Reuters 3rd May 2018 , French uranium mining and nuclear fuel group Orano, formerly called Areva,
said it had signed a fuel reprocessing deal with Ukraine. Orano and the
Ukrainian utility EnergoAtom signed a contract for assessing the
feasibility of reprocessing services of spent fuel assemblies of Ukrainian
VVER-1000 nuclear reactors in Orano la Hague facility Orano said the
contract, signed in the presence of Oleksander Shavlakov, First
Vice-President of EnergoAtom and Pascal Aubret, Senior Executive Vice
President of Orano’s Recycling Business Unit, marks a new step towards
the treatment of Ukrainian used fuels VVER 1000 at the Orano la Hague site. https://af.reuters.com/article/commoditiesNews/idAFFWN1SA18N
THE prolonged closure of an ageing and cracked reactor at Hunterston in North Ayrshire is the beginning of the end for seven nuclear power stations in Scotland and England, experts say.
They doubt whether the reactor will ever restart, and argue that proliferating cracks in other elderly reactors across the country will shorten their expected lives and lead to premature shutdowns. One expert said extending the life of troubled reactors like the one at Hunterston is “gambling with public safety”.
Hunterston’s operator, EDF Energy, however, insisted that it would be able to reopen the reactor. Its other reactors would also run for as long as planned, the company said.
But according to independent nuclear engineer John Large, the new cracks signal the “death knell” for Hunterston reactor three. “This means that reactor four is doomed to the same fate, followed by similar plants at Hinkley Point and Hartlepool, thereafter progressively followed by other advanced gas-cooled reactors,” he said.
EDF announced last week that it was extending the shutdown of reactor three at Hunterston by six months because it had discovered more cracks than expected in its graphite core. Instead of reopening early in May, it is now scheduled to reopen on November 17.
The company said it had found a total of 39 “keyway root cracks” in the reactor and they were “happening at a slightly higher rate than modelled”. The discovery of new cracks was first revealed by the Sunday Herald on April 22.
The integrity of the thousands of graphite blocks that make up the reactor core is vital to nuclear safety. They ensure that the reactor can be cooled and safely shut down in an emergency.
But bombardment by intense radiation over decades causes the blocks to start cracking. If they fail, experts say, nuclear fuel could overheat, melt down and leak radioactivity in a major accident.
Large argued that EDF’s decision to keep reactor three closed until the end of the year was prompted by the UK Government’s safety watchdog, the Office for Nuclear Regulation (ONR). “ONR’s doubts about the reactor safety have not been satisfied by this most recent inspection,” he said.
“It may simply be a way of saving face and fobbing off the announcement that the plant is to be permanently shut down.”
Hunterston reactor three, which started generating power in 1976, is the oldest in EDF’s fleet. The other working reactor on the site, number four, is 18 months behind, has five cracks and is likely to develop more.
The six other advanced gas-cooled reactor plants in the UK are also likely to crack, including the only other working nuclear power station in Scotland at Torness in East Lothian. The others are: Hinkley Point B in Somerset; Hartlepool in County Durham; Heysham 1 and 2 near Lancaster; and Dungeness B in Kent.
Large also highlighted the uncertainties in tracking cracks, which are mostly modelled rather than measured. “There is little that EDF can do to physically resolve this problem,” he said.
Meanwhile, Edinburgh-based nuclear critic and consultant Pete Roche pointed out that Hunterston is now 42 years old.
“This must surely be the end for reactor three,” he said. “We are gambling with public safety by extending the lives of old reactors.”
He expects Hinkley Point B to close “very soon”, followed by other nuclear stations in England. “Even Torness has passed the 30-year threshold, so may not make it to its expected 2030 closure date,” Roche said.
Rita Holmes, a local resident who chairs the Hunterston site stakeholder group, argued it would be very difficult for the public to have confidence in the safety of reactor three. “It has had its day and should be allowed to bow out gracefully,” she said.
