I think it should be mentioned that soviets put out fire in Urta-Bulak gas field in 1966. As far as I know its the only time a nuclear bomb used successfully to resolve a problem in peace.
@@mael1515 10x background for some stuff is fine Reservoirs for power generation, clearing a mountain for roads In a few decades most of the radiation is gone. Besides I'm sure these days they can make even cleaner bombs. Would rule for digging out another planet. Imagine how good it would be for trade if the panama canal was the Panama straight instead. And the ocean already is filled with radioactive waste. The solution to pollution is dilution
@@kapytanhook I agree that it would be useful to have a very clean bomb as a replacement for dynamite. But I don't agree with "the solution for pollution is dilution". We should not pollute to begin with. Also "a few decades" is too long.
Couple of corrections for the nuke nerds: It is uranium 235 used in bombs not 238, which is the common isotope. Also tritium isn't actually very common, its efficiency means only a tiny amount is used and for the most part not tritium directly, but created during the fission explosion through the bombardment of lithium by radiation.
Yeah, Tritium has 0.02% of abundance and U-235 is 0.72%, but as a light element is is easily produced, as Lithium has a big cross section that is independent of neutron energy, even if the Lithium sample is not isotopically pure it is easy to separate of the sample used, this makes the process very efficient as long you have a nuclear reactor of a primary core. But It is used in the form of Lithium Deuteride as Lithium is highly reagent with water and other things exploding the same with deuterium (that is basically Hydrogen), using a molecule composed by the two is a very smart solution for a more stable, safe and manageable material.
@@agranero6U-238 is used in a 4th generation device, in order to create Plutonium during the 2nd phase, which in turn will also detonate during the 4th phase, this type of tamper is commonly used in 4th generation thermonuclear devices.
6:42 i'm glad you chose a work of titular art such as "I'm A High School Boy And A Best-Selling Light Novel Author Strangled By My Female Junior Who's A Voice Actress"
I also look forward to that. In the meantime you can readily find information on the three times that nuclear fracking was done by the American Project Plowshare.
I didn't know "peace nukes" were a thing. Now I learn the idiots used nukes to frack? Seriously, WTF? That sounds like the definition of the word "stupid."
Confusing U 235 and U 238 is fairly easy, but only the first is useful in bombs. Most hydrogen bombs in the early tests had a natural uranium jacket, which acted both as a tamper and fissioned by the neutrons from the fusion reaction. The Soviet “100 megaton” Tsar Bomba had a lead jacket to detune it to 62 megatons.
One of the underground explosions in 1984 happened 40 kilometres from my home on the Kola Peninsula. It felt like a small earthquake, and the dishes in the kitchen cupboards rattled.
One of my favorite facts about this crazy period of history where we were blowing up everything we could get away with using nukes is that Kodak suffered loss of film from there storage facilities from stray radioactive particles traveling hundreds or thousands of kilometers to zip right through the boxes and rolls of new film.
They didn't zip right through anything. Radioactive fallout contaminated the paper mill that produced sheets of papers used as packaging separators for their x-ray film.
it was radioactive fallout, their customers kept returning fogged film which Kodak had to replace per their warranty and their reputation. they kept driving around the country trying to figure it out
@@Gameboygenius yeah, that's the worst part. Wast swathes of land and soil were contaminated, and now as a result moder homo sapiens is more radioactive than people who lived before 1945. In that sense, first nuclear testing was a start of new geological era, where every part of the world will be slightly radioactive.
@@KlodFather Good news! Last I heard, this isn't as much as an issue anymore (as of very recently). Current steel is no longer radioactive much above background, and can be used for most more sensitive applications. The really touchy stuff DOES still need the pre-war steel, but thankfully the demand is much lower given the obviously limited supply!
Nuclear explosions were also used to create deep underground reservoirs for chemical waste. Such as Kama-1 project, where 2000 m deep explosion took place to store hydrozine byproducts.
