3.26 a nuclear reactor doesnt use chemical reactions, it uses nuclear reactions, hence the name NUCLEAR reactior. They use nuclear fission to produce the heat need to create the steam. A standard fuel driven engine is what uses chemical reactions.
hahahah)))) Nuclear chemistry is part of high energy chemistry, a section of physical chemistry - studies nuclear reactions and the physical and chemical processes accompanying them........ Nuclear reaction is the process of interaction of an atomic nucleus with another nucleus or elementary particle.......THIS IS Physical chemistry!!!!!
@@Александр-е7э5ц laugh all you want, it doesn't change the fact that nuclear reactors do not use any form of chemical reaction to produce energy and chemistry has nothing to do with nuclear forces. You are taking the name "nuclear chemistry" and twisting it to mean something else. But the branch of science called "chemistry" which deals with chemical reactions, does not deal with nuclear physics. If you look it up it specifically says that "nuclear chemistry" deals with nuclear reactions or the reaction INSIDE the atoms. Chemistry on the other hand deals with reaction BETWEEN the atoms.
@@Sciguy95 The formation of transuranium elements in a nuclear reactor occurs according to the following schemes: 235U + n → 236U + n → 237U →(7 сут)→ 237Np + n → 238Np →(2,1 сут)→ 238Pu 238U + n → 239U →(23 мин)→ 239Np →(2,3 сут)→ 239Pu (+осколки) + n → 240Pu + n → 241Pu (+осколки) + n → 242Pu + n → 243Pu →(5 ч)→ 243Am + n → 244Am →(26 мин)→ 244Cm HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAH)))))) IS THIS PHYSICS? CHEMISTRY AND PHYSICS TOGETHER.... ONE DOESN'T PROCEED WITHOUT THE OTHER.....
Environmentalists are afraid of nuclear reactors on Russian peaceful icebreakers, but they are not afraid of nuclear reactors on American military aircraft carriers.
Well, aircraft carriers doesn't go on artic waters, and never go alone or isolated. I would be more concerned about nuclear "things" on submarines, they can navigate everywhere, isolated, and can carry lots of nuclear "things"
If you look directly at the front, it looks a lot like a hammerhead shark. The control gallery has to be that way, but the two headlights, one on each side, placed at about a third of the ship's height, complete the picture.
Might as well be traveling on a submarine or on a spaceship - just emptiness all around, as far as the eye can see. The main thing you'll be experiencing is the interior of the ship.
@@manofsan yeah - a long trip would get boring. For a short time it would be interesting to see that open vast empty place. When the weather is 'good', being on deck to hear and see the ice crunch would be an experience.
@chloehennessey6813 Non c'erano americani sulla luna, se non hanno ancora inventato un motore e devono comprarne uno dalla Russia. E all'epoca ne avrebbero avuto uno? Hanno perso la corsa allo spazio a favore della Russia e hanno deciso di filmare a Hollywood che sono atterrati sulla luna per coprire la loro vergogna di non essere stati i primi nello spazio!
Russia has a unique problem as the majority of their direct ocean access is probably in the Arctic Ocean so it is a wise venture to build such a fleet of icebreakers to keep deliveries by sea possible during the long winter there. Props for the intelligent investment.
For this purpose, the icebreakers of project 22220 are being built, there are 7 of them in the project, 3 have been built, another Leader is on the way, and there are still 7 pieces, and these are only nuclear, not counting diesel ones.
@@science-channel In order to prevent ice from sticking to the sides, pneumatic washing is used - there are many holes on the body through which air bubbles are supplied to prevent ice from sticking. But hot water, the mention of which can be found in some sources, is not used for driving in ice. On the icebreaker "Russia" experiments were made with heating the hull in the bow area, but they turned out to be completely useless. True, when parked in ice, the ice around the icebreaker melts - which is not surprising, since 20,000 tons of sea water is required to cool all systems per hour, which at the same time heats up to 25 ° C. At the same time, the decks are completely heated so that the ice does not freeze and it would not have to be removed
Nope. The amount of energy for that will be just enormous... Pneumatic machines (bubble generators) are much cheaper, efficient and they also generate 'repulsive forces' that push pieces of broken ice away from the ship's hull.
