Re: Windscale: Britain's biggest nuclear disaster

On 9 Oct, 03:00, Bill Ghrist <notmyn...@xxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
nada wrote:
On Oct 8, 4:55 pm, xnich...@xxxxxxxxxxx wrote:
Windscale: A nuclear disaster
By Paul Dwyer
Producer, Windscale: Britain's biggest nuclear disaster

"Fifty years ago, on the night of 10 October 1957, Britain was on the
brink of an unprecedented nuclear tragedy.
A fire ripped through the radioactive materials in the core of
Windscale, Britain's first nuclear reactor.
Tom Tuohy, the deputy general manager at the site, led the team faced
with dealing with a nightmare no-one had thought possible.

"Mankind had never faced a situation like this; there's no-one to give
you any advice," he said.

....the fire had been the result of reckless decisions taken to try to
produce the-H bomb"

Full Story from BBC NEWS:http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/sci/tech/7030281.stm

Published: 2007/10/05 23:43:58 GMT

© BBC MMVII

Thank the gods we don't have to worry AT ALL about anything like this
happening again. Onward to Gen III Reactors!

David

If you read the article (or anything about Windscale) you will note that
it had nothing to do with nuclear power generation. Windscale was not a
power reactor; its sole function was to produce plutonium for nuclear
weapons. Nearly all damage that has been done to the environment by
nuclear accidents has occurred in facilities associated with nuclear
weapons production, not with power generation. "National security" is a
wonderful excuse for sweeping all sorts of ugly things under the carpet
and for taking all sorts of short cuts that you cannot get away with
when operating a civil reactor. Even Chernobyl is at least half way an
example of this, since the primary rationale for the Soviet RBMK reactor
design was to have a power generation reactor that could also function
as a weapons grade plutonium production facility, something that is not
practical with light water reactors.

Bill Ghrist- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

I saw the programme last night and there's no doubt that the cause of
the accident was the short-cuts taken to produce plutonium quickly
enough to make an H-bomb.
This meant for instance, that the aluminium casings that contained the
radioactive material were shaved down so that they could run hotter in
the graphite moderator.

They were using air-cooling of the reactor block and one scientist
realised that, if there was a fire, radioactive waste would be blown
up the chimney across most of northern England. So he suggested that
a filter be installed, which was met with derision until a senior
scientist agreed and it was installed.
But the filters weren't good enough to stop the radioactivity escaping
when the fire actually happened.

The fact that the fire was stopped was almost entirely the result of
trial and error and the decision to turn off the fans to starve it of
oxygen.

All in all - a horrifying story of jingoistic technocratic blunder and
cover-ups. All driven by the attempts of McMillan's post-colonial
administration to compete with the US economy, which at the time was
devoting 10% (Yes TEN Percent) of its electricity production to the H-
Bomb programme.

No doubt the civil nuclear industry has learned a few lessons since 50
years ago.
But is anyone telling me that short-cuts aren't taken in the interest
of profits, that there's such a thing as fail-safe technology and that
all of these countries aiming at developing nuclear power stations
aren't interested in weapons production too and they devote their
energies into health and safety issues?

Bwah hahh ahhahh haaa!

.

Relevant Pages

  • The biofuel hoax will starve the world and speed global warming!
    ... all of the various forms of biofuel, including "biodiesel," are made ... Even at current limited levels of biofuel production, ... Will a starving Pakistan, armed with nuclear ... power plants using mass production techniques if we want to end global ...
    (talk.environment)
  • Re: Irish Electricity II
    ... On the nuclear front it's a bit like the original Sunningdale ... It is a no net carbon system true. ... The Endangered Species Act has cut back on some production to ... I'm getting to the point where I'm convinced that nuclear power is the ...
    (soc.culture.irish)
  • Re: Windscale: Britains biggest nuclear disaster
    ... Windscale: Britain's biggest nuclear disaster ... Windscale, Britain's first nuclear reactor. ... it had nothing to do with nuclear power generation. ... weapons production, not with power generation. ...
    (sci.energy)
  • Re: Who was it said the planet was cooling?
    ... It was all about reducing GG production. ... Nuclear emits no CO2. ... significant amount of the world's power. ... I wouldn't see synthetic gasoline as a long term solution though--fuel cell ...
    (rec.motorcycles)
  • Re: Windscale: Britains biggest nuclear disaster
    ... Windscale: Britain's biggest nuclear disaster ... Windscale, Britain's first nuclear reactor. ... it had nothing to do with nuclear power generation. ... weapons production, not with power generation. ...
    (sci.energy)
Quantcast