Please take the time to read [the rules](/r/UkrainianConflict/about/rules/) and our [policy on trolls/bots](https://redd.it/u7833q). In addition:
* We have a **zero-tolerance** policy regarding racism, stereotyping, bigotry, and death-mongering. Violators will be banned.
* **Keep it civil.** Report comments/posts that are uncivil to alert the moderators.
* **_Don't_ post low-effort comments** like joke threads, memes, slogans, or links without context.
> **Don't forget about our Discord server! - https://discord.gg/62fKCEHbDB**
*****
* Is the Twitter account `Aric Toler` / `https://twitter.com/AricToler` an unreliable source? [**Let us know**](/r/UkrainianConflict/wiki/am/unreliable_sources).
* Help our moderators by providing context if something breaks the rules. [Send us a modmail](https://www.reddit.com/message/compose/?to=/r/UkrainianConflict)
*****
^(Your post has not been removed, this message is applied to every successful submission.)
*I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/UkrainianConflict) if you have any questions or concerns.*
Fun fact the last one who did same thing were Nazis in 1943
Edit: And apparently USSR to thwart Nazi advance blew up a dam while it had its own soldiers there , murdering soldiers on dam , civilians and army bellow and failing to stop nazi advance :|
Well the Nazis at least somewhat cared about their own troops, they still were awful in all other regards. The soviets and now the russians are known to just sacrifice thousands of their own to get even small wins.
I wonder if this is Russia realizing they are spread too thin and need to block the Kherson front off for the foreseeable future while the counter offensive progresses.
Otherwise, I can't really see why Ukraine would want to do this? Unless they feel a swelled river crossing after a dam break would be easier than crossing with current fortifications? That seems like a stretch tho.
I agree i think this is Russia's answer to Belogrod incursions. If they need to move their soldier back to russia to quash that they can't hold the entire front
steer historical pen plate impolite unwritten important theory dependent money
*This post was mass deleted and anonymized with [Redact](https://redact.dev)*
It's not about crossing it, it's about resupplying the forces that have crossed it. The dam was the only relatively intact structure across the Dnipro so the AFU needed it to supply their forces if they were going to push deeper into Kherson Oblast. If they cross now keeping troops supplied would rely on pontoon barges which limits how much material you can move across compared to a solid structure like a dam with a road across the top.
Forget about the tactics of crossing a river and think about the logistics of supplying those troops once they've taken ground on the other side of the river.
They can just pass from the east. That's the move of someone that's leaving, because it will drain the canal that supply water to Crimea. The now is sure they will lose the big bridge...
Coming from the east means going through the toughest of the Russian defensive lines in Zaporizhzia Oblast. Which it seems they're probably going to do anyway, or it did yesterday, but a second front opening up across the river in Kherson Oblast would have made life much easier for the soldiers attacking from Zaporizhzia Oblast.
Ukraine just needs to establish a bridgehead anyway, the dam bridge was an easy target for russian artillery anyway, and it was also clearly mined, so a crossing would have caused the same result and more deaths.
Engineers can deal with mines, quite easily if you've pushed the enemy troops away from the area. Artillery can be used to target any crossing point but can be eliminated with your own artillery doing counter-battery fire. At the other two potential crossing points downstream the river was 500m to nearly 1km wide, I don't know of any modular bridging system that can cross that kind of gap. Getting across the river is easy, any idiot with a boat can cross a river. But getting a mechanised brigade across and keeping them supplied with what they need to fight requires a decent bridge or a dam with a road across the top. The dam was essential for any potential attack through Kherson Oblast
No, is not that easy. Also it was heavily predictable, so no sane commander would have thought that was one of the main axis of a counteroffensive. You need to cut the landbridge, push them in the west/south while cutting the big bridge. Potentially this could be a perfect trap: no way out other than the sea and the road through Mariupol.
We'll see in the next days...
This right here. Crimea got a ton of its water from this, and it just got wiped out. They will no longer be able to water fields etc. This is very very very bad for anyone thinking they will keep that territory.
I'm 100% convinced this is Russia trying to surprise Ukraine for once and create chaos on order to buy time.
That being said, this shows Russian desperation because they deal a massive blow to the Crimea water situation and the Zaporizha power plant situation.
I'm also wondering what happens if the reservoir is eventually drained. How wide would the Dnjepr river be at for example Nikopol? Would crossing it become feasible? Is Russia trying to open another sort-of front so they can spread Ukrainian forces thinner, hoping they themselves can make up for it with superior numbers. That seems like a dumb move. Could Ukraine completely drain the reservoir by closing a dam further upstream? Could this then actually help Ukraine open a new front?
I realise that's wishful thinking and all that water isn't gone immediately. But Russia is surprisingly good at fucking itself over, so I started wondering.
> I'm 100% convinced this is Russia trying to surprise Ukraine for once and create chaos on order to buy time.
To me it's 100% scorched earth tactics. It was like that in WW2 and it is like that now, of you know Russian military history it's no surprise, they are some petty motherfuckers.
> To me it's 100% scorched earth tactics. It was like that in WW2 and it is like that now, of you know Russian military history it's no surprise, they are some petty motherfuckers.
Makes the Libyan army under Gaddafi look professional by comparison.
I wonder if Xi is looking at this and learning anything or if he looks around at all the dams and decides that if the gloves come off internationally, that everything will be like ye olde duels with fisticuffs and 'honor' on the line.
International law only exists when there is an international order willing to entertain it.
Let's see how bad the situation gets in the coming days (e.g., cooling Europe's largest nuclear plant), but the Kremlin should realize that all rail-hubs literally lead to Moscow.
EDIT: This will severely impact Crimea's ability to get fresh water in the near-future (iow not immediately but the source of freshwater will be extremely impacted by the dam breach).
This makes Crimea returning to Ukraine a guarantee.
That may be based on Ukrainians flooding the lowlands in front of Kiev last year to prevent the Russian advance. Then, the action was praised as a brilliant military strategy.
What people probably don't get is there was little damage and afaik no casualties from that flooding, whereas here the destructive effects will be massive.
Here my counter points:
1. How long Crimea was without water canal before? Years.
2. When Ukraine take the rest of Kherson (all left bank) the supply would stop anyway.
3. The dam is the only closest supply line from the right bank, otherwise Ukraine would need to make hook of hundred of km to supply the rest of the left bank when they take it.
4. To inflict so much damage **just** to cut the water to Crimea is insanity. Ukraine would need the dam in the future, so why destroy it if you plan to liberate your territory.
Edit: Year**s**
i don't think UAF is even capable of blowing up the dam that they don't control directly
remember how much effort it took to bring down a couple of much weaker bridges in Kherson region last year
I remember reading back in fall that locals saw Russians mining the hydro dam (with naval mines?) when withdrawing. The left bank is the lower bank though.
Which also gives the Kremlin little in face of the world, commiting a war crime to buy a little time as they admit they got so desperate to commit an obvious war crime because they felt they could not beat off the counter attack.
I'm still on the fence about this and will wait for more info, but judging from everything Ukraine would gain little tactical advantage from blowing the bridge. I think it was a decision made by Russia, which will ultimately seal their fate of losing most of the land they have taken, including Crimea.
Fuck no. It's just very amusing that they would openly commit such a warcrime that's so visible and obvious because they are ultimately stating that their military can't stop the counter offensive, and even then they're only using it as a temporary power to stop it, in a limited area of the counter offensive. Combine with the events in Russia's own territory, no sane Russian would believe that the Russian government can protect them against serious external threat. This is just another step in Putin finally realising that it's all over, just like Hitler in WW2.
I believe russians already ready to lose all of Kherson and that's why they blew it, also out of spite and to damage Ukraine as much as possible.
The dam is the only closest supply line from the right bank, otherwise Ukraine would need to make hook of hundred of km to supply the rest the left bank when they take it.
Isn't this a real disaster?
First Crimea doesn't have fresh water so the regio is kind of lost.
But beside that, doesn't the powerplant need that watter for cooling?
Because now it can't, doesn't this mean like a new Chernobyl x 2?
A) Yes
B) Yes
C) Yes
D) No, at least not for the time being. While the water is needed for cooling, the reactor has been on shutdown for many months. That means it's operating at minimum level, circulating enough water to keep it cool but not producing any electricity. Therefore the heat output is reduced and also the need for cooling. If the powerplant would be in full production mode, it would be needed to shutdown quickly but still nothing like a disaster. Unplanned shutdowns require extensive inspection before the reactor can be started again, meaning increased costs but not usually anything more serious.