Paul Mummery, a professor of nuclear materials from the University of Manchester, pointed out that the ONR would not allow EDF to restart reactors until it can be demonstrated that they are safe. “This is quite a task for EDF and not something that can be rushed,” he said.
“EDF is undertaking extensive modelling and experimental programmes to demonstrate the safety of the reactors but it will take time to generate and interpret the results. Time is against them as the reactors will continue to age during service.”
The ONR has welcomed EDF’s decision to keep Hunterston reactor three closed as “responsible, conservative, and made in the best interest of public safety”. It confirmed that the reactor could not be restarted without its permission.
One ONR advisor, professor Paul Bowen from the University of Birmingham, argued that the process showed how the regulatory system was working.
“In my technical opinion and noting that I am not at all influential in any decisions, a return to service for Hunterston reactor three will be justified,” he said.
The director of Hunterston B, Colin Weir, told BBC Radio Scotland last week that he was “100 per cent confident” that the reactor would restart.
A spokesperson for EDF said: “We are confident that we have accurately predicted the behaviour of the core and this continues to underpin the lifetime dates for all our reactors, including reactor three at Hunterston.”
A Scottish Government spokesperson said: “We expect ONR will exercise its duties diligently to ensure the nuclear industry controls its hazards effectively and maintains the highest nuclear safety and security standards.”
Cracks in nuclear reactor threaten UK energy policy, Problems at Hunterston B in Scotland trigger doubts over six other 1970s and 80s plants, Guardian, Adam Vaughan, 7 May 18,
The government’s energy policy is under renewed pressure after the prolonged closure of one of Britain’s oldest nuclear reactors because of cracks in its graphite core raised questions over the future of six other plants built in the 1970s and 1980s.
The temporary shutdown of reactor three at Hunterston B in Scotland is also expected to burn an estimated £120m hole in the revenues of its owner, EDF Energy. The firm said this week that it was taking the reactor offline for six months after inspections revealed more cracks than expected.
Safety fears have been quashed, but the potential impact on wider energy strategy has alarmed experts who say the reactor may never be restarted……
The government’s energy policy is under renewed pressure after the prolonged closure of one of Britain’s oldest nuclear reactors because of cracks in its graphite core raised questions over the future of six other plants built in the 1970s and 1980s.
The temporary shutdown of reactor three at Hunterston B in Scotland is also expected to burn an estimated £120m hole in the revenues of its owner, EDF Energy. The firm said this week that it was taking the reactor offline for six months after inspections revealed more cracks than expected.
Safety fears have been quashed, but the potential impact on wider energy strategy has alarmed experts who say the reactor may never be restarted.
Independent 5th May 2018, California is set to become the first US state to make solar panels
mandatory on most newly built homes. The state’s Energy Commission is due
to vote next week on new energy standards that would require virtually all
new homes to be constructed with solar panels from 2020. Currently around
20 per cent of single-family homes are constructed with solar capacity
built in, but if the new standards are approved as expected this proportion
will rise sharply. https://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/americas/california-solar-power-panels-homes-renewable-green-energy-climate-change-a8337626.html
Why do we desperately need to listen to voices from the heart?
The corporate dominated world does not like to hear voices from the heart. Oh no, there must be no emotion. We must all stick to technical jargon, statistics, the “accepted” facts, in appropriately respectable academic language.
Of course statistics, facts, and technical language have their place in the nuclear-free movement. But as long as the anti-nuclear voices remain boring, the corporate global empires do not need to worry.
This voice came as a comment today on our sister ship antinuclear.net
Jan – Janotine@asia.com– 6 May 18-My grandad was half kiowa. His father married a native american lady, to expand his spread. She was his last wife. The other two died in child-birth. All, so he could have more slave kids to work his spread. May grandad ran away from home at age 12.
I am a westerner. I used to think the west was so grand! My family is from the west. Places like Utah, Arizona, Nevada, New Mexico, Washington, Oregon, Idaho, and yes parts of California.