@@SvendleBerriesin the 90s scientists told us that they are Not Sure If the Ice will in the Arctic completly clear Up in the Summer by 2100. New evidence and Tests Show that it will definetly Happen by 2100 but Most likely before 2050.
🤦🏻♂️ Notice how there is no international trade routes in the ices at all?? Engineering there is of course all about sanctions and west politics and not about engineering or ice at all because Russia bad
I caught what you said at the beginning of the video for icebreakers just isn't enough up in the Arctic well that's just slaps the face of global warming from what I've been hearing for the past decade now that ice should be melting it should be getting thinner etcetera etcetera etcetera in all cases it should be less icebreakers because it would be easier because global warming would be helping out. Unless??? LOL
Are you high or smth? 😂 Russians literally stole or bought all their technology from the West Without the American and German help Russia would still be in it’s natural Medieval stage of development
@@hyy3657 Nowhere, actually. At least "manmade" climate change. Or "global warming" as it used to be called, until they changed the terminology because it kept snowing when it wasnt supposed to. If "climate change" were an actual problem, they would be endlessly hounding India and China, yet they only ever shake their fists at the west. Its bogus.
There seems to be a big rush of the world right now to change every word possible in the some other word. Russia must deliver 'hydrocarbons'? Did you forget how to spell oil? What the hell is wrong with you?
There are around 50 of those functioning constantly. Don't forget Russian fleet of atomic subs. I'd say Russian reactors are good, Chernobyl was long ago
Here is an idea to improve efficiency and demand. Geo political conditions allowing, lay electrical cables in the water. Generate the power where the fossil fuels are located and transport the power via cables to destination countries. Far safer and far more efficient.
@@dimbasz - thanks, i took your advice and looked it up. it only proved how ignorant you are. there are already projects planned to span long distance. Yet, another troll, wannabe with no intelligence or knowledge desperate for attention.
Good to see these rich Russian oligarchs took some time away from their private yachts in Turkey to do these interviews! Hahaha those aren’t icebreaker tans
Против кого их там проводить? Против белых медведей? Северный путь развивают, чтоб вести более эффективную торговлю, и всякие "борцы за свободу мореплавания" не мешали.
I don't think that guy thinks enough about pronouns and identity! All he cares about is ice this, ice that when everyone knows that there isn't any ice left and penguins moved South!
Russian engineering and science is very good. Russian economy is not. It will be telling to see if this endeavour survive the current economic grounding of the Russian nation.
What have the United States achieved with its SUPEReconomy? The military budget is 10 times more than the Russian one. And what is the result? The US supersonic missile program was canceled - there are not enough brains. New ships - Zumwalt, for example - garbage. US Abrams tanks are afraid to give Ukraine, so as not to disgrace. Nuclear missiles - Minutemen extend the life - did not come up with anything new - there are not enough brains. What is the conclusion from everything - money - NOT BRAIN.
Two weeks ago World Bank said that Russian economic became 5th in world. It growing. Moreover, Russian debt is one of the lowest in world, Russia have positive trade balance (sell more than buy), so each year it becoming only richer (and already have hundreds thousands of billions as surplus money; even after West stole year ago $300 billions from Russia)
That’s an awesome ship too bad it belongs to Russia it would great if they put their time and money into more stuff like that instead of always all about military and war
If you look at Russias and why it’s military is not outgunning Ukraine it’s because it doesn’t spend to much on its military. That’s the one thin Putin said he would not do and that is following the USSR down the track of overspending on the military. It’s why Russia has not produced a lot of its new equipment such as the T-14 , SU-35 in large numbers. The reverse is the USA which over spends and is looking for wars to keep its defence industry operating
how America will reduce the number of bases around Russia and China, then we'll talk. For understanding, America has more than 800 pieces, England has about 140, Russia has 20.
I doubt this ship will even make it to the hull being laid. Economic sanctions on Russia are increasing all the while the costs off the war are also increasing. These are unsustainable conditions. It is possible that China will acquire Russia as a client state in the next decade and an economic and security arrangement may allow Russia to continue large capital projects. I suspect some Russian people will prefer this not to happen but the other options are diminishing. In all respects, Russians will endure a lower standard of living for a generation, including the oligarchs.
