http://seattletimes.nwsource.com/html/nationworld/2003547286_nuclear30.html
WASHINGTON -- Making nuclear power plants impervious to an airliner attack by terrorists is impracticable, and it's up to the military to avert such an assault, the government said Monday.

The Nuclear Regulatory Commission, in a revised security policy, directed nuclear plant operators to focus on preventing radiation from escaping in case of such an attack and to improve evacuation plans to protect public health and safety.

I ran across this just a bit ago while browsing today's news stories - and I just have to mention...
I worked at a nuclear power plant for a while. I didn't work on the reactors, just their computers, but still - I learned a lot while I was there (in fact they require it to work there), and I have to say - that thing is pretty damned impervious to airliner attack as it is. And I've seen internal studies & computer modeling to back it up.
Those reactors are under so much concrete so deep under the ground - a plan can dive right into it - and although the building above ground sure won't be in very happy shape, the reactors will be just fine.

I've also seen they have evac plans, etc in place. Although this reactor is kinda out in the boondocks so I don't know if they need to go much farther than "Tell the locals to get the hell out, and leave the cows."

The industry puts profit over safety, a small team of men with easy to acquire guns could defeat the security at most plants and unleash hell. Security at these plants is an oxymoron.

This is a possibility - the plant did have several machine-gun toting guards and very strict security (for example just to get into the office you have to go through a series of checkpoints and an explosives sniffer) - but just looking at it, it made me wonder if it could hold up to something as simple as a reinforced semi truck and a dozen or so people with machine guns.

Although even if they got in I'm not sure what they'd be able to do with it.

The industry puts profit over safety...

Liar.

We should be building dozens of Nuke plants all across the country. There have been few Nuke plant safety issues since nuke power started. It is far cleaner and far safer than ANY other power source we have.

As to safety from terror, the best way to solve that is to continue keeping the Islamofascists in turmoil ELSEWHERE... like Iraq, Iran and Afghanistan!

In truth, we cannot stop them from destroying a nuke plant if they are determined to do it. No "security" wold be 100% regardless.

We should be building dozens of Nuke plants all across the country. There have been few Nuke plant safety issues since nuke power started. It is far cleaner and far safer than ANY other power source we have.


I agree - I support nuclear power as currently the best "alternative fuel" method for generating power - the plant's output is as clean as it gets - pure water vapor.
Yes, every few years or so they eject a waste product, but these are buried miles underground under a rocky no-mans-land in utah, and even this could probably be eliminated if scientists would get cold fusion figured out.

Yes, there have been a couple of accidents in the past, but regulations and procedures have gotten much stricter -
for example, the Chernoble disaster was caused by testing the reactors with the safeties disengaged.

... the thing is, you can name by name each nuclear accident. However, coal mine accidents and oil tanker accidents are so numerous that one cannot remember them all.

The safety record of nuke power all across the world is amazingly good.

Liar.

Telling the facts makes me a liar?

Read...

A compliant U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) in tow, the nuclear power industry continues to put corporate profits ahead of public safety by fighting efforts to increase security at nuclear power plants, Public Citizen said today.

This month, the Nuclear Energy Institute (NEI), the industry’s lobbying organization, issued a report denouncing legislation that would federalize security forces at nuclear power plants. The latest blast against efforts to enhance security follows assurances from NRC Chairman Richard Meserve and NEI President Joe Colvin late last year that legislation to federalize forces at nuclear plants was unnecessary.


http://www.citizen.org/pressroom/release.cfm?ID=996



We should be building dozens of Nuke plants all across the country. There have been few Nuke plant safety issues since nuke power started. It is far cleaner and far safer than ANY other power source we have.


Insanity.. It is the most dangerous form of power production in existence, just one major accident at a place like Indian point or San Onofre could kill hundreds of thousands of people and make vast portions of the United States un-inhabitable for thousands of years. There are much safer ways to boil water, and just conservation alone can save all the power generated by nuclear power, not to mention solar, wind, and tidal power which see advances in their efficiency every year.

The waste generated by these plants in our short term quest for power will be with us thousands and thousands of years past the time humans have come up with ways to generate clean and safe energy. And irresponsible people of today wish to saddle hundreds of future generations with this highly toxic waste.

Like I've said before, the Polonium poisoning incident in the UK should show people how dangerous the substances are that these nuclear plants produce, and they are a goldmine to any terrorists hell bent on maximum death and destruction.

As to safety from terror, the best way to solve that is to continue keeping the Islamofascists in turmoil ELSEWHERE... like Iraq, Iran and Afghanistan!


Oh yea, that'll work, just assume you can keep everybody out of the country that wants to harm us when we have vast borders and coastlines. It is impossible to keep everyone out of here who wants to come here, best not to give them a big target of opportunity like nuclear plants dotting the landscape.


In truth, we cannot stop them from destroying a nuke plant if they are determined to do it. No "security" wold be 100% regardless.


Exactly, so why would you support building even more knowing that? Do you know what happens in a nuclear meltdown? It isn't pretty, we would all be wishing we had shut the things down if that ever happens..

...it made me wonder if it could hold up to something as simple as a reinforced semi truck and a dozen or so people with machine guns.

That can't happen. Machine guns are illegal in this country.

Insanity.. It is the most dangerous form of power production in existence, just one major accident at a place like Indian point or San Onofre could kill hundreds of thousands of people and make vast portions of the United States un-inhabitable for thousands of years. There are much safer ways to boil water, and just conservation alone can save all the power generated by nuclear power, not to mention solar, wind, and tidal power which see advances in their efficiency every year.
Nothing in the world is 100% safe from evil doers. Never has been...never will be. That's reality.

Not even the seat of our government is completely impervious to attack.

We have to decide if the benefits outweigh the risks...without alarmist propaganda and pictures of mushroom clouds.

I think nuclear must be included as a part of our overall national energy strategy. We should use coal, gas, solar, wind, etc. Nuclear can be a part of that, where it makes sense.

A nuclear plant could be protected from airliners by using the Patriot missle system.

The industry puts profit over safety, a small team of men with easy to acquire guns could defeat the security at most plants and unleash hell. Security at these plants is an oxymoron.

My best friends dad runs one in Nebraska so I disagree based on first hand experience. Besides, your real beef should be with the regulatory agency who sets the security standards. And finally, not every industry is a super evil empire out for money, safety be damned.

How many of us work for free? I don't. I'll do charity work for free. But, I don't think many corporations are in the business of charity work. They're in the business of making money.

Everyone complains about corporations who seek "too much" profit (whatever that means). But, they also want their 401k to return 12% every year. Well, people, you can't have it both ways.

Nothing in the world is 100% safe from evil doers.

Proof: The Democratic Party exists