Nuclear Energy Explained: How does it work? 1/3
ฝัง
- เผยแพร่เมื่อ 26 ก.ย. 2024
- Nuclear Energy Explained: How does it work?
Nuclear Energy is a controversial subject. The pro- and anti-nuclear lobbies fight furiously, and it's difficult to decide who is right. So we're trying to clear up the issue - in this video we discuss how we got to where we are today, as the basis for discussion. Next week we'll be looking at the arguments for and against nuclear power in detail.
To get a free audiobook and support our channel, go to audible.com/nutshell - thanks! : )
PRO VIDEO: • 3 Reasons Why Nuclear ...
CONTRA VIDEO: • 3 Reasons Why Nuclear ...
OUR CHANNELS
▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀
German Channel: kgs.link/youtu...
Spanish Channel: kgs.link/youtu...
HOW CAN YOU SUPPORT US?
▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀
This is how we make our living and it would be a pleasure if you support us!
Get Merch designed with ❤ from kgs.link/shop
Join the Patreon Bird Army 🐧 kgs.link/patreon
DISCUSSIONS & SOCIAL MEDIA
▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀
Reddit: kgs.link/reddit
Instagram: kgs.link/insta...
Twitter: kgs.link/twitter
Facebook: kgs.link/facebook
Discord: kgs.link/discord
Newsletter: kgs.link/newsl...
OUR VOICE
▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀
The Kurzgesagt voice is from
Steve Taylor: kgs.link/youtu...
OUR MUSIC ♬♪
▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀
700+ minutes of Kurzgesagt Soundtracks by Epic Mountain:
Spotify: kgs.link/music...
Soundcloud: kgs.link/music...
Bandcamp: kgs.link/music...
TH-cam: kgs.link/music...
Facebook: kgs.link/music...
The Soundtrack of this video:
/ nuclear-1
epicmountainmu...
www.epic-mounta...
🐦🐧🐤 PATREON BIRD ARMY 🐤🐧🐦
▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀
Many Thanks to our wonderful Patreons from kgs.link/patreon who support us every month and made this video possible:
Stephen Bassett, Raphael Hviding, Sam Elitzer, Andrzej Rejman, OpenGG, Andrew Jagasothy, jordan gardner, AgentK, Mehmet Sevil, Carly Tawse, K A I, Kevin Dam, Charlie, Christopher Lang, Nat Ryall, Jeff Le, Nicholas Holtz, Devir Islas, Arnas Valeika, Kirstie, Francesca Monteiro, James Craver, Broderick, Duncan Cheong, Derek, Juan Manuel Corredor, Osric Lord-Williams, Scott Zell, Jeroen Koerts, Patrick Eyrich, tekbit, Chris Linardos, Tony Morley, Jónatan Nilsson, Nat Thomas Golder, Zr4g0n, Cody, Michal, Caroline Andrewes, Alex Kaplan, Tom Alexander Kutil, Vincent, Okan, Sasha C, KokLiang Lim, Marcelo, Mikel De Uranga, Dean Herbert, Anton Efimenko, trefmanic, Adam Smith, David Garcia Quintas, Gaëtan Duvaux, Eduardo Barbosa, maarten ligtenberg, Ghitea Andrei Paul, Ozan, Ryan, Larry Bunyard, Josh Maleszewski, Volodymyr Khomenko, Sebastian Laiseca, Chase, Michael Slade, Scarlet Barton, Matthew Gill, Aaron, Alexander Heavens, Alexander Ahn, Arrngrim, Fluffy19, Adam Primaeros, Jan Schmid, Sara Shah,
Gard Fredrik Skuland, Veselin Kostadinov, Jonathan Velazquez Gore, Daniel, Philly Cashion, Seona Tea, Clayton Fussell, Daniel Gonzalez, Stephen Joseph DCruz, Morten, Dan Q, Thomas Lee, Finn Edwards, David Taylor, Corbin, Fabricio Godoy, Charles Kuang, Alan Feyaerts, Maximilian Ritter, Jesse MacLean, Matt Collins, Yousif, Jesse Powell, Dan Treasure, nga⁴, 冠瑋 陳, Wei Wong, Praveen Muthu, Jon Davis, Bahjat, Mike Mintz, Jem Arnold, Steffen Weng, Igor Benicio de Mesquita, Lars Vas Dias, Greeny Liu, Tibor Schiemann, dante harper, Bünyamin Tetik, Eli Fisker, Joe Pond, Jørgen Smalås, Gustavo, Tommi Mansikka, Dario Wünsch, Matthew Macomber, Daniel McCouid-Carr, Neelfyn, Muath, Edgar Duarte Ortega, Stephen Chen, Alipasha Sadri, Kevin P, Steven Ratner, Theo Alves Monteiro, Brucelow, José, Tony Montuori, Philipp Weber, Brad Wardell, David Davenport-Firth, Alexander Scheffer, Eric, Austin, Enrico, Hamad, Andrew Connor, Ignacio Flores, Tom Langford, Vaelohs, Peter Schuller, Bear, Brandy Alexander, Mark Govea, Alexander Kosenkov, Eric, Wesley Sheridan Montgomery, Artem Anchugov, Brandon Liu, Erven, varinder singh bal, Scott Laing, Philip Freeman, Gizem Gürkan, George Chearswat, Tim, Victor, Martin Fink-Jensen, Josh Allen, oscar gautama, Karl Snickars, Jennifer Hiller, Bruno Araújo, Maarten Bremer, Daniel OCL, Carlos Bohorquez, Elchus, RobPT, Hugo, Lethargicpanda, Amdrew, Minghan Ko, Mark Scheurwater, David Harbinson, Rikard Nyberg, Collin Banko, Florian Guitton, Jezariael Demos, Ajay Shekhar, Nick Yonge, Jon Moroney, Eugene Cham, Renaud Savignard, James, Viktor Asklund, Ryan, somersault18:24, Ben Shackman, Pranab Shenoy, Terry Lipstein, Tim Carll, Javier de la Garza, Rory Bennett, Jan Berdel, Sieglinde Geisel, Jeff Churchill
Nuclear Energy Explained: How does it work?
