all the issues shaping the continents life is slowly getting next to normally where on the streets to give you in the report on the inside our corresponding with on the ground reporting from across the continent and all the friends down the mazda u. t. w. news africa every friday on d w. o they up to date. don't miss our highlights. the d w program on line d, w dot com highlights with turning coal into steam changed the world forever. what can satisfy our energy needs? the answer is changing over time. nuclear energy is highly controversial. will it provide us with a mission pre electricity or lead to nuclear disaster? in times of war, the energy infrastructure often becomes

a military targets. how can the destruction be monitored from space? ah, all this and more cunning up now on d. w. science magazine, tomorrow to day. and the war in ukraine has been raging since february 2022. the attacks have been especially brutal in the east of the country like here and sue me. as to not mathias mom, i was able to observe the war from the international space station than at man. i never explosion. i just little flashes from the ground and we knew they were missiles. actually during the day when we flew over the country, i saw a huge columns of smoke over maria pole for that it was so visible. so on the one hand, we're so far away from earthly problems, we're traveling through space. on the other hand, it's only 400 kilometers away and i could see what was happening on the ground with my own eyes,

one and it's very depressive and frightening looking satellites. also monitoring the impact of the war in ukraine. the data could help to rapidly assess the destruction and aid rescuing offense. the battle of mosul in 2017 images such as these provide any a glimpse of the devastation, but they can be something of the humanitarian catastrophe. experienced by millions of people there. satellite images show the extent of the destruction like in the city of rocca before and after the battle against islamic state towel. we land from the international committee of the red cross or i c. r. c. analyzes images such as these for security reasons. she can show images of current conflicts. my word for the i say i see is to support alcholay on the ground to assess the

situation, to, to know what to expect when they go on the ground. to also document the type of damages that happen. either a civilian, the buildings, hospitals were hit, it's painstaking work. she's an expert on interpreting high resolution images. they're expensive and that's not all me. we don't get an image every all the day on a specific spot and not all the context are covered by dis, a high resolution satellite imagery. and as well, we miss maybe a global picture. a new technology could help to develop it. the i c r c teamed up with researchers from the university of zurich, and e th dura, john big known miss team also analyzed satellite images with the aid of artificial intelligence. with motion in the on is a machine learning works well here,

because it can recognise very subtle patterns within a large amount of data comb, often better than humans, ceaseless damage. the researchers are working with images from europe sentinel to satellites. they're available free of charge and they cover wide areas of the earth's surface every 5 days, supplying images in all the relevant spectrums of light. but the spatial resolution leave something to be desired. so far, the data has been used to monitor forests in agricultural land and their change over time to train the a i program to analyze images of worked on destruction. data analyst book of 5 la draws and images of former combat regions that were carefully documented by staff at the u. n. f wouldn't, is so cancer and if i and it is asking me to your comments back within from ma, so this here is muscle calling not and the dance identify the coordinates of where

the city suffered damage. surely that you can also see that in july and large areas of the city were completely destroyed. these red dance identify areas of destruction via it. and this data, which tells us pretty much exactly where there was destruction can be used to train the algorithm with them. in the goal is to link the various colored areas on the map to the satellite image caused by drawing on the many thousands of data points. the ai system will eventually learn how to reliably identify this kind of destruction. lisa will even using sentinel, choose somewhat lower resolution images, but it won't completely replace human intelligence when i witness somebody's minutes history on. for example, if an algorithm identifies that a building was destroyed with a 50 percent confidence level. although then the algorithm just isn't sure. the size and then a human needs to take a close look out and figure out what really happened on the ground it was. and that's not the case that the algorithm is 90. 5 percent. certainly,

refiners cut seizures tell we love is collaborating with young wagner on the project. her expertise in analyzing wartime images will also flow into the algorithm. they hoped to have the initial version of the a i supported system within the next 2 years. the i c r c analyst is cautiously optimistic in someone who is really pragmatic. so i want to see the quality of the results and, and i be able to exchange with my colleagues on the ground. if this is something that they can use ah, can quickly in their work, the researchers have even bigger plans. they hope that the a i system will one day be used to support ceasefire agreement or even peace negotiations. and not just and conflicts like the war in ukraine. they're also hoping to help diffuse conflicts that aren't in the global limelight conflict

