[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
RE: NRC News release on Terrorists.
Same thoughts here...
All I know is, if I were onsite and come under fire from a 105 mm howitzer,
you'll find me hiding in containment....you would also find me in there if
I knew that some nut was about to crash a plane into the site using the
containment building as a bullseye marker.
I feel confident that I'd be safe and the reactor would be safe ... I'll
take the radiation exposure over bullets and crashing planes anytime.
My thoughts only...
DJWhitfill
"Franta, Jaroslav"
<frantaj@AECL.CA> To: "Radsafe (E-mail)" <radsafe@list.vanderbilt.edu>
Sent by: cc:
owner-radsafe@list.vand Subject: RE: NRC News release on Terrorists.
erbilt.edu
09/27/01 10:18 AM
Please respond to
"Franta, Jaroslav"
OOOOPS -- I guess John meant burning jet fuel from the airliner ! (thanks
Phil !)
...but if nothing gets through the wall, what difference does it make ?
(ignoring destruction of the "balance of plant" for the moment).
As we saw in the WTC disaster, much of the fuel was gone in the initial
fireball. I suspect this would be even more so in the case of a
disintegration of an airliner on the outside of a containment dome.... in
contrast to the WTC, where a significant fraction spilled throughout the
interior of the structure and ignited any combustible materials there....
Also, in chemical/petrochemical industry, large concrete basins are used
for emergency/accidental spills to safely burn-off the flammable liquid.
I think there is a big difference between the relatively skimpy & fragile
fireproofing of steel structures in highrises, and rebar embedded in
four-foot thick concrete walls !
Jaro
************************************************************************
You are currently subscribed to the Radsafe mailing list. To unsubscribe,
send an e-mail to Majordomo@list.vanderbilt.edu Put the text "unsubscribe
radsafe" (no quote marks) in the body of the e-mail, with no subject line.