Help us caption & translate this video!
www.youtube.com...
You want to learn more about science? Check out our sciency products on the kurzgesagt shop - all designed with love and produced with care.
Getting something from the kurzgesagt shop is the best way to support us and to keep our videos free for everyone.
►► kgs.link/science
(Worldwide Shipping Available)
Kurzgesagt - In a Nutshell Yay
Is there a way that you ( Kurzgesagst) could say where you get your sources? Im asking for a sociology project that I am doing
I love these videos!!
.Kurzgesagt - In a Nutshell
💖
Hell of a way to Boil Water.
Could make one hell of a cup of tea
+That_llama_in_a_tuxedo Nuclear tea is the best tea!
Exactly what I thought when I learned this in high school.
Only a tiny amount of radioactive tritium, best to water it down just in case :P
yeet
I'm for a good mix of energy sources. Let's not bet everything on one horse and keep all options open.
Amen, as a future nuclear engineer I still support rolling out advanced solar and wind technology, decarbonizing isn't going so well that I am willing to bet the farm on any particular technology.
I think nuclear and hydro are the way to go, with solar power being used as an extra supply on houses instead of building solar farms.
fusion :b
Dweird Wizzle You should come to Sweden, we cover about 90% of our electricity production with nuclear and hydro.
Hjaelmedhorn Sweden is one of the 2 other places in the world I would want to live!
"Turning physics into engineering was easy on paper but hard in real life"
👏👏
And it is true.
Theory will only take you so far
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
Fossil Fuels are our downfall, it has since produced like 500 megatonnes of greenhouse gasses or something, i dont know the exact number but yea, it is bad to keep sticking to fossil fuel, even worse than burying plutonium underground.
We as humans are possibly too flawed in every way to be trusted with nuclear power. I don't just mean in terms of morality (which is absolutely a huge reason to not be trusted with it), but also in terms of basic everyday flaws, miscalculations, mistakes. We could very well end up damaging the environment far quicker than we are now. Mishandling of waste, improper safety protocols or miscalculations ok safety protocols, no backup plans for failures, terrorists, wars.
**IF** the Fallout series is any indication, maybe it’s for the best.
@@jbj7799 We have better technology today and by extension, better procedures to prevent nuclear accidents.
@@jbj7799 ffs that is a fictional game!
If we do it well, nuclear power could save humanity and massively improve our development on all levels
If not, even reverse. BTW I am the 69th like.
plutonium reactors look promising, but that wont change much if people are afraid of it as they are now in germany they are deconstructing nuclear reactors in order to build more coal ones, which kill far more people a year then the nuclear energy ever did...
then again there have been alot of technological break thoughs, solar panels are gonna receive an improvement soon as well as wind energy making has a cool new concept that might make wind energy far more viable.
Nuclear energy can indeed power humanity.... but i dont think it will.
No: nuclear waist is already to dangerous not to mention the danger of a nuclear disaster worst thant Chernobyl and fukushima.
The future hopefully remains in the hands of solar and wind power and in the not so far future NUCLEAR FUSION: the power of the sun in our hands 🦾😁👌🏻.
@@3dgar7eandro If we gonna be full on solar panels, we should cover really big territories. The wind energy too. We can use it only on most effective places, but not everywhere. Also they can't work non stop. Nuclear energy is dangerous, but improved over the time. And to be honest, Russia didn't really care about safety. And nuclear waste can be buried. It's not the best thing, but we cannot fight climate changes without it.
@@robo-suport_czrobofactory3116 Renewables are more expensive, and you can never prefect it, as you can Nuclear, as this is man made, and renewables rely on nature. Nature is always changing.
Who does this animation, i love it, reminds me of The Crash course animation
KyroSkee CrashCourse was the main inspiration for starting this channel.
***** It's so great to see that Crash Course has already inspired a next generation of creators. I love free educational videos!
***** I love both channel!
Yw 100likes
+KyroSkee
A lot cooler if you spell it, "crache"
2:00 same reasons my girlfriend is dating me
oof mate
Those kinds of self burns hurt xD
because you are a reactor with light water. :D :D
"IT was there" LMAO
Omg xd
My life in a nutshell: “ it was there, it worked and it wasn’t terribly expensive” 2:05
xD
Hey I love your PP
can I have it?
@@Youchan_Husband mine?
@@Youchan_Husband what pp
@@Youchan_Husband it's pfp not pp
I am pro nuclear power. Nuclear power plants are almost completely safe if they are properly built. Most nuclear power plant accidents have been caused because something wasn't very well built or thought out.
For instance, the powerplant that exploded in 2011 in Japan was not ready for a tsunami.
Additionally, we simply dont have time to wait to have the perfect technology for nuclear power. Climate change is happening fast, and we need to do something!
yeah but to be fair it's not necessarily their fault, it was japan's worst earthquake, no safety measures are every taken for the worst case scenario because its too expensive, it only takes into account a standard measure used as reference.
***** they were though, they had backup generators, they were damaged, you can't have an infinite back up for the back ups too, again that's complicated and expensive, just like the sprinklers in a building become useless if the line breaks somewhere, back ups aren't full-proof
Daniel Schoop Their backup wasnt prepared for a tsunami though.