Later, i realized, our frikin government, used the west as a sacrifice zone for open air nuclear bomb testing, biological and chemical warfare testing, uranium mining and processing, nuclear bomb testing.
I have been to every native nation in the west and, most in Alaska as a professional. No sane person thinks the anglos did the west any favors!
People ask me if natives or, even anglos are better off from the europeans coming in and taking america. The anglos used their rascist-Monroe Doctrine, as an excuse for the environmental destruction and genocides of the once pristine, western United States!
In the end, is the west better off? Hell no! They ruined turtle island, and the whole northern hemisphere with their insanity!
Shockley was the dumnest, white rascist ever! He might have helped invent transisters, but the genetics of Europeans and Americans are forever ruined, by the white evil-war-monkey obession, with the magic rocks.
There are very few radionuclide toxicologists in the world because, of the nuclear cosa nostra. Radionuclides are a billion times more genotoxic, teratogenic, mutagenic, carcinogenic, than the most dangerous manmade-mutagenic, chemicals, like agent orange.
Anything factual about radionuclides is verboten! Environmental health professionals, are pariahs in the war-monging, capitalist-paradigm. Health physics is nuclearist propaganda. Superior Northern-European culture and technology, is a sick-cosmic-joke.
The northern europeans culture, with it’s insane blood-lust and psychopathy, has made Europeans genetically inferior and, That’s a Fact Jack! That is the cruel irony
Trump warns that ‘weakness gets you nuclear war’ ahead of Kim Jong Un summit
The president earlier announced the U.S. and North Korea had settled on a time and place for the historic meeting. Politico, By QUINT FORGEY, 05/04/2018
Nuclear deal a challenge for Rouhani as Iran hardliners close in, Parisa Hafezi, ANKARA (Reuters) 4 May 18 – Iran’s hardliners are preparing to bring President Hassan Rouhani to heel if U.S. President Donald Trump scraps Tehran’s nuclear deal with major powers, officials and analysts believe.
Trump has threatened to abrogate the 2015 agreement by not extending sanctions waivers when they expire on May 12, if Britain, France and Germany do not “fix” its “terrible flaws”.
This sets the stage for a resurgence of political infighting within Iran’s complex power structure, Iranian officials said.
Annulment of the accord could tip the balance of power in favor of hardliners looking to constrain the relatively moderate Rouhani’s ability to open up to the West.
While the spotlight is on Trump’s eventual decision there will be a display of unity in Tehran, a senior Iranian official told Reuters, on condition of anonymity.
“But when the crisis is over, hardliners will try to weaken and sideline the president,” the official said.
Nor can the president expect any weakening of Iran’s system of clerical rule as a result of the uncertainty surrounding the nuclear deal, meaning “Rouhani will be in a no-win situation”, said a relative of Khamenei.
For Rouhani the stakes are high. If the deal falls apart, he could become politically vulnerable for promoting the 2015 accord, under which non-nuclear sanctions were lifted in return for Tehran curbing its nuclear program.
“It will also lead to a backlash against the moderates and pro-reformers who backed Rouhani’s detente policy with the West … and any hope for moderation at home in the near future will fizzle out,” said political analyst Hamid Farahvashian.
It is a delicate balance. Supreme leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei knows that Iranians, many of whom took to the streets earlier this year to protest against high food prices, can only take so much economic pressure.
Yes, Iran Lied About Its Nuclear Capabilities. But So Did Israel
Netanyahu’s arrogant theatricals exposed Israel’s lack of current incriminating evidence on Iran – and Israel’s hypocrisy about its own nuclear capabilities, Haaretz, Avner Cohen and Ben McIntosh
If anything, the fact that Iran preserved, archived and sealed away its early work on nuclear weapons development is compelling evidence that Iran is following both the spirit and the letter of the agreement. Indeed, the International Atomic Energy Agency has consistently certified Iran’s full compliance with its provisions. Under the deal, Iran treats its past weapons work as something to be preserved in a historical repository.