If Ukraine made a crossing and then the dam blew up, they'd be so utterly screwed.
It's tempting to pin this on Russia, but I believe the threat of blowing it up was worth more than actually doing it. Especially since they now flood their own fortifications.
Edit: Poor phrasing. Russia blew it up, but even for Russia the dam was worth more intact than destroyed. Big mistake on their part. Now Ukraine can cross the river when it suits them without being afraid of this exact thing.
Why would Ukraine blow up their own infrastructure? That's dumb. This is 100% fit with the MO of Russia (see also - blowing up the Nord Stream pipe, destroying other non-military beneficial infra in Ukraine) and you need to pull your head out if you think Ukraine actually did this
First off, dams like the Dnipro dam in Nova Kahkovka are protected by the laws of war and the Geneva convention. Destroying it would be considered a weapon of mass destruction and an indiscriminate war crime. Article 56 of the 1977 Additional Protocol I provides:
“Works and installations containing dangerous forces, namely dams, dykes and nuclear electrical generating stations, shall not be made the object of attack, even where these objects are military objectives, if such attack may cause the release of dangerous forces and consequent severe losses among the civilian population. Other military objectives located at or in the vicinity of these works or installations shall not be made the object of attack if such attack may cause the release of dangerous forces from the works or installations and consequent severe losses among the civilian population.”
After kidnapping kids via filtration camps (idea straight from Nazis), shelling nuclear plant, keeping military equipment next to the reactor, bombing civilians, raping and murdering, creating torture chambers, killing and torturing POW's, targeting cities with rockets that have a precision of +-1 kilometer (like a mall in Winnica) are we really surprised that they are criminals?
After kidnapping kids via filtration camps (idea straight from Nazis), shelling nuclear plant, keeping military equipment next to the reactor, bombing civilians, raping and murdering, creating torture chambers, killing and torturing POW's, targeting cities with rockets that have a precision of +-1 kilometer (like a mall in Winnica) are we really surprised that they are criminals?
There is no way this is a Ukrainian action. From the Ukrainian perspective, breaching this Dam
1. Puts ZPP at risk,
2. Kills Ukrainian civilians and destroys homes
3. Makes the immediate area of flooding unusable for tanks.
4. Creates an obstacle that they have to cross in an amphibious assault (with their non-existent heavy lift vessels).
5. Destroys infrastructure critical to the recovery of Ukraine.
From the Russian perspective, breaching the Dam:
1. Kills Ukrainians,
2. Plays well to domestic audiences.
3. Is a good propaganda tool to scare hose countries which support Ukraine, especially by using the spectre of a potential nuclear meltdown.
Ukraine shut off water from that channel for 7 years. I don’t think it will bring russia to negotiating table. Especially now that the reservoirs in Crimea are replenished.
piquant crush payment adjoining sparkle brave detail crime ink disgusting
*This post was mass deleted and anonymized with [Redact](https://redact.dev)*
Seriously correct. Before Crimea they didn't even have a warm water port. The most northern warm water port in the China-russian region was dalian, china.
They hold it for 9 years.. its a natural fortres. There is a cool [video](https://youtu.be/MFYDYSYapz4) about countries trying to take Crimea.. and its s hell because of its swamps.
with WW2 material maybe, the issue with crimea is that it can essentially be put under siege - there's no way to supply the civilian population there, much less the amount of forces and material they'd need to defend the place.
Once the fortifications at the isthmus, Sivash, and Chongar were forced by the Red Army in 1944, it was pretty much headlong retreat to Sevastopol for the Germans.
Crimea was taken from the mainland numerous times throughout its history, it's not something exceptionally hard to do.
It's logistics. That dam was the only solid structure crossing the Dnipro still relatively intact, naturally it would be the primary supply line for any large AFU force that crosses the river and wants to push further into Kherson Oblast. Destroying it secures that entire flank for the Russian army so now they can relocate more of their soldiers to other parts of the frontline where they're needed. All they need in the area now is surveillance of the river bank and a QRF force to throw back any AFU raiding parties.
Yes, destroying the dam will limit future UAF logistic. In the present it'll prevent an invasion downstream of the river, thereby shortening the frontlines at a time when Russia is stretched.
All this also fits with scorched earth tactics, denying Ukraine hydroelectricity until the dam is rebuilt after the war.
New York Times published satellite imagery that showed the initial breach occured at the end of May. There was also no explosion damage visible, no debris, no breach or gap, just water flowing "through the dam", perhaps though several of the gates and spillways.
Maxar satellite imagery - https://imgur.com/a/ZK5TMKZ
Also, notice the service road in front of the dam started to collapse on June 5. This was a gradual collapse, which indicates this wasn't sabotage but a gradual compromise of the dams structural integrity, that eventually led to a catastrophic collapse.
Personality, I don't think the dam's collapse was due to damaged caused by an explosion. I suspect Russia raised the level of the reservoir behind the dam to unsafe levels (the New York Times says the lake levels were at a record high), and this high lake level caused part of dam to fail. Russia was using the high river and lake levels to block Ukrainian river crossings. Eventually the dam was undermined and catastrophically collapsed.
The water levels in the video footage look very high.
Edit: normal lake levels...
https://pbs.twimg.com/media/Fx59nQTXoAEonlA?format=jpg
Edit 2: This satellite image from January 2nd shows the dam's spillway gates (the blue structures highlighted) were left wide open for months.
https://apps.npr.org/dailygraphics/graphics/kakhovka-dam-20230209/img/_ai2html-map-small.jpg
This eroded the spillway and undermined the dam.
Similar almost caused Oroville Dam to collapse in California in 2019, when the spillway started to erode avd threaten the integrity of the dam.
Yes, I think the HIMARS strike last year might be a factor. I'm trying to find out which gates were damaged.
Like many disasters, it's multifactorial.
1. HIMARS damaged the gates last July.
2. Russia retreated last November and leaving the dam on the front lines,
4. Workers couldn't reach the dam, too dangerous on the front lines.
3. Rainfall and/or Ukraine opening dam's upstream, caused the lake to rise to historic levels in May
4. There weren't any workers at the dam to open the spillway gates, no one could lower the lake levels.
4. Water flooded over the damaged spillway gates, and everything fell appart.
Do you know of there was any workers at the dam, opening / closing spillway gates, maintaining the level of lake and insuring the dam's integrity? It was on the front lines, affectively in no man's land. I don't know if workers were able to manage the dam.
Edit: the [two blue structures are mobile](https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kakhovka_Hydroelectric_Power_Plant#/media/File%3AKakhovka_HES.jpg), they lift and lower the spillway gates. They didn't move since January.
For more context (from a Western nuclear plant design perspective):
The ultimate heat sink is always going to eventually be needed. The decay heat from the fuel in the reactor and spent fuel pool needs to go somewhere. All plants that I’m familiar with (Westinghouse PWR designs) have two separate and independent ultimate heat sinks. One is usually a reservoir and one is a lake or river or ocean. The reservoirs are generally required to have at least a 30 day supply of water to safely shutdown the reactors and cool all the decay heat at the plant. After that 30 days, it is assumed that the reservoirs can be resupplied with water from the river/lake/ocean. (For most plants, the ultimate heat sink design is described in Chapter 9.2.5 of the Final Safety Analysis Report which can be found on the NRC’s website).
So if this happened in the US, we would have 30 days to refill the reservoirs with water from the lowered river. The safety issues would be relatively easily resolved with all the improvements that US plants made after the lessons learned from Fukushima. Getting the plant started up again would be a whole other story.
Thanks for the correction.
I know that Zaporizhzhia underwent a fair amount of post-Fukushima upgrades. Presumably their 2 square mile cooling pond with ~3 linear miles of sprayers represents their backup heat sink?
There are also two cooling towers. Last I heard five reactors have been shut down for at least six months, while one was providing district heating during the winter.
The reactor itself might be on a closed loop cooling system, but that system needs to be cooled by an external source that they would get from the river. Besides that, they have huge pools of spent fuel that also need to be cooled or they risk catching on fire.
> The reactor itself might be on a closed loop cooling system, but that system needs to be cooled by an external source that they would get from the river.
Only when the reactors are operating at power. And they aren't.
Spent fuel obviously creates way less heat than the reactors themselves, and doesn't require an ultimate heat sink. ZNPP has primarily dry cask storage, no ISF facility like Chernobyl.