Daniel Schoop If I was not mistaken, the power plant in Japan was not designed at all for any sort of tsunami. Instead it was designed to be built in the US and not anywhere near a tsunami. So in that case it was very much their fault.
Fourth generation reactor are meltdown proof.
love this channel!
me too
same here, one of my favorites in youtube
I don't just love it.. I want to %^*\#]+}>!,"\ it.
Hello comments from 6 years ago.
@@nobody9706 Hello
But hey, it's better than fracking. (Then again, what isn't?)
+LazerLord10 Burning dirty coal. Much worse than fracking.
Adam Selene Life is death. Live in your fantasy world all you want but death will come for you as soon as it comes for us, maybe sooner because you can't see it coming.
Actually you remind me a bit of the old joke about the preacher and the flood. You keep waiting around for god to save you until it is too late.
stardude692001
Suit yourself. I would prefer not to die of nuclear pollution, but these days that is a fantasy, as we have all seen. Nobody is waiting around; we are fighting the nukers with everything we have, not including violence, just the truth, and it is working; people are realizing (as they die) that they have been lied to about nuke, used as test subjects, killed in insidious ways. It is too late to stop the sterilization of this planet. 2.4 *million* pounds of MOX against one planet (and that's just the inventory lost at Fukushima, nevermind other sources), the MOX will win, is winning. Nuke is death, nothing else.
Adam Selene All of the Uranium found in reactors was once present in the environment.
You are living in a fantasy if you think you will personally be killed by nuclear material. Even if you work in the nuclear industry it is still a long shot.
The world can't exist at this population level without power. You are literally fighting the hand that feeds you.
Do you have a better option? are you willing to starve to death to stop nuclear power? Are you a luddite?
Give me a source on that number. 2.4 million pounds is way to high, reactors only contain thousands of pounds of fuel not millions.
You still aren't changing the fact that more radioactive material is released from coal burning than by the nuclear industry even including meltdowns and accidents.
stardude692001
Another excuse? Yeah, uranium is found in nature, that's right, buried deep in the ground and in a very dilute form. Left where it belongs, it is essentially harmless, but dug up and concentrated it is no longer natural, and PLUTONIUM is in MOX fuel rods at around 6%. Plutonium is about 2000 times more toxic than uranium. This is *weapons grade* plutonium, reclaimed from obsolete thermonukes. 2.4 million pounds of fuel rods was what Tepco claimed to be in the inventory when those reactors blew up, melted down, melted out and the fuel pools drained and burned. Tepco claimed at a different time that there was twice that amount there, which is more likely. It isn't about the fuel loads in the reactors, it is about the entire inventory, and let's not forget that "spent" fuel has gone through the reaction and is much more toxic and unstable than fresh fuel. Hot particles are not a fantasy; we have *all* breathed them now, and ANY of that is *guaranteed* cancer in the future. 5-10-15 years, perhaps, but it IS cancer.
Do I have a better solution? Of course. Solar, wind, hydro, wave and tidal, geothermal; all current and working technologies. All require no burning of *anything* to operate.
As far as coal goes, it isn't an option, even with modern stack scrubbers you still have the toxic mess to somehow dispose of.
The oceans produce most of the oxygen; with their death, we will all suffocate, and we have no idea how to stop it, nor does it matter, there is already enough nuke gunk in the Pacific to kill the other oceans over time. Are you willing to suffocate in order to use the most expensive, dangerous and evil source of electricity ever devised? It matters not; it will happen if the cancers don't take you first.
Me bite the hand? No, I am ANTI nuke. I also use grid power very rarely, not because of the cost, because of the sources, and the war machine that nuke is essential for.
A luddite? LOL Hardly. I enjoy technology. The difference is that I discern between harmless and harmful technologies. Nuke is harmful, natural energy is not. Pretty simple really.
Thank you so much for this optimistic piece about nuclear power.
I just wanted to add more about the positive effects.
In the worst case scenarios of a massive earthquake and tidal wave with Fukushima no one died of radiation poisoning. But rather from the overreaction of the government not allowing people to return to their homes.
A lot of people could have returned to their homes with very few mitigating factors.
With Chernobyl, the RBMK reactors primary design was to create plutonium for nuclear weapons. Electricity was just a byproduct.
The accident occurred because of the reckless ambitions of the lead engineer on duty. The deaths were created by the Soviet government not being upfront about the disaster.
Just hundreds of feet away was reactor number three and then reactor number two and one. They kept running for about another 15 years.
In both these scenarios today there is tourism including people that are walking right up to the reactor for a limited amount of time.
Everyone knows that the news sells fear and anger. The news is part of the problem with keeping this truly green energy source from being deployed.
There are forces that want to make nuclear power so expensive it can never be bilt. Principle among them are oil companies.
The deaths and expense of global warming with its extreme weather is obvious and plays out everyday.
I'm excited about generation 4 reactors. They're about six different designs and they have about six different characteristics.
Some of the best characteristics are
-They're considered walk away safe.
-They burn more nuclear waste than they create.
-The waste is considered hazardous for far less time.
-They're non-proliferation so they can't be used for nuclear weapons.
- The designs are small and can be as common as a hospital. They take up the footprint of about a Walmart. A truly local power grid to accompany wind and solar.
This is truly the future that's going to power our electric cars and trucks. Some of the byproducts of nuclear power is creating hydrogen. This could power our airplanes, trains and ships.
I look forward to clean skies without smog or inversion layers.