On the other hand, one should realize that Iran did not, and will not, “forget” its existing nuclear knowledge. If the deal is to be abandoned, Iran almost certainly will try to resume that work.
The plain truth is that while the nuclear deal, like any deal, is admittedly imperfect in some areas, it is far better than the situation we were in when it was signed, arguably six months from a first Iranian nuclear weapon.
Furthermore, none of Netanyahu’s specific “archival” items are dated. He presented no single item dated later than 2003. He presented no “proof” of any current Iranian incriminating nuclear activities; all the archival evidence is rooted in pre-2003 weaponization activities.
As far back as 2007, the United States issued a National Intelligence Estimate that drew a similar conclusion: Iran had run a dedicated nuclear weapons program, but that program was dismantled or halted in 2003 and Iran was no longer in pursuit of those weaponization activities in a centralized and methodic fashion…..
…. Netanyahu repeatedly told his audience that Iran lied about its past activities and therefore the Iran deal must be abandoned.
Yes, Iranian leaders did lie. Yes, Iranian officials did not provide the IAEA with true and complete information on past “possible military dimensions” of its nuclear program. This is well-known.
SELLING THE SCIENCE OF CLIMATE CHANGE , Climate One, 4 May 18,The scientific consensus is that human activity is cooking the planet and disrupting our economies. Yet many people still don’t believe that climate change will affect them personally. Or they deny that the problem is urgent enough to take action that would disrupt their lifestyles. Why has communicating the facts about climate change to the public been such a challenge?
“Facts don’t work by themselves,” says David Fenton, founder and chairman of Fenton Communications. “Facts only really work when one, they’re embedded in moral narratives. Secondly, facts don’t work unless they’re embedded in stories. And third, the brain only absorbs messages that are simple and that are repeated.”…….
“Part of my job,” he explains, “is to help scientists speak English and acceptable accurate drama.”
Fenton believes in exploiting the findings of cognitive science to deliver otherwise complex messages. “Only campaigns work,” he stresses, “Only the repetition – I’m repeating myself I know – of simple messages changes public opinion and affects the brain.”
Fenton notes that while it’s hard to be optimistic when you hang out with climate scientists, he remains so because the climate movement has never really tried to reach the general public at a scale similar to a national advertising campaign – let alone the disinformation campaign of the fossil fuel industry……. Climate One is presented in association with KQED Public Radio. https://climateone.org/audio/selling-science-climate-change
Donald Trump has told the NRA convention in Dallas that Second Amendment rights ‘will never, ever be under siege’ as long as he remains in the White House.
Jeff Mason and Daniel Trotta President Donald Trump has enthusiastically embraced the National Rifle Association, vowing not to tighten US firearms laws despite suggesting after a Florida school shooting that he would take on the powerful gun-rights group.
At the NRA’s annual convention in Dallas, Trump called again for arming teachers and increasing school security to head off future mass shootings like the one in Parkland, Florida in February that killed 17 people. Such measures are supported by the NRA.
With Republican control of Congress up for grabs in November’s midterm elections, Trump used the NRA platform to return to rhetoric he used in 2016 to excite pro-gun voters, warning that Democrats are determined to take away Americans’ guns.
Trump made no mention of gun-control proposals he tentatively floated in the past, such as raising the age limit for buying rifles. The NRA opposes that and other limits on gun sales as a violation of the right to gun ownership under the Second Amendment to the US Constitution.
Democratic lawmakers generally support tighter gun laws, but specific proposals that they favour, such as universal background checks and a ban on military-style “assault” rifles, would not alter the Second Amendment.
“Your Second Amendment rights are under siege. But they will never, ever be under siege as long as I’m your president,” Trump told the cheering crowd. “We’ve got to get Republicans elected.
“The one thing that stands between Americans and the elimination of our Second Amendment rights has been conservatives in Congress.
The Parkland massacre at Marjory Stoneman Douglas High School on February 14 seemed to have marked a turning point in America’s long-running gun debate, sparking a youth-led movement for tighter gun controls.