Dude, your videos are so well done. Education and funny with a semi serious overtone, i love watching them and learn at the same time. If you ever come to the uk let me know, I'll buy you a coffee. Keep up the fantastic work.
There was talk about nuking a spot along a mountain range surrounding the Los Angeles basin. The resultant gap created by the explosion would allow constant air flow to help ventilate out the city's serious smog conditions.
@@AJWRAJWR The question should be "Is it net-positive?". If more people die from lung cancer due to smog than would die from slight increase in radioactivity - it's net-positive.
Would it be possible to put conversions of imperial units (into SI units) when you use them onscreen for those of us that are used to it? I would very much appreciate not having to do mental calculations while watching.
@@ronjon7942same thing I do every damn video with imperial units! Pause video, open online unit converter and check or if it's miles multiply the figure by 1.6 on a calculator! They really should just put the SI figures on the screen for non-Americans
Right name "Ministry of Medium Machine Building". And it was specially called this way to make spies harder to steal/understand documents. Not a joke. It was popular practice in USSR. New developing battle tank could have short secret name like tractor.
The use of atomic bombs for peaceful applications was a common talk around the 50s and 60s, not only by the Russians but in USA too, for one reason was to advertise atomic bombs as not so nasty on public perception good look trying that) and for the others it was what I call hammer syndrome: if you only have atomic bombs all looks like a target, Teller wanted to explode a staged device on the Moon...just...because, there was Project Orion and several other things. But the Sovietic programs is far bigger than I was aware, thanks.
6:42 I was so sleepy at work while I was listening to this on my phone, and I immediately went "wait what?" at that joke. That was unexpected but way too apt a description.
In Australian the British tested their nukes on indigenous land occupied by indigenous people. As well as some Australian military personnel. France executed nuclear weapons tests in the areas of Reggane and In Ekker in Algeria and the Mururoa and Fangataufa Atolls in French Polynesia, from 13 February 1960 through 27 January 1996. These totaled 210 tests with 210 device explosions, 50 in the atmosphere. The US? Most of the tests took place at the Nevada Test Site (NNSS/NTS) and the Pacific Proving Grounds in the Marshall Islands and off Kiritimati Island in the Pacific, plus three in the Atlantic Ocean.. (it's probably worse than that)
Around 20:00, regarding the academics rationale, I wonder what a saltier Arctic Ocean at the northern border would have done regarding ice free shipping lanes. It would be interesting to learn of any such back story.
There was also Project Dunebug that used a nuclear bomb to do something like fracking. The multilated cows case seems to be related to a monitoring program related to Project Dunebug.
The only use I could think of that would be legitimately peaceful would be diverting an asteroid or comet from hitting Earth (something you’d think the USSR would consider significant), but even then it turns out you can accomplish that (with enough advance notice) with an impact or conventional explosives.
You forgot that the americans very seriously proposed under operation plowshare was to use hundreds of nuclear detonations to dig canals thru the sinai peninsula to give israel a way to bypass the suaz canal. Honestly using any nuclear bomb in the middle east was super controversial by itself much less hundreds lol
@@d3thkn1ghtmcgee74 I'm not a historian but it's true that the USSR said they nuke or send rockets to the UK, France & Israel if those countries didn't leave.
Minor correction their hydrogen bonds, or the super has its called sometimes requires a fission device which uses plutonium or uranium in order to initiate the thermal nuclear reaction of the hydrogen bomb. You just can't get away from the radioactive stuff.
How is tritium more common than uranium. Tritium is very difficult to make and requires uranium to create a neutron field to turn deuterium into Tritium. And the process of refining the deuterium from water is monstrous.
Nuclear Nadal ruined me 1:38 every time I heard this sentence I chuckle -_- thanks Wadiyan movie. and fun fact, the craters of Storax Sedan and Chagan had the same width and depth
"Peaceful Nuclear Explosions" - Please tell me I'm not the only one to find this phrase hilariously contradictory and ironic to the point of utter absurdity!
