[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

RE: Consequences of attack on nuclear facility- Matt Bivens "Special Report"



Good one, David!  Here's mine. 
 
Ted Rockwell
__________________
 

Your Feature Story by Matt Bivens was a disgrace. An airplane, the biggest we have, cannot drive its wingtanks of fuel through a heavily-reinforced concrete wall surrounding a nuclear reactor. An engine might crack the concrete, leaving its fuel outside. This would not damage the reactor. Even if the reactor were somehow damaged, no significant public hazard would result. We proved that when the Three Mile Island reactor melted with no public impact.

And if the spent fuel pool were damaged, there would likewise be no significant release. These statements are based on engineering analyses that have been made, supported by physical tests, including rocketing an airplane into a wall built to simulate the containment wall. The safest place to be in an air attack would be inside the reactor containment structure.

You're just helping the terrorists spread panic when you print such nonsense. Talk to working engineers who understand these plants, not to anti-nuclear political activists.

You owe your readers a follow-up.

Theodore Rockwell

Nuclear Engineer

301-652-9509