Days after the shooting, Trump promised action on gun regulation and at a gathering of state officials, he said of the NRA: “We have to fight them every once in a while.”
But since then, no major new federal gun controls have been imposed, although the administration is pursuing a proposed regulatory ban on “bump stocks,” which enable a semi-automatic rifle to fire a steady stream of bullets. The devices were used in an October 2017 mass shooting in Las Vegas that killed 59 people.
Hitachi requests British PM’s support for nuclear plant construction, (Mainichi Japan)
LONDON (Kyodo)— Hitachi Ltd. on Thursday requested British Prime Minister Theresa May provide support for the company’s nuclear power plant construction operations in Britain amid swelling costs for a project in Wales, according to sources familiar with the matter.
Meeting with May at her office in London, Hitachi Chairman Hiroaki Nakanishi requested more support from the British government, including direct investment, the sources said. ……
In 2016, Japan and Britain signed a memorandum of understanding to closely cooperate in the nuclear field, a move that would help Japanese companies build nuclear reactors in Britain.
Lincoln University 4th May 2018 , Researchers have secured £1.1 million in grant funding to develop
artificial intelligence systems to enable self-learning robots to be
deployed in place of humans to hazardous nuclear sites.
It is estimated that up to £200 billion will be spent on the clean-up and decommissioning
of nuclear waste over the next 100 years.
Now, a team of computer scientists from the University of Lincoln will create machine learning
algorithms to increase capabilities in several crucial areas of nuclear
robotics, including waste handling, cell decommissioning and site
monitoring with mobile robots.
Machine learning is an application of artificial intelligence (AI) which enables systems to collect data and use
it to inform automated decision-making and make improvements based on
experience without being explicitly programmed.
The Lincoln team will create algorithms for vision-guided robot grasping, manipulation and
cutting, mobile robot navigation, and outdoor mapping and navigation. The
aim is to build systems which can use machine learning to adapt to the
unique conditions of nuclear sites, including locations contaminated by
radiation.
The Lincoln project is part of the National Centre for Nuclear
Robotics (NCNR), a multi-disciplinary EPSRC RAI (Robotics and Artificial
Intelligence) Hub led by the University of Birmingham, and also involves
Queen Mary University of London, the University of West England, University
of Bristol, University of Edinburgh, and Lancaster University.
The world’s nuclear energy watchdogs: 4 questions answered, The Conversation, Scott L. Montgomery Lecturer, Jackson School of International Studies, University of Washington, May 4, 2018
North Korea has promised to get rid of its nuclear weapons, but how will the world know if it actually follows through?
There is only one international agency in the world that could verify their compliance, the International Atomic Energy Agency. However, North Korea canceled its membership to the organization in 1994. When the IAEA demanded to inspect certain facilities in North Korea, they backed out and eventually expelled all nuclear inspectors in 2009.
Since then, North Korea has remained outside the IAEA’s jurisdiction. While it isn’t clear whether the agency will be called upon if a deal on denuclearization is reached, IAEA Director General Yukiya Amano has said the agency is prepared to send a team of inspectors should a diplomatic agreement be reached.
So, with that possibility in mind, let’s look at how the agency operates and all the other nuclear energy challenges it faces beyond North Korea.
1. What is the International Atomic Energy Agency?
The IAEA was founded in 1957, inspired by U.S. President Eisenhower’s “Atoms for Peace” speech promoting the peaceful uses of nuclear energy. From the beginning, its task has been to spread and monitor the application of nuclear technology for non-military uses and make sure that such technology is not diverted to build weapons.
…..Headquartered in Vienna, Austria, the agency is a membership organization that reports annually to the United Nations, but is independent of it. Member nations must obey its rules and requirements in order to receive the knowledge and technology it provides.
The agency is best known for its work in two areas. The first is nuclear safety: protecting people and the environment from harmful radiation. The second is nuclear security, which focuses on preventing the spread of nuclear weapons, including threats of nuclear terrorism.
