuclear Power Plant....I was 14 when they began construction.....all.kinds of news stories & protests....been operating since 1990.....Operating & functioning well
Penn State is investing large sums into its nuclear program. Nuclear still remains the way of the future
@I. Wynn Wynn tell that to your solar and wind energy when the world pulls up with an 18 terawatt-hour energy demand
@I. Wynn Wynn wind? Really? Haha
The real casualty, nuclear FUSION power. Not much public support for it.
no one knew the level of radiation released because it exceeded the maximum readings on the plants radiation detection equipment. Normal radiation levels are around .10 and .20 microsieverts/ hour. In a helicopter flew a physicist with a high range Geiger counter and mapped the "plume" of radiation and found it to be 8 millisiverts/ hour. That's 8,000 microsieverts/ hour and they didn't realize that the core had partially melted down untill years later. They had to wait for some of the radiation to decay just to enter the containment building and see just exactly what happened. But still, people got exposed to fallout and some of them settled out of court in exchange for them to drop the lawsuits and keep quiet about what really happened. Mainly the industry did this to not slander the good name of nuclear power and avoid a long lengthy legal process. With that said, this ain't no chest x-ray the radiation is different. You got alpha beta and gamma along with neutrons and yes you do have some x-rays too but it's all this other stuff that makes this incomparable to getting an x-ray. Anything over 5 microsieverts/hr and your going to increase your risk of developing cancer. Anything above 1.5 microsieverts is considered hazardous at least levels at this rate for a prolonged period of time I would start to be concerned for my health and after a month long exposure of 5-10 microsieverts you would probably start developing some kind of radiation sickness. The fatter and taller you are the higher the dose you can absorb before getting sick. At 100 microsieverts/ hr only 1-2 weeks and your getting radiation sickness. You won't die but it will weaken your immune system. Once you get these particles in your body though they cause the most damage. You don't eat or drink x-rays. That's when the problems start. Lucky the containment building didn't blow and most of the long lived isotopes stayed within the premises of the plant but the lighter ones did manage to make their way all the way to Albany NY. One of them is iodine 131 and causes thyroid problems although it has a short half-life and so it "disappears" after 8 days or stops being radioactive. Xenon is another one but unlike iodine our bodies just pass it out and most of it if any doesn't stay behind. Tritium however bonds to water because it's just another form of hydrogen and it too is radioactive but it is more stable so it lasts longer in the environment. There was the initial plume and then there were hot spots that peppered the area around the outside of the plume from rain passing through, absorbing the radiation and where the rain fell the radiation landed.
I just turned a yr old a few days earlier in March of '79 when that happened
You cannot call something with 20,000 year half life ‘clean energy’
@M 78 Chernobyl - didn't work out so well there.
@@ToriHalfon Run by communists. What do you expect. Trust science=support nuclear energy
@@joecole5643 fukushima was run by some of the best scientists in the world, and even they were not prepared for the earthquake/tsunami combo. Nuclear energy is not safe.
@@ToriHalfon Yes it is. Nobody died as a result of Fukushima. The people who were reported to have died died as a result of displacement. Nobody was poisoned because of it. That is the word from scientists. You must avoid all risks in life. Do you use cars or planes?
@@joecole5643 The Fukushima crisis is far from over, however. Millions of tons of contaminated, radioactive water (used to keep the molten reactors and spent fuel rods cool to prevent further radioactive releases, and from pumped groundwater that continues to seep into the reactors’ basements) is stored on-site in more than 900 tanks. Despite efforts to prevent seepage using “ice walls” (man-made permafrost), and special processing technology intended to clean radionuclides from the water, Tepco was forced to admit late last year that these efforts had failed, confirming that levels of several long-lived, cancer-causing isotopes were still present in the stored water at more than 100 times legally permitted levels. www.yournec.org/updateeight-years-after-fukushima/
Guy: "The idea that you can power a world of 9 billion people on just solar and wind is a delusion"
Elon Musk: "Hold my beer!”
I live roughly 20 miles from 3 mile island. People do have some thyroid disease in the area but it’s just another power plant to us. I frequently fish the Susquehanna river within very close proximity to the plant (literally at the boundary of how close you’re allowed to get to the plant).
