nuclear-news

Nuclear plants are not safe from terrorist attack

Major Fallout Predicted Over Obama’s Nuclear Power Proposal. by: Grace Huang, t r u t h o u t 22 February 2010“……..According to NuclearBailout.org, though Mohammed Atta, one of the 9/11 hijackers, said that he had considered targeting a nuclear facility instead of the World Trade Center, nuclear reactors are still “not required to be protected against air attack.”

As seen with Chernobyl and Three Mile Island, an accident could also be devastating. Nuclear reactors need a large amount of water to keep them cool. However, when there isn’t enough coolant, the reactor is in danger of overheating and could suffer severe core damage. Large amounts of toxic radioactive material could then be released into the air.

Because of cutting costs at reactors in an effort to stay competitive, however, safety measures and security alike are inadequate.”When money is the bottom line, safety is somewhere in second, third, or fourth place,” said Block. “But you can’t afford that if you’re guarding the most dangerous material on earth. If there’s going to be a nuclear renaissance, then there has to be a safety renaissance. You don’t see that right now.”

t r u t h o u t | Major Fallout Predicted Over Obama’s Nuclear Power Proposal

February 23, 2010 - Posted by Christina Macpherson | safety, USA | antinuclear, nuclear, nuclear costs, nuclear renaissance, nuclear secrecy, nuclear spin, nuclear wastes, radioactive, reactors