I would much rather live next door to a nuclear power plant then a power plant admitting CO2 gas in other poisons and toxins.
@Your Mother is a Hamster he isn’t implying we should building Chernobyl reactors. There were multiple of issues with the reactor and its maintenance iirc. As to where you got that people can never return to Fukushima, that’s partially true but also partially false at the same time. People have returned to the city, it’s just that certain areas are still irradiated. As for the nuclear waste, there are methods in development to reusing some of the waste, and there will be a storage site in Finland were we could store such waste with little to no issue as it’s in the middle of no where, with little to no natural disasters and a good amount of distance from population centers since it’s Finland(and since it buried fairly deep).
There ups and downs to each power source and nuclear is no different. I’m not downplaying it’s dangers but we do have ideas to deal with such problems and will have to since we’re running out of fossil fuels to power our ever growing energy needs.
And if you really want to go against nuclear energy, then direct that energy to the 15,000 nuclear weapons we have that could carpet bomb the Earth.
@Your Mother is a Hamster he literally said at the beginning that he was going to talk about the positive effects. The fair majority also take the negative effects into consideration. What does the liberal media have to do with this? Does the liberal media only talk about the positive sides about nuclear energy?
Are you really into it? I'm curious what specialty do you have??? Or you just studied all alone? Asking to anyone that commented out here but I guess that's not enough for me to understand what's the truth...
@@mayanlogos92 hello I recommend some podcasts also reading numerous articles. Learning how radioactive elements react inside change inside of reactor. Learning the different kinds of reactors that are out there. Some that can burn up more waste than they make.
Wikipedia has a great summary of generation 4 reactors. It's a lengthy read but it gives you a general overview of what's being proposed for the future.
I myself like small modular reactors and then putting a bunch of them in series.
I like the analogy of driving a Toyota Corolla through the mountains versus a Mack truck. It's a lot easier to control the Toyota Corolla
"With Chernobyl, (...) The accident occurred because of the reckless ambitions of the lead engineer on duty. The deaths were created by the Soviet government not being upfront about the disaster."
Looking for who is guilty won't change the numbers. History tells us that nuclear accidents happen despite of the country or reactor generation. Punkt.
You are excited about Thorium reactors, but they don't still exist. It's just a theoretical/experimental model. In the mean time I would install some solar panels over the roof to save almost 50% of the bill. That alone renders nuclear too expensive in comparison, and shows that all the money gone into R+D should be better invested in pushing forward solar tech.
YMMV but numbers don't lie.
Incredibly well explained. Good job!
Alltime Conspiracies jhioeofegaikdyacg chu udsjdcf-fútbol en un comunicado en el diario la noticia el viernes por los la el día de los lúltimos de los dos que y de la misma fecha forma en el la que no ha podido ver la el mismo próximo otro que no se haya ha puede llegar al a las pocas que no se ha rido hecho que no haya un nuevo problema un rato y no se ha dado
Alltime Conspiracies que no es un problema para el mundo pero no se puede hacer más que el mundo que no lo sepa y lo hago en el mundo y no me se lo puedo creer 3
...
Fuck you conspiracy bastards uncovered for hats conspiracy have dunning-kruger effect you believe the earth is flat so fuck you
very confusing comment section
your videos are strangely addicting..
lol
They already treated that topic.
That’s because of their animations
@@Multiroester addiction
Yee
People, do some research - haven't any of you heard of Gen IV reactors? For example, the Integral Molten Salt Reactor or IMSR (made in Canada) is a completely different kind of reactor which:
1. Cannot melt down, as the fuel/salt mix is already in a molten state
2. Creates extremely small amounts of waste, which are only radioactive for a couple hundred years (instead of 20,000!)
3. Can use spent Uranium as a fuel - or Thorium, which is as plentiful as lead, and safe enough to hold in your hand
4. Does not create usable bomb-making material (Plutonium) - so no proliferation problems
5. Is much smaller and less expensive than the huge outdated reactors in use all over the place
6. Is completely walk-away safe - so worst case scenario is that the plant shuts down and cools off by itself
... and many many more benefits
+ChickenCupcakeable I recommend videos by Kirk Sorensen, a nuclear physicist that worked at NASA and highly endroses molten salt reactors. Type "LFTRs in 5 minutes - Thorium Reactors" or watch the two hour version :)
You could just watch part three though
+Daniel Gillis All of that maybe true however even if it is less expensive there is no way it is as cheap as natural gas right now.
+Daniel Gillis I was going to post this, but then you did and i figured it would be easier to like yours.
What does it cost
"Ah, yes; lets harness the power of the sun to power our kettles!"
TheBakingSeal
the sun actually runs on nuclear fusion, by fission. if we had fusion reactors the power problem would be solved.
imagine how badass that would be though. we’d control tiny suns.
@@corbeaudejugement true, i'm thinking we don't have the materials hard or strong enough to contain that amount of energy, and if we did it'd probably be heavy enough to sink into the earth, so it'd have to be some sort of space energy network to take advantage of 0 gravity...
not Todoroki my eye
Our boiling will be legendary!!!
wów
I'm Nuclear supporter, because it is one of the cleanest energy but also can produce huge amount of power in a short time, meanwhile solar and wind energy are the best, but you need hundreds square miles of solar farm or wind farm to equally produce same amount of electricity compare to a single nuclear reactor.
IndraEMC ^ Dont forget that solar power doesnt work if the sun isnt out, and windmills dont work if there's no wind.
well solar power doesn't produce nuclear waste
Erik Beyer Paulsen Moreover, their energy production is not constant and cannot be adjusted, so massive accumulators are needed to be ready for shortages or potential blackouts.