Is this supposed to be comforting? Because this is the problem with nuclear power... I am sure it is great, when there are people who know all about it, know how to deal with it, deal with it, aren't greedy, and don't lie. But that is not the world we live in. I mean,it might be the greatest thing since sliced bread, if everyone was a nuclear engineer! I think there is likely a good reason why, nuclear power plants were never featured on DIRTY JOBS. But, yeah there is some thyroid disease... Hardly comforting.
I live right outside York pa. At school we were not allowed out that day. I won a radio for selling stuff and it came with batteries so we found out why we were not allowed out at resecce.
6:03 highly trained people, for example Homer Simpson
uh, has this guy run the solar output numbers..... we are hit with more energy per day than we know what to do with, we just don't have the capture down.
No way to store it though. Output has to meet demand in real time. The real way to solve the energy problem is to figure out how to store massive amounts of energy. If we can do that, we don't even need solar panels. We can power most cities from ocean tides. Manufacturing solar panels creates its own toxic chemicals, it's not as green as everyone thinks it is.
I don’t think you’ve run the numbers either by your response.
The key is technology to capture and store it. Just because we aren't there now doesn't mean we won't be in 5 or 10 years.
I understand the need (at the time) for cheaper energy. When the Oil Embargo happened the first time the USA construction on over 100 facilities. By the early 80s they had switched almost everything over to "electric power" It was the first big step forward on renewable energy (someone had to do something) I don't think they had any idea how big it would be, until something went wrong. I grew up in northern Ohio (we had 2 -5) Davis Besse( which is still working today) being the one my grandfather worked for. Our biggest problem is figuring out what to do with all the waste going forward. Many places just cover it up in concrete and fence it off.
I drive by this place every morning
Do you glow in the dark?
Count the energy used and cost associated with nuclear fuel rods when they are made and what happens when the fuel is spent. Include THAT when you talk about cost.
Nuclear power is not scary it’s just misunderstood
Fukushima is a great pointer as to how safe current tech is.
That place got hit by a 9,3 earthquake (a quake so heavy that Japan moved 2 meter) and a giant tsunami.
Only one part failed.
I highly doubt you could say the same about other types of power supply.
You simply don't build nuclear power plant in a place that is prone to earthquakes. Japan should go geothermal
In the long run, it seems Nuclear Fusion reactors are the best option. It also seems now that we are getting very close to constructing working fusion reactors, so we can only hope that they become available as soon as possible. In New Zealand, we are generating practically all our power from renewable resources, but I am not sure if we can continue to do that indefinitely.
If we can get fusion power going we're golden
@@action_jackson5043 They've had a fusion reaction working but so far it consumes more power than it generates, so that's apparently what they're working on now.
Net was reached dec 2022! I believe It’s going to happen!
6:41 ACFX 87345 is cut off in the bottom of the newspaper. That seems a bit odd that a car that old would be numbered in that series, but 87346 was last seen 10 years ago. BNSF car characteristics has information on neither of the cars so... I have no clue what the ACF roster was like in 1979.
The east coast gotta do something... us on the west coast have our damns
dams are terrible for the environment though. Also, the Hoover dam isn't doing so well right now because of the drought, if it keeps up it will have to reduce production.
You may have your damns but if you don't give them, what good does that do? :-P
@@dunzerkug Correct. Nevada and California are dependent on us for water
Yeah but the problem is rather than building safe designs, nuclear power reactors are build as a means to produces plutonium for nuclear bombs. Hence they are not as safe as they could but rather as efficient as they can be for plutonium production.
Born and raised literally on the shore of the Susquehanna pretty much as close to the plant as possible and and my mom grew up during the actual meltdown. At 6:37 you can see my town Goldsboro. The meltdowns was blown way out of proportions, birth defects and related issues aren’t common at all and the plant was still functioning until I moved away with my wife a few years ago. Close call but other than that pretty much nothing happened honestly
I think up to this day Russia has 35 operating nuclear plants with a plan to go up to 50 by 2022.
The EU has 128
The Fukushima disaster was on March 11, and the The Mile Island accident happened on March 28. What the heck is wrong with my birth month.
It's pretty energetic!
Endearing Stargazer I know how you feel, Waco and OKC both happened on my birthday
Pearl Harbor happened on my bday.