This watchdog role requires determining whether any member country might be developing nuclear weapons – specifically nations that have signed international treaties. For example, the Treaty on the Non-Proliferation of Nuclear Weapons is the world’s most important legally binding agreement for preventing the spread of nuclear weapons. At present, a total of 191 states have joined the treaty. Three nuclear weapons states – Israel, India and Pakistan – have not signed and North Korea withdrew from it in 2003.
The IAEA evaluates compliance with other treaties including those governing nuclear free zones and important safeguard agreements with as many as 181 nations……..
3. How does the agency verify how nuclear material is being used?
Among the more than 2,500 people who staff the IAEA, only about 385 are inspectors. They come from 80 nations and mainly hold backgrounds in physics, chemistry and engineering.
Routine inspections involve verifying whether a member’s report about its nuclear facilities and material is accurate. Depending on the size of the facility, this might take a few hours for one or two people or two weeks for 10 inspectors. They do this in a number of ways, including the collecting of samples of nuclear material, measuring levels of radioactivity, checking plans and blueprints against actual construction, and interviewing officials, engineers and others involved in nuclear work.
Over time, the agency has had to make changes in its inspection processes. For example, before 1997, inspectors were limited to examining only facilities that member states had declared. After discovering that Iraq had lied about the true extent of its nuclear program, the IAEA board of governors approved a protocol to allow inspectors to access undeclared sites that might be involved in nuclear work.
Inspectors have also found themselves in the line of political fire. For example, between 2002 and 2003, the Bush administration wanted evidence that Iraqi President Saddam Hussein had an active nuclear weapons program. U.S. attempts to pressure the agency did not alter IAEA findings that such evidence could not be found.
Similarly, the agency has stood its ground in favor of the Iran nuclear deal and Iran’s compliance in the face of President Trump’s continued criticism of the agreement.
4. What are the main challenges facing the agency?
There are myriad challenges facing the IAEA.
Expanding demands on the agency have come from developing nations with growing economies such as Thailand and Chile that want to use nuclear science in medicine, agriculture and industry. Growth of nuclear power into new areas of the world is bringing concern about the development of weapons and terrorist groups acquiring nuclear material.
North Korea, whose weapons program may or may not be halted by talks with the U.S., has plutonium and uranium that could be sold without international approval or safeguards.
Then there is the Trump administration’s threat to abandon the Iran nuclear deal, a move that would dismiss years of effort by the IAEA to head off an arms race in the region. At the same time, any future need to verify that Iran is not building a weapon would almost certainly rely on IAEA inspectors. Similarly, it seems likely that a deal between the U.S. and North Korea would require the Democratic People’s Republic of Korea to rejoin the agency and have any denuclearization efforts confirmed by it as well.
the US has lost at least six atomic bombs or weapons-grade nuclear material since the Cold War.
Not only that, but the US is responsible for at least 32 documented instances of a nuclear weapons accident, known as a “Broken Arrow” in military lingo. These atomic-grade mishaps can involve an accidental launching or detonation, theft, or loss – yep loss – of a nuclear weapon.
February 13, 1950
The first of these unlikely instances occurred in 1950, less than five years after the first atomic bomb was detonated. In a mock nuclear strike against the Soviet Union, a US B-36 bomber en route from Alaska to Texas began to experience engine trouble. An icy landing and stuttering engine meant the landing was going to be near-impossible, so the crew jettisoned the plane’s Mark 4 nuclear bomb over the Pacific. The crew witnessed a flash, a bang, and a sound wave.
The military claim the mock-up bomb was filled with “just” uranium and TNT but no plutonium, so it wasn’t capable of a nuclear explosion. Nevertheless, the uranium has never been recovered.
March 10, 1956
On March 10, a Boeing B-47 Stratojet set off from MacDill Air Force Base Florida for a non-stop flight to Morocco with “two nuclear capsules” onboard. The jet was scheduled for its second mid-flight refueling over the Mediterranean Sea, but it never made contact. No trace of the jet or the nuclear material was ever found again.
