[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
RE: the Wash. Times, the Post, and "reality"
Point
taken. I guess my antipathy to the Washington Times was bubbling to the
surface [of the pressurizer].
Best
regards.
Jim
Dukelow
Radsafe and Jim:
Nit picking the fine points of a PWR concerning
the steam generators, pressurizer and reactor water level at TMI is NOT
the point of my post with the excerpt of the Wash. Times article. It's no
surprise the technical community can't communicate with the public. While
a scientist goes on at length explaining reactor design details to be completely
accurate, the basic point is lost that the Time article admits:
A
malfunction in a water system [at TMI] ..... caused a meltdown
within a reactor core,
setting off the release of radioactive gas. However,
despite a national
frenzy of fear and speculation, there were no injuries due
to radiation
exposure.
The US is facing a possibly act of radiation sabotage
from a dirty bomb that from a radiological viewpoint would most likely be
trivial in its radiation health consequences. However, such an act would cause
massive panic if the Norm's of the world have their way in scaring the pants off
the public. This panic and disruption of life in America is what the terrorists
threatening use of a so-called "dirty bomb" are after.
I would imagine
that if a few buckets of wood ash from northern Florida [or Northern New
England] with Cs-137 content of 20,000 to 25,000 pCi/kg of ash were spread
across some subway platforms in New York after setting off firecrackers,
there would be public panic and the subways of New York would be shut down
for days. But the fact that several thousand tons of Cs-137 enriched woodash
from a 50 MW[e] wood burning power plant in Burlington, Vermont is spread across
the fields of organic food coops in the Northeast Kingdom of Vermont mixed with
manure to enrich the potassium content of soil each year causes no one the least
bit of concern. Absurd? Yes. Organic food coops like Bread and Circus oppose
"food irradiation" to prevent bacterial food contamination, but quietly spread
elevated levels of fission products on their fields from biomass burning
which they consider a wonderful thing.
Criticicizing the Wash. Times on
the trivial point of their mentioning the steam generators vs. the
pressurizer relief valve on the primary side only gets away from the important
point which they were willing to put into print. Namely, a serious accident at a
nuclear plant resulted in no offiste consequences due to radiation exposure.
Stewart Farber, MS Public Health
Consulting Scientist
email:
SAFarberMSPH@cs.com
======
In a message dated
5/13/02 11:29:33 AM Pacific Daylight Time, jim.dukelow@pnl.gov writes:
email: SAFarberMSPH@cs.com
=====http://www.washtimes.com/national/20020513-8388828.htm
=========================================================
U.S. weighs July 4
threat
By Bill Gertz
THE WASHINGTON TIMES
The TMI facility was the site of a serious nuclear
accident in 1979. A
malfunction in a water system used for steam
generators caused a meltdown
within a reactor core, setting off
the release of radioactive gas. However,
despite a national frenzy of fear
and speculation, there were no injuries due
to radiation
exposure.
========================================================
Jim Dukelow
responds:
Well, the steam generators in the TMI plants
transfer heat from the primary to the secondary cooling system, generating
steam on the secondary side, which then goes to the steam turbines to power
the generators that produce the electricity.
Perhaps the reason the
Washington Post would never say what the Times did is that the Times was wrong
and the Post has higher standards.