Xtramassive
Solar power in california alone produces millions of tons of waste per year in manufacturing.
FlappySock In places like Scandinavia, solar power is almost completely useless in the winter, because days are very short.
Do a video on ducks, dammit! Ducks are the key to understanding the universe.
Something tells me you're biased.. but I can't quite place it...
Anton K ducks are rubbish and it is dumb
duckstroll.mp4
I disagree, don't you know the universe is a frog?
Cats and ducks are amazing
the tardis was easy to find in this video
Where are they in the other videos?!
Victor Migliore EVERYWHERE
I feel that the pros definitely outweigh the cons. I think most people would agree that we need power, and that solar energy is the best. But the change over to green energy is going to take a while, and nuclear power is the best option.
Solar is not the best. It doesn't work at night, it produces little energy, and is super expensive.
Diana Peña When you consider the externalities of all energy sources, solar becomes a very good contender.
Diana Peña what's the best form of clean/renewable energy according to you?
Diana Peña Do more research on solar energy, because you are wrong
Nolan Thiessen Nuclear and solar are about on the same in terms of exteralities...and everything is SOOOO much lower than coal. People should shift all concerns about nuclear over to coal because that is the real killer, and it doesn't even need to melt down to do so...just normal operation kills millions a year. www.eea.europa.eu/data-and-maps/indicators/en35-external-costs-of-electricity-production-1/en35
I am pro fusion. HURRY UP SCIENCE.
who isn't??
Me too
LarlemMagic want it so bad?
you do it
Alex Lakis I don't have that kind of cash. Dear god If I could do something about it and be the first guy to get this commercial I would sell my soul.
Pro Fusion? Fusion is not a real option as it is not even close to reality.
Its extraordinary how much effort you guys put into these videos! Thank you for making them. They are both fun and educational to watch! I really enjoy them! Keep up the amazing work!👍😁
The grants to nuclear are worth it! This is part of the PR to counter the vast majority of humanity who oppose this crazy egotistical non solution of a non existent problem.
I literally watching this for my lesson at school xD
Same 😑😂😂😂😂
My teacher said me to watch this video. Lol.
You might do well in geography, just not English lol
A lot of people are here because of school work 😑
Ok😑
Same lol we’re learning about radioactivity rn, gotta watch part 2 and 3 still(also had a doubt in nuclear fission and fusion, so rly helpful kurzgesagt is)
Is it just me, or in almost every video he uploads has a tardis in it?
He puts a TARDIS in every video
I didn't notice before this video
I just dont get it.
Yeah it's fucking annoying after you notice it
The Tardis is everywhere!
I honestly have to say more research should be done on nuclear energy to make that free electricity dream possible. Or, find a new way to supply more energy. Either way, let's hope the scientists can figure out for the future of mankind. Nice work again ducks!
there has been 60 years worth of research. its not about how much we know its about what we do with it. Build them in safe areas, build them well, and man them with knowledgeable competent people and there will be no problems.
Well I learn something everyday. Still, I hope energy can be produced without salvaging nature. Of course, the energy I'm talking about is enough to support every human on earth for free, a fat dream obviously but let's wait and see...
Hahn Deathspark any tech that comes out to do such a thing will meet the same kind of "is it safe? lets do more studies" kinda talk as nuclear has gotten.
This world sure is amazing and mysterious in it's own ways :)
Hahn Deathspark its alot more than that. but i wont go into a rant. save that for another time.
Molten salt reactors... About fifty times as efficient as light water reactors, they not only get almost all of the energy out of whatever fissionable materials they are given, requiring much less fuel to make the same amount of energy, they also produce waste that is significantly less radioactive and toxic due to being far more efficient.
If you use Thorium as the main fuel the only long term radioactive element produced in any quantity would be Plutonium 238.
But that can hardly be called waste, as it is the very stuff NASA uses to power its long range space probes and big rovers like curiosity.
Google RTGs.
Merecir the great thing about molten salt reactors is that you can throw in just about anything fissionable into them, and they'll suck just about all the energy available out of it, unlike current reactors which only use around 2% of the available energy stored in fissionable materials.
Chandler Chapman-Fong fusion reactors you mean? yeah, science is still working on that one. we've gotten a net gain of energy out of them now, which is a huge step, but they aren't commercially viable yet.
josh fritz what about breeder reactors with molten salt. A breeder actually makes more fuel (plutonium) then it uses(uranium)
LFTRs are breeders, they convert Thorium into Uranium 233. And since you start so low you get another fission event at Uranium 235.
After that you get plutonium 238 which you remove from the reactor and use to power space probes.
You no not want to fission plutonium, as the resulting transuranics you get when a neutron is absorbed are the really nasty ones that makes you want to store the unused fuel as waste for 100.000 years.
Damn, its been so long. I used this as a reference for a Science powerpoint back in grade 7
Oh really
I am now lol
This gave me an A, Thank you so much!
3.6 roentgen's , not great but not terrible
dejan i’m told it’s the equivelant of a chest x ray.
I've seen worse
You are Delusional...
FFS. Give ti a rest
I love Nuclear Energy!
That's what she said.
Fuck yeah!
What about nuclear waste?!
Stefan Schares
The world has produced most of the nuclear waste we'll ever see. Additionally, LFTR uses nuclear waste as fuel.
Stefan Schares build breeder reactors. light water reactor uses less then one percent of uranium. but breeder reactor use more then 60 percent. and thats with todays funding. if nuclear really takes of we can be sure it will go up 90 percent
0:17
TH-cam: Demonetized.