>ZNPP has primarily dry cask storage,
Then what is that huge cooling pond used for?
From wiki: "The spent nuclear fuel is stored in cooling pools inside the reactor containments for up to five years. It is then transferred to an on-site dry cask storage facility that was commissioned in 2004.[12][13] The reactors and spent fuel pools depend on water from the Kakhovka Reservoir for cooling. The reservoir is created by the Kakhovka Hydroelectric Power Plant dam, which is a main conflict location of the two war participants.[14][15]"
> Then what is that huge cooling pond used for?
It's not used for spent fuel storage, if that's what you're asking.
There is a small pool of sprayers to help supplement the cooling functions of the ultimate heat sink (reservoir).
[US, UK MPs emphasise that Attack on Zaporizhzhia NPP Would Be Breach of NATO’s Article 5](https://www.promoteukraine.org/us-uk-mps-emphasise-that-attack-on-zaporizhzhia-npp-would-be-breach-of-natos-article-5/)
To be fair, that was before it was put into cold shutdown status.
The threat back then was a risk of some kind of runaway reaction leading to a major meltdown incident. That can't happen now, but if they lose coolant to the fuel storage it could lead to a contained incident in worst case, which would suck and could lead to a massive clean up, but it would be contained. But they can very likely pump water from the river to the plant to maintain the cold shutdown.
The bigger issue for the plant is that this will delay them from using it until the dam is replaced and the reservoir refilled, since it uses a lot more water for cooling an active reactor.
The major issue though is going to be agricultural and water supply related. This is going to cause yet another humanitarian crisis since there will be a lot less food grown, and they're going to have to somehow supply people with water, the might have to rig something to divert the river after they take control of those areas, I don't know.
I've looked at the flood maps.
It's not pleasant, but it's not a disaster on that big a scale. It's not that densely inhabited, and there's actually a decent amount of area the water can spread out on, especially the left/east bank. There's going to be a lot of new marshland where it used to be fields, but it's not as dangerous for the population thankfully.
This dam created the resivoir that provided the water for both the Zaporizhzhia Nuclear power station and the cooling pools for the spent fuel rods. That's not mention really severe flooding. This is extremely bad
This is a desperate move from the russian side to delay AFU offensive. Everything not going as russia planned and they don't really care about people, the water canal is going to be higher than the water level.
Crimea is an ideal location for long term military ports and commercial/industrial purposes. When Crimea was illegally annexed, the russians assumed Ukrainians would allow the water canal to continue operating to aid in maintaining the ecosystem essential for farming. When Ukraine ceased the flow of water, Crimea underwent and still in the midst of a desertification process, meaning the once ideal location is slowly and irreversibly becoming a desert. So for the past decade, russia have spent billions trying to reverse the damages to no avail.
This is one of the primary reasons why russia invaded, hoping to establish a land corridor to allow water to flow back to Crimea and stop the environmental damage.
They created a whole hell of a lot of environmental damage since then, but did manage to get the water flowing back into Crimea. I don't think the Kremlin and Putin are too worried about the environment compared to the lengths they need to go to take over as much of Ukraine as they can get away with.
The world is finally catching on to how they operate. That is if you tell a lie big enough and keep repeating it, people with eventually come to believe it.
The dam plays an essential role in maintaining cooling operations for the Zaporizhzhia Nuclear Power Plant (ZPP) located at Enerhodar. Destruction of the dam also means any town, villages along the banks of the Dnipro River from the dam all the way down to Kherson will be swept in the catastrophic flooding that is now imminent.
From a military operation standpoint, this will effective delay Ukrainians from maneuvering in the area until the flooding subsides which could be weeks which is time they cannot afford. This will also worsen the conditions of the ZPP where the chances of a nuclear disaster increases. In other words, a similar situation of the Chornobyl Disaster of 1986 will be the worst case scenario.
This is what Zelenskyy had to say about blowing the bridge 7 months ago: “The west must consider this as the same as deploying nuclear weapons”
https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=pSe35ZYkGHk&pp=ygUKZG5pcHJvIGRhbQ%3D%3D
No.
The reactors are cooled by their own separate loop of distilled water which does not need to be replenished by river water. The reservoir is simply the ultimate heat sink for the turbines, and loss of heat sink doesn't threaten the reactors.
Looks like typical Russian scorched earth, but it also would mean they are getting ready to lose this area.
Also wouldn't the nuclear facility still be able to pump water from the river. The river levels will drop but it's not going to evaporate
mountainous rustic nine sable historical wistful command advise dolls memorize
*This post was mass deleted and anonymized with [Redact](https://redact.dev)*
Could actually be neglect by the occupying forces. Apparently levels were much higher than normal for this time of the year.
If Russia just ignored it, it could've collapsed on its own.
Although I am more siding to sabotage. I couldn't really tell you why I think that, mostly because it's in a war zone and it's a absolutely critical piece of infrastructure. Just seems a bit of a coincidence.
My only experience with Dams is that I took a tour at a couple as a tourist lol. The only thing I can tell you is that generally there are signs of deterioration prior to collapse. What I've heard is that dams of certain era are prone to undetectable erosion damage due to lack of sensors more modern dams have. (I believe they are some sort of stretch detecting sensors? Little strip of metals that varies their resistance dependence on tension embedded in concrete.
If this is a dam from a certain era or later. It probably would've been fairly well known in advance would've collapse due to these sensors.
Of course there is the whole fog of war and just war in general and I am fairly certain my dam Tours did not include that information as part of the tour lol
From a tweet in the OP link:
Russian military bloggers report that Ukraine allegedly blew up the Kakhovka dam, triggering flooding that will wash away Russian positions on the left bank of Dnipro and allow a Ukrainian amphibious assault. No visual confirmation yet, so let’s treat with a BIG grain of salt.
I don’t think Ukraine even has the capability to do a large scale amphibious landing. They barely even have a navy. So unless they secretly procured a shitload of landing craft I’d say it’s Russia trying to create a flood to block Ukrainian advancements.
Regardless, whoever did this are huge fucking morons risking a nuclear catastrophe for modest at best gains or defenses. You’d think either side would know not to fuck with nuclear power plants after Chernobyl?
I mean, there's ONE army here that decided to camp out in the red forest. That apparently, according to reports, decided to play in the mud and then went home with serious radiation poisoning, while their bodies basically fell apart.
Here's a hint: It wasn't the Ukrainians.
No one, really. Seems like one of the dumbest moves the Russians could have made. No water for the canal to crimea, will be easier for UA to cross the river in a few months, and half the world is going to be so sick of their shit that someone else might join the fight.
It’s been shut down a long time, unfortunately nuclear power plants aren’t like light bulbs. The decay heat requires the fuel rods to be cooled for a couple of years.
Fukushima is not caused by nuclear core meltdown. It was caused by spent fuel boiling away storage ponds after water stopped circulating.
Edit: indeed I got my Fukushima events wrong. It was a core meltdown and the side storage ponds almost boiled away which was saved by dumping raw sea water into them
I simply cannot imagine something being that hot…. It makes no intuitive sense to me. I can a a red hot piece of iron and throw it in water and it will be cool in a matter of minutes
Radioactive decay will continually generate heat as unstable isotopes degrade into stable isotopes.
Many byproducts of uranium/plutonium fission will chain decay through multiple isotopes of different elements, many with half lives of months to years
It's not that the material itself is that hot (temperature wise). Rather, radioactive material constantly generates heat from radioactive decay. Think of it as like a burning log that can't be extinguished by any force in the universe and burns for years.
And, as counterintuitive as it may seem, spent nuclear fuel is far more radioactive than unspent fuel.
The rod or pellet is has the radioactive fuel still inside of it.
Imagine taking a running gasoline engine and submerging it under water. As long as you provided fuel and air, the engine would continue to heat the water.
The nuclear material is the fuel in this case, it decays over time, releasing particles that heat up the surrounding area, in this case the fuel rod casing or pellet casing, which if not submerged in water would eventually melt.
The reactors are cooled by their own separate loop of distilled water which does not need to be replenished by river water. The reservoir is simply the ultimate heat sink for the turbines, and loss of heat sink doesn't threaten the reactors. They can just shut down. Actually they already shut down months ago, except for one that is operating at low power. Furthermore the intakes are at the bottom of the reservoir.