Well we lost Steven Hawking so I guess that happened.
I work in downtown Harrisburg and can see 3 mile island from the window by my desk.
The entire point of fertile thorium and fusion reactors is that they are completely safe. If something goes wrong, you just turn off the proton accelerator or the confinement magnets and the reaction stops. There's no way for a runaway reaction to cause a meltdown disaster, because you have to constantly help the process along just to keep it going. So those new ways aren't really comparable to old enriched uranium reactors.
How many of these big power plants are thorium?
@@kirilbellic3602 I don't think there's more than one or two thorium reactors in operation, the technology is kind of still in development
@@maxmccormick3376 I'd bet since the lobbyist and special interests cant get what they want they wont let it happen.
@@kirilbellic3602 - No big power plants use thorium, small 40Mw breeder reactors have tried it.
Not to downplay this accident, but overall, Nuclear accidents are extremely rare. Also, Globally our rejection of Nuclear power was a massive mistake, and the environment has payed dearly for it as we continue to rely on fossil fuels for our electricity.
Nuclear accidents especially such as chernobyl are rare but catastrophic. The environment pays for it in different ways but ultimately still suffers.
@@victorl3969 It’s like being shot once every year vs being stabbed once a week
The China Syndrome is an incredible film, highly recommended if you're into disaster movies.
Notice how the conversations turn to ifs?
Meanwhile at the Palo Verde Nuclear Power Plant in Arizona, all continues to go extremely well.
Turns out, with modern technology, as long as you keep it away from natural disasters, everything is fine.
Malcom Heavy Same at 3 mile island. I live right next 2 it. It is super high tech
I made my best impromptu speech citing Three Mile Island! Ty Retro Report for being so informative!
Best laid plans. Nuclear energy is cleaner then coal
The problem with nuclear power is the pressure required by the current designs. Water at 2000 psi is dangerous. Molten salt designs are walk away safe as they operate at atmospheric pressure and employ freeze plugs and passively cooled drain tanks if something were to go wrong.
Biggest fear all my life. People like this do unimaginable things in this world and something like that effects the people around it for generations. I don't understand it but that is a good thing I think I'd rather the people around it and generations to come don't have to heal before they are even born. To come into the world healthy, whole, and full of a life you are ready to live now that's a beautiful thing.
Ok, so we have had many nuclear accidents in the past, so let's make a fusion-based reactor that will create amounts of energy equivocal to the sun. Great idea!
Many? Nuclear reactor disasters have been low. And consider how only 8,000 people have died from nuclear disasters, compared to almost one million dying from coal every year. Your fear of nuclear in an age of state of the art plants is funny.
My mom lived 3 miles from Three Mile Island and when this was going on nobody in her neighborhood was panicking or leaving.
Proponents of nuclear often act as if the public concerns are unfounded. But every time the public's trust is regained, another catastrophe happens. The response from the industry is that there were mistakes or neglectful actions that led to one problem or another... but there is no magical safe fairy that deems a nuclear plant safe. It's safe until we discover it's not safe, which usually doesn't give us much time to evacuate.
AsellusPrimus reactor meltdowns on post 1980 designs? Zero.
Those catastrophes you're referring to aren't generally all that hazardous. Proponents of nuclear don't act as if public concerns are unfounded, but it's a little hard when the public doesn't generally understand the science behind nuclear power. They don't understand how radiation works and as a result, people fear it far more than they should. The concerns aren't unfounded, but they are generally overblown. You even said ..."another catastrophe happens."
Nobody died at Fukushima as a result of radiation exposure. Nobody died at Three Mile Island as a result of radiation exposure. 31 people died at Chernobyl as a result of radiation exposure.
So, all these catastrophes and you wind up with 31 people directly killed by radiation, and likely another 100 or so from residual radiation exposure. Sounds terrible, but the tsunami that caused the Fukushima meltdown, killed 15,000 people! The gunman at the Mandalay Bay in Las Vegas, killed 58 and injured hundreds more, more than died at all three reactor accidents combined.
For catastrophes, they sure don't seem all that catastrophic.
If we didn't have nuclear power there would be no Spiderman or The Hulk. How we going to live without them?
I live next to the other nuclear plant in Pa. Beaver nuclear plant. Most don’t even realize it’s a nuclear plant..