A Frustrated Gamer FBI wants to know your location
@A Frustrated Gamer wait what
mcplumpkin allies want to know your location
@@calvinscarvings.66 im in the allies
@@mcplumpkin6191 sure buddy
Amazing!!! Your videos are getting better and better. Keep up the good work!
They truly are amazing!!!
Tardis o.O!
Nice vid btw.
I saw that to
If you are a fan you would know most of their videos include a tardis cameo
All of their videos do have a tardis
I know
1:40 - I love the TARDIS cameos.
Whats tardis
@@ivoryix2889 a thing from a british tv show called doctor who
I think they are putting one in each video
Could you guys do an episode on Thorium Energy(Liquid Fluoride Thorium Reactor(LFTR)). It's a new and exciting up and coming source of energy and I believe if you do just a little bit of research you will love it.
is there a Tardis in every video you guys make?
+Matrix_ yup
+Matrix_ they forgot in one video
Ikr?
lol
+hey7328 there is one at 1:40
As someone who just started working with Illustrator and AfterEffects I am so amazed by the production value and effort you put into this.
Probably the most interesting channel in youtube
Wow your six pack is legit
‘Inexpensive’, not ‘not expensive’.
Huge fan thanks for the great videos
Wow another Channel sponsored by Audible. They are taking over TH-cam lads
***** there wasnt anything negative in his comment about that, he just noticed that audible sponsors many different youtubers, in which he is definetly right. i think we should be happy that sponsorships on youtube seem to work out
Well at least they are selling books, even if it is in audio format. Better than sponsored by McDonalds
Schimmellasagne Thats what I meant to say mate. These guys just love to jump to conclusions
***** You're absolutely right, it's not like people have made their entire livelihoods by making youtube videos and having them as their sole source of income for years, and are just now starting to add on this audible crap and patreon... oh wait.
Anybody else find it amusing that a company that converts printed matter into audio is investing so much in video advertisement?
Here in Israel there are commercials for radio ad-space that claim that "only in IBA [israeli broadcasting association], radio advertising works", which would be funny enough if they only advertised on their own radio (indicating that nobody bid for those slots), but actually air those ads on TV as well...
Im pro nuclear, what are you?
I am
Pro
Pro
Same
Pro
Modern physics is just finding alternative ways to boil water
For a physicist boiling water is easy, you just put it in a vacuum...
Neutron...the bullet!
- Boris 2019
Lmao
@Dark Rider That's right!
THORIUM people. It resolves essentially all of these issues and more. Search it on TH-cam.
Wake Wind yes
Thorium in my ass
Thumbs up for the TARDIS ! :)
Recently discovered this channel, loving your work and animation. Please keep making more videos!
Firstly thanks kurzgesagt for 7 years full of videos with educative and beautiful content with birds. I think we should use them with a great discipline if we want to end climinate change Thank you kurzgesagt (sorry for english)
I subscribed to this channel 3 years ago and saw this video 1 year ago and my teacher recommended this video today!
Awesome video! It's cool the see this here. We discussed this topic in physics class and I must say the way you present it on the video is very well understandable. Thanks for this video and I look forward to seeing the next two :)
Why is the TH-camr interested in ducks? But I am just loving your videos!
Ducks are good.
+Anton K Your profile picture shows that
YouSuckTube XD
not just ducks, it is by hundreds of people and each one has a different bird
the moderators are on the ground and the patrons are in the tree and yes there is a tardis
Thanks kurgesagt, I was trying to build my own nuclear reactor and it exploded 3 times, now I can build one in my backgarden with confidence!
Bro that background music motivated me damn well
"That's it? That's the renewable energy?
It's just boiling water!"
Tons of water to the extremely hot temperatures turned into steam flowing through the giant turbines attached to a generator that generates electricity for a city with population of 2 million people! And its doing all that without poluting the clouds and Earth's atmosphere by burning fossil fuel! On top of that its very cheap and easy to produce while the fossil fuel will be soon depleted.
Where is that video nuclear bombs explained did they pull it down?
+William Lag TH-cam most likely put it down because of explaining weapons.
+Miguel Machado yeah i thought so
+William Lag He haven't made it...
+Rory Shols has'nt made it ...mkay
+Mdu Mkwent Hasn't made it...
Turning physics into engineering was easy on paper but hard in real life"
👏👏
It was an awesome explanation I loved it 😁😁
Nicely explained.
Your channel never fails to amaze me, keep up the great work!
"Just click my head to get there"
Remember when youtube had that feature?
This was playing at my school
good job
Where is the "Atomic Bomb explained" video?
They will make it soon :)
GunpowderCoffee or in comparison to the nuclear power plant they make it melt down
no they havent
Lol soo aged comment
@@Rami-bi9xj but there still is no Atomic Bomb video
Can you guys describe the other types of reactors in another video?
We'd be here all damn day, but commercial reactors and some Gen 4's would be reasonable.
did anyone see the tardis?
+Kenneth Ng Yes, they apparently put one in every videos
+FreeDoum where?
+Trevor Phillips
At 1:38
EVERY?
I knew I wasn't crazy
I’ve learned more from this channel then all my years in high school.
Excellent video!
Personally I think nuclear power is the way forward. The reason it's not popular is because no-one seems to be willing to invest in it. If we refined and developed it more, I'm sure it would easily meet the world's electricity needs more efficiently and therefore cheaply than any other method we currently use. As far as the environmental impact goes, the only issue is getting rid of the depleted uranium (or whatever other element is used). I reckon that with the money we save by ditching oil, coal and gas, we'd be able to send it all to space/into the sun anyway.
1:43 Random TARDIS on the left side of the screen?
Saw that too. Is The Doctor here to save us from something?!?