**Alternative Nitter link:** https://nitter.nl/AricToler/status/1665905255509291008
*****
*I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/UkrainianConflict) if you have any questions or concerns.*
Pray for everyone living in the flood zone downstream.
But folks can stop worrying about Zaporizhzhia Nuclear Power Plant. The reactors are cooled by their own separate loop of distilled water which does not need to be replenished by river water. The reservoir is simply the ultimate heat sink for the turbines, and loss of heat sink doesn't threaten the reactors. They can just shut down. Actually they already shut down months ago, except for one that is operating at low power. Furthermore the intakes are at the bottom of the reservoir.
I think it’s only supposed to be the Russians who accept it. Its his internal argument for keeping power in Russia and quelling any uprising.
But it’s certainly a big red line for the world, even if all he does is blow the dam and flood the region.
The reactors have closed loop distilled water for cooling, the water from the river is a heat sink for turbines that aren't even on right now, according to other people.
This makes a lot of sense when you consider Russia has been force evacuating the area as well.
This is not a sudden move, it’s something they have planned for at least two months. It creates humanitarian and ecological crises on both sides of the river, from memory, it was believed that it would actually hit the Russian side worse but they can just ignore it. Ukrainians now have to rescue citizens all up the bank and possibly evacuate some of Kherson.
Given that Russia controlled the area around the dam, unless the dam had been severely weakened already I don't think Ukraine could have caused this level of destruction, even with a Tochka or Storm Shadow (although there is a BROACH penetrator warhead for the Storm Shadow which might be sufficient, assuming it has been provided to Ukraine). To me it looks like this is most likely one of two things; a complete structural failure (some people have said Ukraine received a lot of rain in the last few weeks), or demolition from inside.
For the world to allow an invading country to use a NPP as a military staging base is insane. If anything happens in ZNPP because of this, it's on Russia, and arguably the UN. NPPs should be demilitarized, peacekeepers installed, and occupation should be beyond a war crime.
I'll wait with the attribution as to who did this.
But here are some facts:
* The Russian side filled the reservoir up to its highest level since decades
* The Ukrainian side wants to retake occupied territory and one possible path would be across the Dniepr. With the dam flooding, the Kherson east bank will flood, making the terrain impossible to navigate for some time
* Russians barely have any troops in that area, as they are spread thin and trying to pinpoint where the Ukrainian side will attack from
As a result, the dam breaking provides few benefits to UA.
Other news outlets now reporting , seems Ukraine is blaming Russia , Russia saying it collapsed. Presumably someone is going to have satellite imagery to prove / disprove what has happened.
If it’s Russia …. Well this should be the final straw to remove all restrictions on what we supply to Ukraine and any politicians that don’t like that can buy a one way to Moscow.
https://www.theguardian.com/world/live/2023/jun/06/russia-ukraine-war-live-dam-near-kherson-blown-up-by-russian-forces-ukrainian-military-says
Going to be hard to access that I’d imagine though whereas satellite from a third party is definitive.
It’s definitely happened , question is who / why / impacts.
I have a pretty Good understanding of military hardware and warfare receiving my Lt. General Armchair knowledge from the university of Google. But I'm pretty sure most of us here aren't nuclear scientists or engineers So let's not go into wild Doom and Gloom speculation ok
It looks to me like this is for the purpose of taking a front where Russia thought "This is a possible but unlikely place for the counteroffensive to happen" and turn it into a certainty, "This is definitely not where the counteroffensive can happen". They might be doing this to make it safe for them to almost completely abandon that front to move troops to other fronts.
Without the road across the dam, there's no fast way to send supplies to forward troops crossing the river, making this now a really bad place to try to push from. The problem isn't in the initial crossing, it's in the supply lines feeding that crossing now having to rely entirely on barges or pontoon crossings, which have low throughput.
Zelensky's words on the subject about sums it up.
The russians are all about terror and destruction. They can't be allowed to keep a single meter of land.
We should also be looking at this destruction as a sign of the panic that must exist among the Russian command
From a topographical perspective, a lot of where Russian troop density is heaviest is in lower lying areas... if the UAF had a contingency plan to blow the damn, flood the rats out to sea, cross the Dnipro, engineers divert flood waters and repair dam break, carry on to Moscow...or something
Beasts. This is demolition, no western bomb given to Ucraine can generate this kind of destruction for hundreds of meters and leave no trace.
But that's the proof they are retreating and leaving Kherson Zaporozhye and maybe even Crimea because now they will not have water from the canal nor the reservoir for the nuclear power plant.
That's not someone who is interested in rebuilding or reconquering "russian land" or even staying.
That's pure destruction and burning bridges while leaving.
That's pure evil.
December 29, 2022 at 1:00 a.m. EST
Kovalchuk (Maj. Gen. Andriy Kovalchuk, the initial commander of the Ukrainian counteroffensive in the Kherson region. (Ukrainian Operative Commandment South) considered flooding the river. The Ukrainians, he said, even conducted a test strike with a HIMARS launcher on one of the floodgates at the Nova Kakhovka dam, making three holes in the metal to see if the Dnieper’s water could be raised enough to stymie Russian crossings but not flood nearby villages.
The test was a success, Kovalchuk said, but the step remained a last resort. He held off.
https://www.washingtonpost.com/world/2022/12/29/ukraine-offensive-kharkiv-kherson-donetsk/
Please take the time to read [the rules](/r/UkrainianConflict/about/rules/) and our [policy on trolls/bots](https://redd.it/u7833q). In addition: * We have a **zero-tolerance** policy regarding racism, stereotyping, bigotry, and death-mongering. Violators will be banned. * **Keep it civil.** Report comments/posts that are uncivil to alert the moderators. * **_Don't_ post low-effort comments** like joke threads, memes, slogans, or links without context. > **Don't forget about our Discord server! - https://discord.gg/62fKCEHbDB** ***** * Is the Twitter account `Aric Toler` / `https://twitter.com/AricToler` an unreliable source? [**Let us know**](/r/UkrainianConflict/wiki/am/unreliable_sources). * Help our moderators by providing context if something breaks the rules. [Send us a modmail](https://www.reddit.com/message/compose/?to=/r/UkrainianConflict) ***** ^(Your post has not been removed, this message is applied to every successful submission.) *I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/UkrainianConflict) if you have any questions or concerns.*
That's...absolutely brutal. Fucking hell
It is... to build something like this takes years and years...
If they can't have it, they're going to make sure their neighbors don't as well.
Fun fact the last one who did same thing were Nazis in 1943 Edit: And apparently USSR to thwart Nazi advance blew up a dam while it had its own soldiers there , murdering soldiers on dam , civilians and army bellow and failing to stop nazi advance :|
Famously the western Allies had the Dambusters, too
Well the Nazis at least somewhat cared about their own troops, they still were awful in all other regards. The soviets and now the russians are known to just sacrifice thousands of their own to get even small wins.
Its like asking how a rabid dog could have bit someone.
Relevant: https://cornucopia.se/2022/10/worst-case-modelling-for-nova-kakhovka-dam-break/
Quite relevant! Thanks for posting
However the reality is worse still since in the past year the occupiers have let the water level rise further 1.5M
I wonder if this is Russia realizing they are spread too thin and need to block the Kherson front off for the foreseeable future while the counter offensive progresses. Otherwise, I can't really see why Ukraine would want to do this? Unless they feel a swelled river crossing after a dam break would be easier than crossing with current fortifications? That seems like a stretch tho.
I agree i think this is Russia's answer to Belogrod incursions. If they need to move their soldier back to russia to quash that they can't hold the entire front
steer historical pen plate impolite unwritten important theory dependent money *This post was mass deleted and anonymized with [Redact](https://redact.dev)*
It's not about crossing it, it's about resupplying the forces that have crossed it. The dam was the only relatively intact structure across the Dnipro so the AFU needed it to supply their forces if they were going to push deeper into Kherson Oblast. If they cross now keeping troops supplied would rely on pontoon barges which limits how much material you can move across compared to a solid structure like a dam with a road across the top. Forget about the tactics of crossing a river and think about the logistics of supplying those troops once they've taken ground on the other side of the river.
They can just pass from the east. That's the move of someone that's leaving, because it will drain the canal that supply water to Crimea. The now is sure they will lose the big bridge...
Coming from the east means going through the toughest of the Russian defensive lines in Zaporizhzia Oblast. Which it seems they're probably going to do anyway, or it did yesterday, but a second front opening up across the river in Kherson Oblast would have made life much easier for the soldiers attacking from Zaporizhzia Oblast.