February 5, 1958
In the early hours of February 5, 1958, a B-47 bomber with a 3,400-kilogram (7,500-pound) Mark 15 nuclear bomb on board accidentally collided with an F-86 aircraft during a simulated combat mission. The battered and bruised bomber attempted to land numerous times, but to no avail. Eventually, they made the decision to jettison the bomb into the mouth of the Savannah River near Savannah, Georgia, to make the landing possible. Luckily for them, the plane successfully landed and the bomb did not detonate. However, it has remained “irretrievably lost” to this day.
January 24, 1961
On January 24, 1961, the wing of a B-52 bomber split apart while on an alert mission above Goldsboro, North Carolina. Onboard were two 24-megaton nuclear bombs. One of these successfully deployed its emergency parachute, while the other fell and crashed to the ground. It’s believed the unexploded bomb smashed into farmland around the town, but it has never been recovered. In 2012, North Carolina put up a sign near the supposed crash site to commemorate the incident.
December 5, 1965
An A-4E Skyhawk aircraft loaded with a nuclear weapon rolled off the back off an aircraft carrier, USS Ticonderoga, stationed in the Philippine Sea near Japan. The plane, pilot, and nuclear bomb have never been found.
In 1989, the US eventually admitted their bomb was still laying in the seabed around 128 kilometers (80 miles) from a small Japanese island. Needless to say, the Japanese government and environmental groups were pretty pissed about it.
?, 1968
At some point during the Spring of 1968, the US military lost some kind of nuclear weapon. The Pentagon still keeps information about the incident tightly under wraps. However, some have speculated that the incident refers to the nuclear-powered Scorpion submarine. In May 1968, the attack submarine went missing along with its 99-strong crew in the Atlantic Ocean after being sent on a secret mission to spy on the Soviet navy. This, however, remains conjecture.
How the Manhattan Project’s Nuclear Suburb Stayed Secret, Oak Ridge, Tennessee, once home to 75,000, went up fast and under the radar. But it was built to last, too. Atlas Obscura , BY JESSICA LEIGH HESTER , MAY 03, 2018 “…… Oak Ridge isn’t like most of the country’s other suburbs. The town was conceived and built by the United States government in the early 1940s as base for uranium and plutonium work, as part of the Manhattan Project. As the nuclear effort marched along, the town grew, too. By 1945, a dense suburb had taken shape, home to roughly 75,000 people. At war’s end, Oak Ridge was the fifth-largest city in the state—and all along, it was supposed to be a secret.
…….. the pace of building there was stunning enough, but doing it all under the radar required a little willful blindness. The town didn’t appear on any official maps, and visitors were screened by guards posted at the entrances. Still, at that scale, it couldn’t be truly clandestine. “People saw stuff, certainly,” Moeller says, but probably chose not to wonder too deeply about what was happening there out of a combination of patriotism and ignorance. Moeller speculates that those who saw workers and supplies streaming into the site may have sensed that asking too many questions would have been un-American. The idea was, “it’s not my business; it’s for the war effort,” he says. “There was a much greater spirit of national unity than we could even fathom now.”
Billboards were installed all over town to remind workers to keep their mouths shut about their work, even though most workers knew very little about the project’s true scope.
Similar “secret cities” were built in other parts of the country, such as Los Alamos, New Mexico, and Hanford, Washington, home to 125,000. Designers of these towns had additional tactics to obscure specifics. In Los Alamos and Hanford, sometimes everyone was given the same mailing address. At Oak Ridge, street addresses were designed to be confusing to outsiders. Bus routes might be called X-10 or K-25 or Y-12, in reference to the factories they led to, while dorms had simple names such as M1, M2, and M3. If you didn’t already know where you were trying to go, none of it would make sense. “There weren’t any signs on buildings, just numbers, codes names, and numbers,” Wilcox recalled. The town was full of such ciphers, and even employees didn’t know how to decode them all. ……https://www.atlasobscura.com/articles/how-to-build-secret-nuclear-city
nuclear-news 