Search Tags:

Categories:

Nuclear Flask Train Crash Test - BBC News 1984



Uploaded by: huxby
Video Description:
A BBC News report of the nuclear flask train crash test at the British Rail test track near Old Dalby in Leicestershire on 17th July 1984.


Tags for this video: bbcnews crash flask nuclear test train

Find more videos in the "Autos" category
See more videos uploaded by huxby

Related Videos
nuclear train about to flySpectacular Train CrashLive Train Crash!! (Stupid) 3/3
nuclear-train-about-to-fly.htmlnuclear-train-about-to-fly.htmlnuclear-train-about-to-fly.html
Train Crash With Trucktrain crash with nuclear flaskWATCH! Rhineland Freight Trains (with comments)
nuclear-train-about-to-fly.htmlnuclear-train-about-to-fly.htmlnuclear-train-about-to-fly.html


Share This Video:       StumbleUpon       del.icio.us       Reddit       digg       Furl       Spurl       Simpy       YahooMyWeb


Comments for this video: Show || Hide
Comments for this video on YouTube
Exactly! I really ... ( 1 month ago by mothity)
Exactly! I really don't understand why greenpeace have such a problem with Nuclear energy, its much better than coal, oil and gas, and isn't going to run out any time soon. They just have no logical arguments and want the world to be powered by dreaming of a better place. It's bloody ridiculous, if they aren't whining for wind turbines and 'Down with Nuclear', they're busy bullshitting about stuff they don't understand.
yes. most of them ... ( 1 month ago by derrickdanderson)
yes. most of them that i know personaly always seem to have an answer to all. even going as far to contradict their own statements. as a generic example, they say this way is better only to find that it is not, then they say that way is better only to find it is not. so what do they do? they look to place the blame on everyone else who told them in the 1st place that it would work or not. not ever once saying sorry we were wrong. no they are too good for that. makes me sick to my stomach.
ppl think nuclear ... ( 1 month ago by vcMalice)
ppl think nuclear power means nuclear explosions. get your head out of your ass.. a meltdown is GOOD when it happen, it means that it stops the reaction, cools the rods, and everything stops.
get your heads out of your asses greenpeace
since they started ... ( 1 month ago by slartibartfast69)
since they started transporting nuclear waste has there been any accidents like this?
not yet, and IF there ever is an accident like this my guess is that the container will be fine as proved here.
i think it's just scare mongering.
just my 2pence
Anyone with an ... ( 1 month ago by bertyUK)
Anyone with an ounce of technological knowledge will tell you that Nuclear is the way forward - if we're to phase-out coal there is no other safer alternative. We have to educate and show developing countries the way forward. I agree "get your head outta your arses".
Chynobyl was a systematic error.
the voice over ... ( 1 month ago by themaskandmilo)
the voice over sounds like terrice and philip from southpark :)
Rubbish!! ( 1 month ago by Marcus746746)
Rubbish!!
Lol, no safer ... ( 4 weeks ago by nkx1)
Lol, no safer alternative? So hydro electric, solar, wave, and wind are not safer alternatives than nuclear? What exactly about nuclear energy is so safe? The potential for core meltdown (however small), the radioactive waste that lasts for thousands and thousands of years, the potential for terrorist attack?
You are truly a moron.
OK i'm a moron nkx1 ... ( 4 weeks ago by bertyUK)
OK i'm a moron nkx1 - are you a person or is that code for a retarded robot. We can harness vast amounts of energy within a Nuclear reactor. The options you've just suggested would require huge grouping to provide near enough power - and we know all too well how people hate living near a pair of large blades so we create deeper social problems. Since you know so much - why don't you let us all know how many wind turbines we require. best wishes.
"They" used to say ... ( 3 weeks ago by crashinflames)
"They" used to say "split atoms, not wood", now they say "split wood, not atoms". You can't win for loosing.
once again ... ( 2 weeks ago by peanuts2105)
once again greenpeace know shit
stupid greenpeace ( 2 weeks ago by Carmoron)
stupid greenpeace
All of you are all ... ( 2 weeks ago by andreaacme)
All of you are all right in a way. Nuclear is NOT a safe game to play, as using alternative power is NOT as near efficient as using nuclear. The point is, YES lets look forwards towards technology but lets put more effort into making it safer for us to use! Question: Is your car engine safe? It generates many explosions per second to produce power. Still, we aprove thier use because we know that technology is making them safer every day. Answer: Safe enough ... today. Think about it.
The explosions in ... ( 2 weeks ago by nkx1)
The explosions in your engine do not hang around and pose threat of cancer and adverse environmental impact for tens of thousands of years.
Greenpeace will say ... ( 2 weeks ago by williamsone2006)
Greenpeace will say ANYTHING to get people on their side.
rubbish ( 2 weeks ago by bobizzle69)
rubbish
Greenpeace, lying ... ( 2 weeks ago by anfenn)
Greenpeace, lying since 1984. I guess that's why the founder of greenpeace left.
nuclear power has ... ( 1 week ago by moonunitzappa13)
nuclear power has been recognised as one of the greenest and cleanest forms of power. sparse accidents in the 70's and 80's should not be held acountable for the whole source of power. solar power only has a 15% efficency rate and wind power is slowly approaching 30%.... if greenpeace were so sure why did they make 3 allegations in this video?
It really depends ... ( 1 week ago by nkx1)
It really depends on your definition of cleanest and greenest. If by cleaner and greener you mean that it produces radioactive waste that is harmful (ie causes cancer, etc if it contaminates groundwater or other mediums) for 10,000 years or more, then I guess you're right.
Who cares if solar and wind are not that efficient (though efficiency is definitely improving)? There is no waste! It can be 1% efficient; as long as we can harness enough of it to meet our needs, there is no downside.
of course nuclear ... ( 1 week ago by moonunitzappa13)
of course nuclear power is not the "cleanest and greenest" because that sort of power hasnt been invented yet ( dont say solar.... FFS)
and yes radionucleacides have half lives for thousands of years but what is done with the radiactive waste???... it is sealed off and stored in suitable ground near no water tables( this is now.. yes some shit happened in the 50's) and yes eventually a newer storage medium will have to be used wh
en burying nuclear waste becomes less favourable.
WHATTTT..? if ... ( 1 week ago by moonunitzappa13)
WHATTTT..? if something has 1% efficiency it doesnt matter.????? it matters a hell of a lot effieciency rate is when something creates a percent of the energy used to run it or maufacture it( kinetic, heat, etc)
so if we build 1000 solar panels; which to manufacture use large amounts of energy and they give us 1% of that energy back ( they make more but you said it didnt matter) then that is a very large problem! considering the sources of power currently used to make them ( coal)
Solar panels and ... ( 1 week ago by nkx1)
Solar panels and wind turbines often take practically zero energy to operate. Obviously anything man-made takes energy to manufacture.
I'm not if we're on the same page here. Energy efficiency is how much fuel source is converted to energy. So if the sun yields 1,000 watts of energy per square meter (m2), a 1 m2 solar panel of 1% efficiency would yield 10 watts of energy. Also, nuclear power plants and mining uranium ore both
require energy, just as manufacturing a solar panel does.
Did the driver ... ( 1 week ago by superbrian113)
Did the driver remember to get off,,,,,
what was their ... ( 3 days ago by jimmyshitbags)
what was their fucking problem, even if bolts were loosened or whatever, at the end of the day they crashed a train into the flask and it didnt break open...



Tell a friend:


URL 
Embed Code