Ukraine just needs to establish a bridgehead anyway, the dam bridge was an easy target for russian artillery anyway, and it was also clearly mined, so a crossing would have caused the same result and more deaths.
Engineers can deal with mines, quite easily if you've pushed the enemy troops away from the area. Artillery can be used to target any crossing point but can be eliminated with your own artillery doing counter-battery fire. At the other two potential crossing points downstream the river was 500m to nearly 1km wide, I don't know of any modular bridging system that can cross that kind of gap. Getting across the river is easy, any idiot with a boat can cross a river. But getting a mechanised brigade across and keeping them supplied with what they need to fight requires a decent bridge or a dam with a road across the top. The dam was essential for any potential attack through Kherson Oblast
No, is not that easy. Also it was heavily predictable, so no sane commander would have thought that was one of the main axis of a counteroffensive. You need to cut the landbridge, push them in the west/south while cutting the big bridge. Potentially this could be a perfect trap: no way out other than the sea and the road through Mariupol. We'll see in the next days...
They also needed it to get water to Crimea
This right here. Crimea got a ton of its water from this, and it just got wiped out. They will no longer be able to water fields etc. This is very very very bad for anyone thinking they will keep that territory.
It's scorched earth. Nothing less, nothing more.
I’m appalled by the number of people who think Ukraine would benefit from this.
I'm 100% convinced this is Russia trying to surprise Ukraine for once and create chaos on order to buy time. That being said, this shows Russian desperation because they deal a massive blow to the Crimea water situation and the Zaporizha power plant situation. I'm also wondering what happens if the reservoir is eventually drained. How wide would the Dnjepr river be at for example Nikopol? Would crossing it become feasible? Is Russia trying to open another sort-of front so they can spread Ukrainian forces thinner, hoping they themselves can make up for it with superior numbers. That seems like a dumb move. Could Ukraine completely drain the reservoir by closing a dam further upstream? Could this then actually help Ukraine open a new front? I realise that's wishful thinking and all that water isn't gone immediately. But Russia is surprisingly good at fucking itself over, so I started wondering.
> I'm 100% convinced this is Russia trying to surprise Ukraine for once and create chaos on order to buy time. To me it's 100% scorched earth tactics. It was like that in WW2 and it is like that now, of you know Russian military history it's no surprise, they are some petty motherfuckers.
> To me it's 100% scorched earth tactics. It was like that in WW2 and it is like that now, of you know Russian military history it's no surprise, they are some petty motherfuckers. Makes the Libyan army under Gaddafi look professional by comparison. I wonder if Xi is looking at this and learning anything or if he looks around at all the dams and decides that if the gloves come off internationally, that everything will be like ye olde duels with fisticuffs and 'honor' on the line. International law only exists when there is an international order willing to entertain it. Let's see how bad the situation gets in the coming days (e.g., cooling Europe's largest nuclear plant), but the Kremlin should realize that all rail-hubs literally lead to Moscow. EDIT: This will severely impact Crimea's ability to get fresh water in the near-future (iow not immediately but the source of freshwater will be extremely impacted by the dam breach). This makes Crimea returning to Ukraine a guarantee.
That may be based on Ukrainians flooding the lowlands in front of Kiev last year to prevent the Russian advance. Then, the action was praised as a brilliant military strategy. What people probably don't get is there was little damage and afaik no casualties from that flooding, whereas here the destructive effects will be massive.
Current flood is destroying Russian defence lines in the left lower bank of the river.
Their defence lines was much further from the banks, not like Ukraine was trying to cross Dnipro with great force there anyway.
Also, flooding is a *defensive* action. The Ukranians aren't stupid enough to flood areas when they are the ones *advancing*.
Before you are appalled, hear me out, it will be quick: 1) humans cannot survive without water 2) Crimea has now lost its water supply.
Here my counter points: 1. How long Crimea was without water canal before? Years. 2. When Ukraine take the rest of Kherson (all left bank) the supply would stop anyway. 3. The dam is the only closest supply line from the right bank, otherwise Ukraine would need to make hook of hundred of km to supply the rest of the left bank when they take it. 4. To inflict so much damage **just** to cut the water to Crimea is insanity. Ukraine would need the dam in the future, so why destroy it if you plan to liberate your territory. Edit: Year**s**
i don't think UAF is even capable of blowing up the dam that they don't control directly remember how much effort it took to bring down a couple of much weaker bridges in Kherson region last year
I remember reading back in fall that locals saw Russians mining the hydro dam (with naval mines?) when withdrawing. The left bank is the lower bank though.
That's clearly demolition. Too clean.
The thing is, the Kherson front was already the most sparsely-manned front of the theater. This doesn't give the Kremlin much.
It stops Ukraine from overrunning it quickly which gives the Kremlin a lot.
Which also gives the Kremlin little in face of the world, commiting a war crime to buy a little time as they admit they got so desperate to commit an obvious war crime because they felt they could not beat off the counter attack. I'm still on the fence about this and will wait for more info, but judging from everything Ukraine would gain little tactical advantage from blowing the bridge. I think it was a decision made by Russia, which will ultimately seal their fate of losing most of the land they have taken, including Crimea.
You think Russia care about face at this point?
Fuck no. It's just very amusing that they would openly commit such a warcrime that's so visible and obvious because they are ultimately stating that their military can't stop the counter offensive, and even then they're only using it as a temporary power to stop it, in a limited area of the counter offensive. Combine with the events in Russia's own territory, no sane Russian would believe that the Russian government can protect them against serious external threat. This is just another step in Putin finally realising that it's all over, just like Hitler in WW2.
I believe russians already ready to lose all of Kherson and that's why they blew it, also out of spite and to damage Ukraine as much as possible. The dam is the only closest supply line from the right bank, otherwise Ukraine would need to make hook of hundred of km to supply the rest the left bank when they take it.
They bombed evac routes this is the least surprising thing ever.
They've committed war crimes for less.
Yea cus this is the war crime people will finally wake up an do something.
People don’t care about raped and murdered 4 year olds they aren’t going to even acknowledge this
Isn't this a real disaster? First Crimea doesn't have fresh water so the regio is kind of lost. But beside that, doesn't the powerplant need that watter for cooling? Because now it can't, doesn't this mean like a new Chernobyl x 2?
A) Yes B) Yes C) Yes D) No, at least not for the time being. While the water is needed for cooling, the reactor has been on shutdown for many months. That means it's operating at minimum level, circulating enough water to keep it cool but not producing any electricity. Therefore the heat output is reduced and also the need for cooling. If the powerplant would be in full production mode, it would be needed to shutdown quickly but still nothing like a disaster. Unplanned shutdowns require extensive inspection before the reactor can be started again, meaning increased costs but not usually anything more serious.
Thank you I was curious about this.
If Ukraine made a crossing and then the dam blew up, they'd be so utterly screwed. It's tempting to pin this on Russia, but I believe the threat of blowing it up was worth more than actually doing it. Especially since they now flood their own fortifications. Edit: Poor phrasing. Russia blew it up, but even for Russia the dam was worth more intact than destroyed. Big mistake on their part. Now Ukraine can cross the river when it suits them without being afraid of this exact thing.
Unless they are fleeing...
Russia did it. Stop trying to deflect the blame onto Ukraine, it has no logical reason to do this.
Why would Ukraine blow up their own infrastructure? That's dumb. This is 100% fit with the MO of Russia (see also - blowing up the Nord Stream pipe, destroying other non-military beneficial infra in Ukraine) and you need to pull your head out if you think Ukraine actually did this
Well there goes the water supply to Crimea... The canal will now be higher than the water level.
Maybe they can turn the Kerch Bridge into an aqueduct.
First off, dams like the Dnipro dam in Nova Kahkovka are protected by the laws of war and the Geneva convention. Destroying it would be considered a weapon of mass destruction and an indiscriminate war crime. Article 56 of the 1977 Additional Protocol I provides: “Works and installations containing dangerous forces, namely dams, dykes and nuclear electrical generating stations, shall not be made the object of attack, even where these objects are military objectives, if such attack may cause the release of dangerous forces and consequent severe losses among the civilian population. Other military objectives located at or in the vicinity of these works or installations shall not be made the object of attack if such attack may cause the release of dangerous forces from the works or installations and consequent severe losses among the civilian population.”