I saw it as well.
+C There's one in each of his videos :)
I saw it! now I need to find all of the tardis'es
supposedly there are advances coming down the pipeline which will make nuclear energy the way to go. improved reactors will eliminate radioactive waste and instead be able to continue extracting energy from the fuel rods until it reaches a much more inert and non-harmful state.
Green energy people need to watch this instead of drawing a line at the word nuclear
The video kind of makes this point. But I find it could be more stressed.
Nuclear weapons demands was responsible for the massive funding of RnD and building of nuclear power in it's hayday.
It was cheap, because it was subsidized massively.
And the kind of designs that where ready to be used, where developed because we wanted to breed weapons fuel. Other more promising designs where underfunded and had little chance on a commercial scale.
If we would put the same amount of funding and subsidies into renewable, the world would be a better place. But you can't build weapons out of solar or wind.
It's more of a case of investments and returns Imo.
Why invest millions into renewables, which give very little energy for the price relative to other power plants when you can put that same amount of money into nuclear which produces large amounts of power and has a much more efficient fuel source than fossil fuel plants?
Why would there be so much money being put into nuclear suddenly during an oil crisis even though nuclear weapons didn't change much in this time?
Fossil fuel plants are some of the most popular types anyway and there isn't much of a market for coal powered weaponry atm so I personally think this makes more sense.
Everything is subsidized massively at the upstart. Fracking was a bunch of crazy mining engineers that everyone wrote off, now, they are rewriting US energy markets (for better or worse!). If we want solar, or wind, or nuclear invitations, we are going to have to pay for it..I, for one, that it is worth it.
I was trying to stay away from that argument until the other videos are out. :)
Fact is. Without subsidies nuclear would be dead. And it is/was cheap because it was political will to have it so.
This argument even stays if we don't consider the practical underwriting of the insurance rosk for worst case accidents by all citizens. (This is true for fossil as well. We carry the risk of the energy policy not the companies building powerplants. If the climate goes kaputt, it's on us)
What is better for the climate and the planet? Some kind of nuclear option is probably indeed best. At least short term.
Tilman Baumann IEA suggests that nuclear is cost competitive in a levelized cost sense, and European Environmental Agency suggests cost externalities of nuclear (like insurance) run about the same as renewables.
But ya, as long as you support it in the short term, perhaps we can win you over in the long term (if we are needed :D )
Being in the nuclear division in the navy, I can say that it's the most efficient source of power. As long as the operators are competent, and have a sufficient level of knowledge, no nuclear accidents should happen.
At 3:50, "nuclear provides 10% of the world's energy demand"
That's not true.
You should have said "10% of the world electricity production"
That's a huge difference !
Hey Kurzgesagt! Fan from India. Also, checked out your hindi subtitles, it's inaccurate and horrible to be frank. Your content is the best, and I love everything you do. As your research is so authentic and accurate, I thought you should know how bad and simply wrong the hindi translations are.
Love from India. Keep up the good work
This makes up for the Energy Systems MSc lecture I missed today :)
Everybody research Thorium Energy. You will not be disappointed.
@Bennett Pandolfino lol it's y fav vid by him
It’s funny that I just became a Fallout fan and this got on my recommendations.
whats the chance that i find a random picture on the internet about nuclear energy i needed for my homework and it turns out to be an upload from my favourite science channel.
I LOVE YOUR VIDEOS, KEEP DOING WHAT YOU'RE DOING!!!!!
Kudos to scientists for turning the most destructive thing in their time to an endless power source
So, to cut this really short (which was what I was looking for)...
Uranium 235 is sprayed with neutrons. This splits an atom of U235 and the neutrons (from the break up) cause radiation of heat energy (and other neutrons go on to do the same). Is that correct, anyone?
If that's correct, why almost five minutes?
I feel like you should do one on cancer and its treatments to clear up the massive misconceptions people have about it.
My brain is happily stimulated.
I just discovered this channel and I love it! Very entertaining and informative videos! Keep the nice job guys!
Suciu Vasile That's subjective, but eh. They're still awesome.
The problem is, people are more scared of invisible radiation and the prospect of a 5-10 year long uninhabitable land.
But are not scared of invisible gas that will very slowy cause our planet to cook our biosphere to deatb withing the next 100-500 years.
When people think of nuclear energy today, they still think of 3 mile island and Chernobyl. Nuclear energy has come leaps and bounds from that but there is still that public fear that is hard to shake off.
@@tymiranda9278 ? There are multiple nuclear energy accidents every year, the reason why its not used is its too expensive
will you please make a video on consumption of fossil fuels and their depletion also various sources of energy and their consumption globally.
It doesn't need to be in a video ,it is obvious that nuclear is the most effective ,safer and environmentally friendly
I just watched this in school class! So cool!
Where's the Nuclear Bombs Explained video??
So that Northkorea wont use it as a tutorial XD
Atomic energy is clean energy!
Looking forward to watching the rest of this three part video, in the next minute. lol
I agree with the sentiment, but the visuals are way too manipulative
Here in sweden 50 percent of our energy is nuclear.
Yeah but people still say its bad which i think is weird!
Some Russian idiots: *blows up reactor*
Everyone: "Nuclear bad!1!1! bad reactor! bad boy!"
Nuclear reactor is the best way to get energy period. Only problem is human error, there hasn't been a nuclear reactor malfunction, or catastrophe where human isn't the one to blame. Get FULL AI operated nuclear reactors build them where there is least probability of natural catastrophes, build it bigger than ever before and pre sealed so hard that in a case of a war, bombing or any other fuckup - that humans can and will cause, it can't fuck up a big radius and get atomic dust everywhere.