analyst, valerie sch, deja advises the zurich project and is convinced it could make a difference. it is on the fact for peace negotiations. it's important to look at what happened during the war a i can help provide that overview. and later it could act as an early warning system to monitor whether the warring parties are sticking to their agreements or whether some other kind of intervention is needed. on the perhaps one day seen that new a i system will be able to help find ways out of wars like a warning, new crane at the wooing ukraine has d stabilized energy supplies in many european countries, they want to become independent of russian gas. the challenge is to find alternatives. liquid natural gas or l n g is one alternative, but there is no infrastructure in place. some of you that coal and nuclear power

should continue to be used, but could now be the perfect time to make the switch to green energy. of course, a main sources of energy have always been changing over the years. humans have been using fire for around a 1000000 years. they burned wood, pete and dung. it's been a source of heat and a way to prepare food. it was even used to harden wooden spears, but our ancestors only learned how to light fires themselves in the last few 1000 years. still for more than 5000 years, people have been using oil lamps to bring light to the darkness. these early lamps, mostly round unfashionable oils, religious ceremonies were often illuminated in this way. candles made of wax tallow, or fat, also started to be used. in ancient times, charcoal burners refined wood into charcoal and their smoking kills. this allowed higher firing temperatures,

which made it possible to process metal and make new ceramics. the romans used charcoal on an industrial scale clearing entire forests and releasing huge amounts of pollution due to the economic boom and population growth at the end of the middle ages. wood for building materials and fuel became scarce in many places. a new source of energy was needed. that's when coal mining became important, had eventually fueled the industrial revolution. hard working steam engines had an almost insatiable hunger for energy. and massive amounts of coal were burned. the construction and operation of a growing railway network added to the need for coal. billions of tons of coal were being used. the release of significant amounts of c, o 2 had begun. the world would never be the same. another energy transition was on the horizon because an important fuel for lamps whale oil

was beginning to dry up. whalers had ruthlessly killed the animals for 3 centuries . their oil was the main source of energy for lighting. in the 19th century and gas lamps became the standard for lighting and urban areas . the fuel was made out of coal, but since gas lamps were so expensive to operate and maintain, starting in the 1920s, electric lighting became more popular. coal fired power plants provided the necessary electricity. at the same time, the horse drawn carriage was replaced by the automobile. a new energy hungry machine. huge amounts of crude oil were soon needed to meet the world's additional need for gasoline and diesel. after world war 2, private households were increasingly electrified refrigerators, electric stoves, washing machines and personal electronics. the demand for electricity skyrocketed

and was mainly covered by comb or oil fired power plants. all of this nearly came to an end with the oil crisis in the 19 seventy's high oil prices, paralyzed industry and halted traffic. this open the door for nuclear power plants a way to produce electricity at home without depending on other countries. nuclear energy was all the rage, but more and more people in europe opposed the development leaving nuclear and fossil fuels behind. that's the rallying cry today. renewables are meant to provide power for a clean all electric tech civilization. will this be our last energy transition? looking back, it's not likely since the start of the war in ukraine, the focus has been on nuclear energy. russian troops have taken over the nuclear reactor in the upper reaches, the fighting has compromised its safety. in other countries,

nuclear energy represents the solution to the energy crisis. even in germany where all nuclear power plants are due to be shut down by 2023, 3 generators. annella said to remain in operation. could nuclear energy also help fight climate change? a terrifying threat to the planet. but for others, a risk worth taking nuclear power is divisive. china and india have been ramping up their capacities to get electricity to hundreds of millions, more people without raising emissions. other countries from germany to japan has been switching off plants because they're read about safety. do we need nuclear energy to stop climate change and should we risk it? we've probably all heard of the infamous cannibal disaster in 1086. a reactor went out of control and blew up after overheated uranium melted through protective

barriers. the disaster channel was the worst in the history of nuclear power generation. let's fast forward 25 years in 2011 an earthquake and c nami struck the coast of japan, killing mold in 19000 people and fending 3 nuclear reactive at the fukushima plant in to meltdown with disasters like these. it's no surprise people find nuclear power apocalyptic, but take a look at the numbers and that fear doesn't hold up. compared to renewable sources of energy. nuclear has killed more people for each terror. what hour of electricity than it's generated? but let's put that in the context of fossil fuels. the death rates from burning gas, oil, and coal make nuclear seem almost as safe as solar. a wind. that's because burning fossil fuels relief is toxic particles, but damage our lungs and hearts. the appellation they cause kills an estimated