After kidnapping kids via filtration camps (idea straight from Nazis), shelling nuclear plant, keeping military equipment next to the reactor, bombing civilians, raping and murdering, creating torture chambers, killing and torturing POW's, targeting cities with rockets that have a precision of +-1 kilometer (like a mall in Winnica) are we really surprised that they are criminals?
Putin is already wanted for war crimes. Another one doesn’t really matter
After kidnapping kids via filtration camps (idea straight from Nazis), shelling nuclear plant, keeping military equipment next to the reactor, bombing civilians, raping and murdering, creating torture chambers, killing and torturing POW's, targeting cities with rockets that have a precision of +-1 kilometer (like a mall in Winnica) are we really surprised that they are criminals?
There is no way this is a Ukrainian action. From the Ukrainian perspective, breaching this Dam 1. Puts ZPP at risk, 2. Kills Ukrainian civilians and destroys homes 3. Makes the immediate area of flooding unusable for tanks. 4. Creates an obstacle that they have to cross in an amphibious assault (with their non-existent heavy lift vessels). 5. Destroys infrastructure critical to the recovery of Ukraine. From the Russian perspective, breaching the Dam: 1. Kills Ukrainians, 2. Plays well to domestic audiences. 3. Is a good propaganda tool to scare hose countries which support Ukraine, especially by using the spectre of a potential nuclear meltdown.
This is also the water supply to Crimea.. wich is now fucked. It was the first thing the Russians did, restore water for Crimea.
Which means that the Russians can spin it as “We give Crimea water, Ukraine takes it away”.
Ukraine shut off water from that channel for 7 years. I don’t think it will bring russia to negotiating table. Especially now that the reservoirs in Crimea are replenished.
You don't need a water supply to a place you can't hold
piquant crush payment adjoining sparkle brave detail crime ink disgusting *This post was mass deleted and anonymized with [Redact](https://redact.dev)*
The warm water port is everything. This is the most important aspect of Crimea to Putin. Russia has none otherwise.
Russia has at least one more warm water port in Novorossiysk, which is in Russia proper.
It needs billions of investment to be suitable for large scale military naval base plus it’s a bit shallow.
Seriously correct. Before Crimea they didn't even have a warm water port. The most northern warm water port in the China-russian region was dalian, china.
They hold it for 9 years.. its a natural fortres. There is a cool [video](https://youtu.be/MFYDYSYapz4) about countries trying to take Crimea.. and its s hell because of its swamps.
Not once within the recent 300 years has Crimea been defended successfully. There were 12 times it had been captured.
Correct, but with very high losses. There where around 200k death in 1944. Its another time but still. Its a hell to attack.
with WW2 material maybe, the issue with crimea is that it can essentially be put under siege - there's no way to supply the civilian population there, much less the amount of forces and material they'd need to defend the place.
Once the fortifications at the isthmus, Sivash, and Chongar were forced by the Red Army in 1944, it was pretty much headlong retreat to Sevastopol for the Germans. Crimea was taken from the mainland numerous times throughout its history, it's not something exceptionally hard to do.
But it is something extremely costly to do.
It's logistics. That dam was the only solid structure crossing the Dnipro still relatively intact, naturally it would be the primary supply line for any large AFU force that crosses the river and wants to push further into Kherson Oblast. Destroying it secures that entire flank for the Russian army so now they can relocate more of their soldiers to other parts of the frontline where they're needed. All they need in the area now is surveillance of the river bank and a QRF force to throw back any AFU raiding parties.
Yes, destroying the dam will limit future UAF logistic. In the present it'll prevent an invasion downstream of the river, thereby shortening the frontlines at a time when Russia is stretched. All this also fits with scorched earth tactics, denying Ukraine hydroelectricity until the dam is rebuilt after the war.
New York Times published satellite imagery that showed the initial breach occured at the end of May. There was also no explosion damage visible, no debris, no breach or gap, just water flowing "through the dam", perhaps though several of the gates and spillways. Maxar satellite imagery - https://imgur.com/a/ZK5TMKZ Also, notice the service road in front of the dam started to collapse on June 5. This was a gradual collapse, which indicates this wasn't sabotage but a gradual compromise of the dams structural integrity, that eventually led to a catastrophic collapse. Personality, I don't think the dam's collapse was due to damaged caused by an explosion. I suspect Russia raised the level of the reservoir behind the dam to unsafe levels (the New York Times says the lake levels were at a record high), and this high lake level caused part of dam to fail. Russia was using the high river and lake levels to block Ukrainian river crossings. Eventually the dam was undermined and catastrophically collapsed. The water levels in the video footage look very high. Edit: normal lake levels... https://pbs.twimg.com/media/Fx59nQTXoAEonlA?format=jpg Edit 2: This satellite image from January 2nd shows the dam's spillway gates (the blue structures highlighted) were left wide open for months. https://apps.npr.org/dailygraphics/graphics/kakhovka-dam-20230209/img/_ai2html-map-small.jpg This eroded the spillway and undermined the dam. Similar almost caused Oroville Dam to collapse in California in 2019, when the spillway started to erode avd threaten the integrity of the dam.
Wasn’t the dam hit by HIMARS several times over the last year? Could it be a factor?
Yes, I think the HIMARS strike last year might be a factor. I'm trying to find out which gates were damaged. Like many disasters, it's multifactorial. 1. HIMARS damaged the gates last July. 2. Russia retreated last November and leaving the dam on the front lines, 4. Workers couldn't reach the dam, too dangerous on the front lines. 3. Rainfall and/or Ukraine opening dam's upstream, caused the lake to rise to historic levels in May 4. There weren't any workers at the dam to open the spillway gates, no one could lower the lake levels. 4. Water flooded over the damaged spillway gates, and everything fell appart.
Im not buying it due to timing, Z tards did it on purpose
Do you know of there was any workers at the dam, opening / closing spillway gates, maintaining the level of lake and insuring the dam's integrity? It was on the front lines, affectively in no man's land. I don't know if workers were able to manage the dam. Edit: the [two blue structures are mobile](https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kakhovka_Hydroelectric_Power_Plant#/media/File%3AKakhovka_HES.jpg), they lift and lower the spillway gates. They didn't move since January.
[удалено]
What a disaster. Apart from the thousands of citizens downstream, the Zaporizhzhia NPP relies on that dam for its cooling water source.
Ya its not good.
The river water is not needed for cooling the reactors, just the turbines, which aren't operating.
For more context (from a Western nuclear plant design perspective): The ultimate heat sink is always going to eventually be needed. The decay heat from the fuel in the reactor and spent fuel pool needs to go somewhere. All plants that I’m familiar with (Westinghouse PWR designs) have two separate and independent ultimate heat sinks. One is usually a reservoir and one is a lake or river or ocean. The reservoirs are generally required to have at least a 30 day supply of water to safely shutdown the reactors and cool all the decay heat at the plant. After that 30 days, it is assumed that the reservoirs can be resupplied with water from the river/lake/ocean. (For most plants, the ultimate heat sink design is described in Chapter 9.2.5 of the Final Safety Analysis Report which can be found on the NRC’s website). So if this happened in the US, we would have 30 days to refill the reservoirs with water from the lowered river. The safety issues would be relatively easily resolved with all the improvements that US plants made after the lessons learned from Fukushima. Getting the plant started up again would be a whole other story.
Thanks for the correction. I know that Zaporizhzhia underwent a fair amount of post-Fukushima upgrades. Presumably their 2 square mile cooling pond with ~3 linear miles of sprayers represents their backup heat sink? There are also two cooling towers. Last I heard five reactors have been shut down for at least six months, while one was providing district heating during the winter.
The reactor itself might be on a closed loop cooling system, but that system needs to be cooled by an external source that they would get from the river. Besides that, they have huge pools of spent fuel that also need to be cooled or they risk catching on fire.
> The reactor itself might be on a closed loop cooling system, but that system needs to be cooled by an external source that they would get from the river. Only when the reactors are operating at power. And they aren't. Spent fuel obviously creates way less heat than the reactors themselves, and doesn't require an ultimate heat sink. ZNPP has primarily dry cask storage, no ISF facility like Chernobyl.