I am very interested in who choose the test names: Starfish Prime, Castle Bravo, Project Plowshare, Project Teacup, Operation Sunbeam, Storax Sedan (this would be a cool rock band name).
I always wish they'd given fission bomb propelled spacecraft a whirl. The nuclear powered plane was a stupid idea, and they probably knew it. That money could have been better spent on yeeting a satellite into the cosmos
The Irish Sea (between Ireland and Britain) is apparently the most radioactive sea in the world due to the Sellafield nuclear waste processing plant in the UK.
Nuclear Demolition anyone? Demolition of high rise structures were also on the list of use for peaceful nuclear explosions... Many systems put in place during construction of such structures during their construction... Some of you might have recognized three (3) of such systems being deployed at a particular date, 20-something years ago, thus completely pulverizing most of the structures into microscopic dust. Yes. It was a nuclear demolition. You are welcome
Pretty sure any decent seismometer would register these large explosions. The ban was more linked to accident like Daiguo Fukuriryu Maru and the simple fact that by testing in the air, you cannot avoid spewing radioactive stuff over the whole planet. Even if it's trace amounts, other countries, specially non-nuclear ones, might see issues with that.
Trying to understand....Higher salinity will cause the sea water to freeze at a tenp below normal. Fair enough. But that tenp is lower, not higher. So how could it cause sea ice to melt if it is even lower than the sea ice melting point ? Although the water still remains fluid, it is still colder than what froze the ice in the first place. @20:05.
No different than dynamite. Well, thousands of tons of dynamite. Ok, millions of tons of dynamite. Oh, and some pesky radiation. Fine, ‘savage irony’ works.
Can someone please tell him to make video on solid state battery🔋. Where it stand today. Is it even real if it is then when it will arrive. Because there is lots of misinformation about this topic on internet...
Why do this in clear sky days? I imagine that in a rainy day the rwin and heavy water concentration around would prevent at least some of the radiantion from going away. The downside it that more of the radiantion wont go away, making the bomb site more radioactive, but ¯\_(ツ)_/¯
To say thermonuclear bombs are 'cleaner' is misleading. They still require the detonation of fissile material first along with usually further fissile tamper that will produce radioactive products. Hydrogen bombs are cleaner per unit of yield because their total yield is magnified by fusion. To date the worst total fallout from a US nuclear test was that from our highest yield thermonuclear bomb test Castle Bravo.
Especially on the ground, all the neutrons escaping from the fusion reaction will activate any material nearby, resulting in short lived isotopes. Of course, one way to further increase yield is to use a uranium shell to capture as much of those fusion neutrons and create even more fission yield. But then you have more fission products instead.
"On the need to launch work to study the possibilities of using atomic and thermonuclear explosions for technical and scientific purposes." -a Japanese Yuri.
It is easy to exaggerate radiation and fallout risks. That negatively impacts energy policy. High natural background radiation is not associated with any negative health outcomes. Fallout is usually really low acute dose. Your channel is great.
Prompt fallout from a ground detonation can easily be lethal... but only for about a week. These "remnant" higher dose rates years later are, as you say, completely meaningless and have no negative health impacts. There are populations living at around 100x average background all their live with no statistically measurable effects at all, it has been tried.
Really I shouldn’t be surprised. Moscow probably looked at everything East of the Urals the way Washington looked at Nevada, but fuck that’s depressing. As always , great information. Thank you.
1:26 "... this was certainly propaganda (the peaceful use of atomic energy)" - if this was a propaganda, how would you describe Ursula von der Leyen's speech in which she implied that the Russian bombed Hiroshima and Nagasaki?
Awesome content! Kind of odd how many of these used very large yield bombs. I wonders why they didn't design micro nukes like 1-10 kt to use more strategically. I assume a mini nuke almost negligible fallout, and would have a much larger variety of applications.
Does this mean Russia is asian country ? And I dont mean it in insulting way. They been shifting to asia from europe for while Your analysis on it is just as deep as japan indo