Problem solved best energy there is.
+siamanspaps
Was Fukushima human error?
Other than that i agree
+Elusive7thElement Avsolutley Japan has regular earthquakes troughout history and tsunamis afther those, atomic reactor in that place is a truly spectacular level of stupidity.
+siamanspaps
Human error in design and location?
Got it.
Also, if it wasn't a damn light water reactor, it likely wouldn't have been an issue
+siamanspaps Nope, sorry. The best way to get get energy would be containing a black hole and converting the radiation it emits into energy.
K463178
I rather agree.
It's a little beyond our abilities right now, but black holes offer the chance for pure mass-energy conversion.
600kg of anything could power the earth for a year. 600,000 tonnes of anything could power the world for 1 million years. That's peanuts compared with the 8 million tonnes of coal China burns every day.
Gotta love E=MC^2
That C squared in particular, multiply a mass by the speed of light squared and you get its energy.
i have homework about this! and the video really helped
All the "I watched an HBO Miniseries that Fictionalized Nuclear Power and was riddled with scientific inaccuracies" goof balls are running wild.
If you're a nuclear engineer, operator, or at the very least a physicist, it pains to see these people talk.
It also is painful to watch videos from wonderful content creators on a complicated subject that don't seem to have that great of a grip on nuclear power, or why it is so good, but I don't hold that against them. It's "expensive" because of fear-mongering and legislation. It's not actually *that* expensive when you can mass produce a standard model, like France and South Korea does.
Also, LWRs, the way you described them, would constitute a lot of non LWRs. LWRs are unique in one major regard: the coolant and moderator are both regular water, and these designs are predominantly Pressurized Water Reactors (PWRs), some are BWRs (Boiling). It's also important to note that these designs are largely based on an inspired by naval reactor designs, as that is where reactor plants first started emerging, which is why modern reactor designs are trying to get away from that, because, obviously, we can accomplish more on land than in a submarine with more efficient designs. There are no size or area restrictions. The LWR/PWR design is really great for small reactor plants, but not the most optimal for large, commercial reactors, which is what 80ish% of the world's reactors are like.. they're Gen2 Reactor Plants. I will grant that the LWR is not the "safest or most elegant" reactor design, but I think putting it in that context is a but misleading. LWRs are VERY safe, and still statistically safer than any other power production platform, outside of other reactor plant designs. Technically, a lot of our Gen4 designs that will be in construction by the end of this coming decade are safer, more efficient, and considerably more complex than LWRs, or any other current operational reactor that we have.. but they're all still very safe, and their capacity factor, at least in the US, is very high. About 90%.
I also think it is unfair to say that Three Mile Island "barely escaped" its catastrophe. The containment vessel, which is made of reinforced steel and several feet of concrete, did its job, and it wasn't even close to succumbing. This is a prominent difference between Chernobyl and TMI, or the Soviet Era reactors and the US. The RBMK-1000 would have never been licensed in the US, for a number of reasons, including the positive reactivity coefficient and the lack of a containment vessel. Some reinforced steel and concrete would have nullified everything that die. Also, regulations are much more strict in the US, and so is the safety atmosphere in general.
The "radioactive cloud that threatened central Europe" is extremely hyperbolic. Europe was just fine. People fictionalize the extent of radiation or how much it increased the surrounding areas.
Here's my question. Everyone, and I mean everyone, seems to know about Chernobyl or Fukushima. Movies, series, and TH-cam videos will be dedicated to them regularly, including videos like this. Yet, how's come we never hear about the worst energy disaster? The Banqaio Dam Collapse in 1975 China killed 200,000+ people and displaced 11 million from their homes, and I sincerely doubt anyone really even knows about this, let alone will we see the media talking about it. Nothing comes close to this disaster, and its environmental impact and death toll is worse than every nuclear reactor plant in history, combined. Yet, hydroelectric power is still one of the safest forms of energy, just being nuclear. *It's an example of how unfairly it is treated, fictionalized, and sensationalized.*
"
yeah... that's not great, but not terrible
It wasn't so much riddled with innaccuricies as it was oversimplifications. Worst part is that i noticed several times (particularly during legaslov's explanation) the show went out of it's way to emphasize that nuclear is actually very safe when using proper designs, or at least when run properly, but the only thing most people took away from it is "oh my goodness look at that guy in the hospital!!!!!!!! I'm emotional now and solar panels aren't scary sounding!!"
I agree with everything else you said though.
This comment is really what people need, I really hope people will see this, even though it's been 4 years since it was posted.
1:39
why the hell did there jus pop up a tardis
ik right?
why will u just put a tardis ? its not dr who,its nuclear energy
@@therealmedhaansh in alot of kurzegasagt's old videos have dr who references in them
I give up trying to explain why nuclear power is the best.
All I know is, the day fusion is the main source of energy is the earth I want to live in
Looking at probably at least a century before prototypes are up and running in most countries
Yeah i gave up too... Some people are just too stupid. Love for all the pro nuclear ppl :D
then Fallout happen. Hope you saved up some caps :P
Great explanation on this subject. Was looking to make one presentation on the same. And this 3 part series is really helpful.
2019 after watching Chernobyl 🙋🏼♂️
clicking the duck's head does'nt do ANYTHING. 2:20
true
It's because of youtube removing a feature to do that.
Nuclear energy is actually much more cheaper than wind turbines and solar energy. And the payoff is much more better than any other way to produce energy. The energy that these environmental produce is a fraction of what nuclear energy produces with a much smaller input.
Damien Gallegos decommissioning 😒
I have learnt a lot from this video.