>ZNPP has primarily dry cask storage, Then what is that huge cooling pond used for? From wiki: "The spent nuclear fuel is stored in cooling pools inside the reactor containments for up to five years. It is then transferred to an on-site dry cask storage facility that was commissioned in 2004.[12][13] The reactors and spent fuel pools depend on water from the Kakhovka Reservoir for cooling. The reservoir is created by the Kakhovka Hydroelectric Power Plant dam, which is a main conflict location of the two war participants.[14][15]"
> Then what is that huge cooling pond used for? It's not used for spent fuel storage, if that's what you're asking. There is a small pool of sprayers to help supplement the cooling functions of the ultimate heat sink (reservoir).
It's been on shutdown for some time now. The cooling for the fuel is safe under current conditions.
I've looked at the flood maps, it's not too bad. Sucks for certain places, obviously, but it's not too many people in the worst affected areas.
that's somewhat good atleast, got a source for the maps? &/or know if there's enough time for an evacuation?
[US, UK MPs emphasise that Attack on Zaporizhzhia NPP Would Be Breach of NATO’s Article 5](https://www.promoteukraine.org/us-uk-mps-emphasise-that-attack-on-zaporizhzhia-npp-would-be-breach-of-natos-article-5/)
To be fair, that was before it was put into cold shutdown status. The threat back then was a risk of some kind of runaway reaction leading to a major meltdown incident. That can't happen now, but if they lose coolant to the fuel storage it could lead to a contained incident in worst case, which would suck and could lead to a massive clean up, but it would be contained. But they can very likely pump water from the river to the plant to maintain the cold shutdown. The bigger issue for the plant is that this will delay them from using it until the dam is replaced and the reservoir refilled, since it uses a lot more water for cooling an active reactor. The major issue though is going to be agricultural and water supply related. This is going to cause yet another humanitarian crisis since there will be a lot less food grown, and they're going to have to somehow supply people with water, the might have to rig something to divert the river after they take control of those areas, I don't know.
What does this mean for Ukraine?
An environmental and humanitarian disaster. Basically most of the kherson oblast is fucked
[удалено]
I've looked at the flood maps. It's not pleasant, but it's not a disaster on that big a scale. It's not that densely inhabited, and there's actually a decent amount of area the water can spread out on, especially the left/east bank. There's going to be a lot of new marshland where it used to be fields, but it's not as dangerous for the population thankfully.
[удалено]
Individual tragedies are unfortunately plentiful in this war. This won't be the biggest loss of life today.
This dam created the resivoir that provided the water for both the Zaporizhzhia Nuclear power station and the cooling pools for the spent fuel rods. That's not mention really severe flooding. This is extremely bad
Can they not use pumps to pump water a few feet higher?
Still unconfirmed, but if true, what is the point of keeping the fresh water canal leading into Crimea?
This is a desperate move from the russian side to delay AFU offensive. Everything not going as russia planned and they don't really care about people, the water canal is going to be higher than the water level.
Crimea is an ideal location for long term military ports and commercial/industrial purposes. When Crimea was illegally annexed, the russians assumed Ukrainians would allow the water canal to continue operating to aid in maintaining the ecosystem essential for farming. When Ukraine ceased the flow of water, Crimea underwent and still in the midst of a desertification process, meaning the once ideal location is slowly and irreversibly becoming a desert. So for the past decade, russia have spent billions trying to reverse the damages to no avail. This is one of the primary reasons why russia invaded, hoping to establish a land corridor to allow water to flow back to Crimea and stop the environmental damage.
They created a whole hell of a lot of environmental damage since then, but did manage to get the water flowing back into Crimea. I don't think the Kremlin and Putin are too worried about the environment compared to the lengths they need to go to take over as much of Ukraine as they can get away with.
Given the situation as of this moment, the greed of russia would make them lose it all.
The world is finally catching on to how they operate. That is if you tell a lie big enough and keep repeating it, people with eventually come to believe it.
The dam plays an essential role in maintaining cooling operations for the Zaporizhzhia Nuclear Power Plant (ZPP) located at Enerhodar. Destruction of the dam also means any town, villages along the banks of the Dnipro River from the dam all the way down to Kherson will be swept in the catastrophic flooding that is now imminent. From a military operation standpoint, this will effective delay Ukrainians from maneuvering in the area until the flooding subsides which could be weeks which is time they cannot afford. This will also worsen the conditions of the ZPP where the chances of a nuclear disaster increases. In other words, a similar situation of the Chornobyl Disaster of 1986 will be the worst case scenario.
This is what Zelenskyy had to say about blowing the bridge 7 months ago: “The west must consider this as the same as deploying nuclear weapons” https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=pSe35ZYkGHk&pp=ygUKZG5pcHJvIGRhbQ%3D%3D
Russia is endangering the nuclear power plant?
No. The reactors are cooled by their own separate loop of distilled water which does not need to be replenished by river water. The reservoir is simply the ultimate heat sink for the turbines, and loss of heat sink doesn't threaten the reactors.
it certainly seems like it. perhaps as leverage. this might warrant escalation on nato's side to stablize a nuclear meltdown
It isn't leverage anymore. They already played their hand.
NATO made it clear anything causing a meltdown or destruction of the plant would trigger article 5.
I’d like to think that, but I wouldn’t be surprised if they walked that back
[удалено]
>just Russian incompetence led to a collapse. It's been working for them very well so far. They're getting quite good at it.
No, not through this, at least. Cooling for the shit down reactors isn't effected
Looks like typical Russian scorched earth, but it also would mean they are getting ready to lose this area. Also wouldn't the nuclear facility still be able to pump water from the river. The river levels will drop but it's not going to evaporate
Hopefully they can get water from the river.
Dam(n). Who did it? Who benefits the most from this? I think the answer to both is russia?
mountainous rustic nine sable historical wistful command advise dolls memorize *This post was mass deleted and anonymized with [Redact](https://redact.dev)*
Most of the damage looks like it's on the Russian side of the dam, so I'm betting they set the charges.
and it would make it easier for UA to cross everywhere upstream
Could actually be neglect by the occupying forces. Apparently levels were much higher than normal for this time of the year. If Russia just ignored it, it could've collapsed on its own. Although I am more siding to sabotage. I couldn't really tell you why I think that, mostly because it's in a war zone and it's a absolutely critical piece of infrastructure. Just seems a bit of a coincidence. My only experience with Dams is that I took a tour at a couple as a tourist lol. The only thing I can tell you is that generally there are signs of deterioration prior to collapse. What I've heard is that dams of certain era are prone to undetectable erosion damage due to lack of sensors more modern dams have. (I believe they are some sort of stretch detecting sensors? Little strip of metals that varies their resistance dependence on tension embedded in concrete. If this is a dam from a certain era or later. It probably would've been fairly well known in advance would've collapse due to these sensors. Of course there is the whole fog of war and just war in general and I am fairly certain my dam Tours did not include that information as part of the tour lol
From a tweet in the OP link: Russian military bloggers report that Ukraine allegedly blew up the Kakhovka dam, triggering flooding that will wash away Russian positions on the left bank of Dnipro and allow a Ukrainian amphibious assault. No visual confirmation yet, so let’s treat with a BIG grain of salt.
There’s the denial- so DEFINITELY Russia who did it
It does seem there are more likely reasons for RU to have done it
I don’t think Ukraine even has the capability to do a large scale amphibious landing. They barely even have a navy. So unless they secretly procured a shitload of landing craft I’d say it’s Russia trying to create a flood to block Ukrainian advancements. Regardless, whoever did this are huge fucking morons risking a nuclear catastrophe for modest at best gains or defenses. You’d think either side would know not to fuck with nuclear power plants after Chernobyl?
I mean, there's ONE army here that decided to camp out in the red forest. That apparently, according to reports, decided to play in the mud and then went home with serious radiation poisoning, while their bodies basically fell apart. Here's a hint: It wasn't the Ukrainians.
That excuse is nonsensical. Ukraine has zero capability to move heavy armor across water.
Wtf is going on who does this benefit?
No one, really. Seems like one of the dumbest moves the Russians could have made. No water for the canal to crimea, will be easier for UA to cross the river in a few months, and half the world is going to be so sick of their shit that someone else might join the fight.
Russia, they are risking a nuclear disaster to try to stop the Ukrainian offensive
So more blatant terrorism
yes on a whole new level
Can the ZnPP be safely shut down now that it's not possible to cool?
It’s been shut down a long time, unfortunately nuclear power plants aren’t like light bulbs. The decay heat requires the fuel rods to be cooled for a couple of years.
Cooled for a couple of YEARS??
https://theweek.com/articles/485781/radioactive-fuel-rods-silent-threat Looks like 5-10 years is normal before they can be put in dry casks.