$8000000.00 people a year. comparing nuclear and coal is like comparing planes and cars. while we obsess about plane crashes, far more people die on the road than in the air for every kilometer they travel. but plane crashes make the headlines and so they seem even scarier, same goes for nuclear disasters. you compare them to clarion this you all, they all in industries. certainly. you are fuzzy foods. ah, the number of that that, that, that it is is the minimum. but so far there have been few nuclear designs to in history and you catastrophe could change the entire discourse. beyond that radioactive waste could claim many lives in the future. more about that later. ah, the fact that nuclear energy is safer than fossil fuels is one reason why some people at changing their minds about nuclear power. the big one is that in terms of climate change, nuclear is clean it c,

o 2 emissions are about as low as solar and wind over its lifetime. and it also provides a pretty constant supply of electricity as countries kick fossil fuels out of the energy grids. nuclear could provide a steady baseload for when the sun isn't shining in the winds, not blowing. 10 years ago i changed my nuclear energy. i realized that we needed nuclear energy to solid climate change. but does quitting nuclear mean burning more fossil fuels? let's look at germany. it's been shutting down nuclear plants for decades, but 2 of 3 remaining ones will remain operational in case an emergency, a curve. if you hear guns office, i want to say completely openly here as a supporter of the peaceful use of nuclear energy. my view on nuclear energy has changed since the events of japan. shortly after the fukushima disaster, german chancellor angle america announced the nuclear phase out a decision that may have proved costly. a study in 2019 estimated that quitting nuclear flu, jemine's,

coal exit so much for that lead to $1100.00 more depth than expected from breathing dirty air each year. the annual social cost is $12000000000.00 but that's only half the story. germany's electricity emissions actually later fell in to renewables, push coal out of the mix and energy experts say the massive expansion of renewables was only politically possible because the government agreed to quit nuclear. you can argue with both ways, probably in germany would have been able to reduce it to me should be quicker if it differently. but i hope the better, really think of bring your goal, although not only in germany, but this is really, again, you're been an expert on nuclear power. she says renewable energy. is it cheaper than building new nuclear plants? it's not the same as keeping existing nuclear plants on line for longer building new nuclear capacity is agatha groups now very expensive. it took me quite

a bit into prolonging now. but as a catchy, old react is a more dangerous and needs to be retrofitted to stay safe. and what about the nuclear waste? spent fuel rods stay radioactive tens of thousands of years. and it's not only the roads, all the concrete and metal exposed to radiation can't just be thrown away. decommissioning and nuclear plant can take decades. the problem is, even after 70, as of nuclear power generation, nobody has found a proven way to get rid of the waste for good. my name is joe, correct, recovery, suffering for europe. this is have a comp on a boat in 2018 trying to stop a nuclear plant. he feels could end up dumping radioactive waste into the ocean. nuclear waste is something even nuclear advocate for sometimes on shore, about his toxic radioactive and in the wrong hands could even be used for radioactive or does he bombs everything scope together in high reactive waste needs

to be kept out of the environment for protein. that is really big, a real big chunk, the industry solution for nuclear waste to bury it deep, underground, isolating the waste inside rockwell clay to stop radiation reaching the surface. finland is set to open. the world's 1st deep geological storage facility in 2023 to permanently deal with its nuclear waste. we think that deeper in the finish, but druck 450 meters deep in a kind of concrete ah, parcher petrocca is the safest place to put them down there. um huh. it's always better. they live in temporary storage is on the ground level. hello. this is patsy to a he mom from placebo the company that designed the facility. but if the site perceiver is building a, okay, latoya in west and finland is the only one in the world. and it hasn't even been built yet. can we really trust that the technology will work for ever while of

course, sure. if it hasn't been started, there hasn't been a prototype, but it has been tested. even in all kilo that we have been doing 30 years of research. and it's all kind of possible i leaks and things that might happen. they are considered that might not convince environmentalists worried about contamination and even potential terror attacks in the distant future. but even they agree, the idea needs research. the world already has half a century's worth of nuclear waste to deal with. so what does this all mean for us to we really need nuclear power to stop climate change? well, it can clearly help. nuclear is as safe as renewable energy in terms of lives lost and could balance out a clean energy mix. but we still can't be sure the waste won't come back to hurt us in the future. huh. ah.

