RE: nuclear plant threat

["E. Chris Horley" <ehorley@LANL.GOV>]

Having designed and analyzed nuclear containment and emergency systems for 

15 years, I have to weigh in on this. Rather than postulate multitudes of 

impact scenarios and counter technical arguments, the fundamental truth is 

that a fully loaded 767 with a transcontinental load of fuel is a 

significant adversary for a nuclear plant. In fact, it is a significant 

adversary to any man made item from above ground to 50 below ground. (If 

you don't like my 50ft, pick your own number). It is one hell of a bomb. So 

let's stay focused on the real issue of how to make these flying bombs 

terror proof.



If someone perseverates over the vulnerability and impact of an attack on a 

nuclear plant, I can help add over a 1000 other targets to their list and 

the attendant damage each will cause. If this is not enough to dilute their 

nuclear power focus, then we can get into the biological, chemical and 

nuclear threat arenas. In the end, everyone has a right to stay in denial. 

In a free society, we are at risk and must recognize and accept it. And 

stomp hard on terrorism.



These of course are my personal views.



Chris Horley



E. Chris Horley, P.E.



Los Alamos National Laboratory

NIS-5,  Safeguards Science Technology

505-667-0639

505-665-4433  FAX



************************************************************************

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.