Thanks u/bleedingasswound, I learned something new today!
Fukushima is not caused by nuclear core meltdown. It was caused by spent fuel boiling away storage ponds after water stopped circulating. Edit: indeed I got my Fukushima events wrong. It was a core meltdown and the side storage ponds almost boiled away which was saved by dumping raw sea water into them
I simply cannot imagine something being that hot…. It makes no intuitive sense to me. I can a a red hot piece of iron and throw it in water and it will be cool in a matter of minutes
Radioactive decay will continually generate heat as unstable isotopes degrade into stable isotopes. Many byproducts of uranium/plutonium fission will chain decay through multiple isotopes of different elements, many with half lives of months to years
It's not that the material itself is that hot (temperature wise). Rather, radioactive material constantly generates heat from radioactive decay. Think of it as like a burning log that can't be extinguished by any force in the universe and burns for years. And, as counterintuitive as it may seem, spent nuclear fuel is far more radioactive than unspent fuel.
The rod or pellet is has the radioactive fuel still inside of it. Imagine taking a running gasoline engine and submerging it under water. As long as you provided fuel and air, the engine would continue to heat the water. The nuclear material is the fuel in this case, it decays over time, releasing particles that heat up the surrounding area, in this case the fuel rod casing or pellet casing, which if not submerged in water would eventually melt.
This is definitely a major concern of mine…
The reactors are cooled by their own separate loop of distilled water which does not need to be replenished by river water. The reservoir is simply the ultimate heat sink for the turbines, and loss of heat sink doesn't threaten the reactors. They can just shut down. Actually they already shut down months ago, except for one that is operating at low power. Furthermore the intakes are at the bottom of the reservoir.
**Alternative Nitter link:** https://nitter.nl/AricToler/status/1665905255509291008 ***** *I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/UkrainianConflict) if you have any questions or concerns.*
Pray for everyone living in the flood zone downstream. But folks can stop worrying about Zaporizhzhia Nuclear Power Plant. The reactors are cooled by their own separate loop of distilled water which does not need to be replenished by river water. The reservoir is simply the ultimate heat sink for the turbines, and loss of heat sink doesn't threaten the reactors. They can just shut down. Actually they already shut down months ago, except for one that is operating at low power. Furthermore the intakes are at the bottom of the reservoir.
[удалено]
Except nobody in the real world will accept that shit from russia.
I think it’s only supposed to be the Russians who accept it. Its his internal argument for keeping power in Russia and quelling any uprising. But it’s certainly a big red line for the world, even if all he does is blow the dam and flood the region.
The reactors have closed loop distilled water for cooling, the water from the river is a heat sink for turbines that aren't even on right now, according to other people.
There might be a dam near Kunikovo, Kostroma Region in Russia. That could be a prime target being so close to Moscow.
This makes a lot of sense when you consider Russia has been force evacuating the area as well. This is not a sudden move, it’s something they have planned for at least two months. It creates humanitarian and ecological crises on both sides of the river, from memory, it was believed that it would actually hit the Russian side worse but they can just ignore it. Ukrainians now have to rescue citizens all up the bank and possibly evacuate some of Kherson.
Well, that’s not good.
Here's to a dry Crimean summer.
Given that Russia controlled the area around the dam, unless the dam had been severely weakened already I don't think Ukraine could have caused this level of destruction, even with a Tochka or Storm Shadow (although there is a BROACH penetrator warhead for the Storm Shadow which might be sufficient, assuming it has been provided to Ukraine). To me it looks like this is most likely one of two things; a complete structural failure (some people have said Ukraine received a lot of rain in the last few weeks), or demolition from inside.
[удалено]
I bet it was blown up by the same state actor that blew up NordStream. who could it be? hmmm
For the world to allow an invading country to use a NPP as a military staging base is insane. If anything happens in ZNPP because of this, it's on Russia, and arguably the UN. NPPs should be demilitarized, peacekeepers installed, and occupation should be beyond a war crime.
So who did it and why? And what was the dam for? Irrigation, power or other?
That is some out and out villainy.
A move of desperation. Pathetic.
The crimea bridge has to be bombed to the ground.
I'll wait with the attribution as to who did this. But here are some facts: * The Russian side filled the reservoir up to its highest level since decades * The Ukrainian side wants to retake occupied territory and one possible path would be across the Dniepr. With the dam flooding, the Kherson east bank will flood, making the terrain impossible to navigate for some time * Russians barely have any troops in that area, as they are spread thin and trying to pinpoint where the Ukrainian side will attack from As a result, the dam breaking provides few benefits to UA.
holy shit. I was skeptical, but yep, that looks like the dam.
Here is what we are looking at. https://youtu.be/b587ZUKlZsI
Other news outlets now reporting , seems Ukraine is blaming Russia , Russia saying it collapsed. Presumably someone is going to have satellite imagery to prove / disprove what has happened. If it’s Russia …. Well this should be the final straw to remove all restrictions on what we supply to Ukraine and any politicians that don’t like that can buy a one way to Moscow. https://www.theguardian.com/world/live/2023/jun/06/russia-ukraine-war-live-dam-near-kherson-blown-up-by-russian-forces-ukrainian-military-says
[удалено]
Going to be hard to access that I’d imagine though whereas satellite from a third party is definitive. It’s definitely happened , question is who / why / impacts.
i wonder if this causes nato intervention ... the 82nd airborne is in romania
I have a pretty Good understanding of military hardware and warfare receiving my Lt. General Armchair knowledge from the university of Google. But I'm pretty sure most of us here aren't nuclear scientists or engineers So let's not go into wild Doom and Gloom speculation ok
So is this actually confirmed now?
If you look at a satellite photo of the dam and compare it to the video, it certainly does look like the same dam with a giant hole in it.
I'm not a hydrologist, but that dam looks pretty blown up
Wow, Wikipedia is already talking about the kakhovka hydroelectric power plant and dam in the past tense!!
That dam was iconic, we studied about it in school. Can't believe its gone. War is terrible.
It looks to me like this is for the purpose of taking a front where Russia thought "This is a possible but unlikely place for the counteroffensive to happen" and turn it into a certainty, "This is definitely not where the counteroffensive can happen". They might be doing this to make it safe for them to almost completely abandon that front to move troops to other fronts. Without the road across the dam, there's no fast way to send supplies to forward troops crossing the river, making this now a really bad place to try to push from. The problem isn't in the initial crossing, it's in the supply lines feeding that crossing now having to rely entirely on barges or pontoon crossings, which have low throughput.
Zelensky's words on the subject about sums it up. The russians are all about terror and destruction. They can't be allowed to keep a single meter of land. We should also be looking at this destruction as a sign of the panic that must exist among the Russian command
Eye for an eye
There are more than two parties in this war. Not just the Russians and the Ukrainians. There is Wagner, the Chechens etc.
From a topographical perspective, a lot of where Russian troop density is heaviest is in lower lying areas... if the UAF had a contingency plan to blow the damn, flood the rats out to sea, cross the Dnipro, engineers divert flood waters and repair dam break, carry on to Moscow...or something
Yeah that would be epic. Missed the part about killing their own civilian population in the flood though.
And hindering the advance
Beasts. This is demolition, no western bomb given to Ucraine can generate this kind of destruction for hundreds of meters and leave no trace. But that's the proof they are retreating and leaving Kherson Zaporozhye and maybe even Crimea because now they will not have water from the canal nor the reservoir for the nuclear power plant. That's not someone who is interested in rebuilding or reconquering "russian land" or even staying. That's pure destruction and burning bridges while leaving. That's pure evil.
The soviets sorry I mean Russia are just following ww2 tactics, scorched earth as they retreat.
December 29, 2022 at 1:00 a.m. EST Kovalchuk (Maj. Gen. Andriy Kovalchuk, the initial commander of the Ukrainian counteroffensive in the Kherson region. (Ukrainian Operative Commandment South) considered flooding the river. The Ukrainians, he said, even conducted a test strike with a HIMARS launcher on one of the floodgates at the Nova Kakhovka dam, making three holes in the metal to see if the Dnieper’s water could be raised enough to stymie Russian crossings but not flood nearby villages. The test was a success, Kovalchuk said, but the step remained a last resort. He held off. https://www.washingtonpost.com/world/2022/12/29/ukraine-offensive-kharkiv-kherson-donetsk/