the uranium to 35 and to tony him are split in the nuclear reactor with the help of neutrons. this process releases energy the energy heat motor, which then gets off steam, christine power, the turbine, which is connected to a generator and that produces electricity. nothing is burned in a nuclear reactor, so no greenhouse gas emissions are released. but the process produces radioactive waste that nuclear fission creates energy was formulated by albert einstein as equals m. c squared ruffled larry from nigeria once to better understand what that means. what does equals mc squared mean? the world's most famous equation was contained in a paper, albert einstein published in 19 o 5. it was a kind of after thought to his theory of special relativity. the formula

established a relationship between e or energy and or mass. and see the incredibly fast speed of light. that means even a tiny amount of mass contains a large amount of energy. that's evident, for example, when atomic nuclei fused together. such nuclear fusion takes place in the sun's interior. the temperature and pressure is so high that hydrogen nuclei fuse into helium nuclei. the sun loses about $4000000.00 tons of mass per 2nd via radiation. but that's not even a drop in the bucket compared to the sun's entire mass. because a tiny amount of mass produces a vast amount of energy. scientists are looking for ways to generate energy by nuclear fusion here on earth to. but that's still a long way off. nuclear vision also transforms mass into energy. one very well

known example of this is the nuclear bomb. after the explosion, the total mass of the fragment, speeding apart, is less than the original mass. in nuclear power, plants atoms are split into these fragments. a 1000th of a gram of this mass generates roughly as much energy as 8 households in europe use in a year. so much for the practical side. now to the theory, i'm shines formula also describes the conversion of energy into mass. that's what a particle accelerator does. charged atoms are subatomic particles, are accelerated and made to collide in gigantic detectors. the energy of that collision is then converted into matter particles, the building blocks of the universe. so in a way, einstein's formula allowed physicists to discover the fundamental principles that

make up our world atomic fees and produces enormous amounts of energy. one graham of nuclear feel is equivalent to 11 tons of coal, or 90000 kilowatt hours. with one kilowatt hour, you could watch 14 episodes of tomorrow to day. we're not this could reset into nuclear fuse and continue. ah, this is where scientific history is being made. the joint european taurus or jet fusion facility and the british town of cullum, near oxford, a pink flame flickers in the darkness. first, it covers the floor of the reactor. then it flavors up to the ceiling. what you're looking at is a fine 2nd plasma pulse that releases $59.00 mega joules of energy of record and nuclear fusion energy generation. it's not

a particularly large amount of energy, just enough to boil 60 electric kettles. but for science, it's a milestone. these is also really significant. what we've managed to demonstrate inside jet is that we could create a many sun the right got a many saw hold it there for sustain period and get really good performance levels, which is a major step forward in terms of our quest to get sets of fusion power blocks the sun uses nuclear fusion to generate energy, naturally glowing, hot plasma and ionized gas bubbles. within at about 15000000 degrees celsius, under huge pressure, hydrogen atoms constantly fused to form helium adams. this process, the so called hydrogen burning produces energy which the sun emits has radiation. nuclear fusion research is modeled on this type of reaction. like at the gen,

experimental nuclear fusion facility and the u. k. in a talk, a mac reactor plasma is heated to more than 100000000 degrees celsius using microwaves in a ring shaped vacuum chamber. once this process is set in motion, it is supposed to continue by itself indefinitely. almost the same thing happens in the sun. hydrogen nuclei fused gather to form helium and energy is released. however, a lot of energy is required to activate the process. the major goal of fusion research is to eventually produce more energy than is needed to heat the plasma. weather man made large scale nuclear fusion will be a success remains to be proven by more powerful nuclear fusion facilities such as eater here in southern france. oh,

that's all for this weeks to morrow to day d. w. science magazine. you can find more reports from the world of science online at d, w dot com. thanks for watching and until next week. stay curious with

ah, my girl, plastics can be found in the arctic as well as in our drink water. they're everywhere. it's one of the greatest problems of the century that needs to be resolved. micro plastics in invisible danger. close up. in 30 minutes on

d. w. a pulse ah, the beginning of a story that moves us and takes us along for the ride. it's all about to perspective culture information. this is either you news and more d, w made for mines the country that will host the world. i once you visit, you never forget it. up caught between transformation and exploitation with between education and tradition. between cosmopolitan player and captivating wilderness. the portrait of a desert state full of contradictions. katara starts november 11th on

d. w. oh, can they get all the harvesters? are immigrants, dolock, if they come in, every thing you enjoy eating at home with your family, was harvested by people who are being exploited. then i dc and we're gonna need to, we can't keep doing what we're doing, the classes up, we need to be commit sustainable. as possible, and that's why your green revolution can absolutely necessary. ah, europe reveals the future is being determined. now, our documentary theories will show you how people, companies and countries are we thinking everything i'm making may to change his life? we don't do something, our children won't be able to enjoy fresh air. you are at the reduced, starts november 3rd on d,

w ah ah, this is dw news live from berlin, russian as strikes knockout, most of keels, water supply, power facilities were also hit. i was rush a launch a fresh barrage of attacks on vital ukrainian infrastructure also coming up.