It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

NEWS: US Nuclear Plants Safer Than Ever From Terror Attack

page: 1
0

log in

join
share:

posted on Mar, 15 2005 @ 05:34 PM
link   
US nuclear power plants are now claimed to be safer than ever from terrorist attacks. They are now apparently safe from a suicide aircraft crash which according to the US Nuclear Regulatory Commission's chairman 'would not pose a significant threat'. This news broke nearly four years after 9/11, the NRC chairman Nils Diaz claims that both nuclear security and safety are better than they have ever been, and are both getting better.
 



www.spacewar.com
"What we have done in the last three and a half years is to make it very difficult for anyone to find ways to attempt acts of radiological sabotage, even more difficult to succeed in doing real harm, and to be very prepared to protect our people in the very unlikely event of radiological release," he said.

Protective barriers have been moved farther away from nuclear reactors, the number of guards has increased and towers have been installed to shoot potential intruders, Diaz said at a news conference here.

"We have hardened both the security and the safety of the power plants," he said.

"We found that general aviation, in general, is not a significant threat to a nuclear power plant," Diaz said, adding that power plants are even safe from a helicopter packed with explosives.



Please visit the link provided for the complete story.


My question is why has is taken so long for these measures to be incorporated? Surely straight after 9/11 people would be thinking that an airplane could be hijacked and used to crash into a nuclear power plant, which would trigger a radiological disaster. Protective barriers and guards have been installed at these nuclear reactors; towers have also been installed to shoot potential intruders. This doesn’t seem like it would be very efficient in stopping a Boeing 747 crashing into the plant, so how have they really improved the safety?

Related News Links:
www.spacewar.com




posted on Mar, 15 2005 @ 05:43 PM
link   
I actually have to laugh at this one unfortunately considering this other story that came out this morning Illegals at power plant prompt call for legislation

Here is a quick quote from the news story:



Illegal aliens using false Social Security numbers were able to enter and work as contract painters at a power plant in Florida, including work near one nuclear reactor.



posted on Mar, 15 2005 @ 05:47 PM
link   
Uhm...no, not buying it. It's a cover up for wasted/misappropriated funds. The nuke plants are just as insecure as always, because they rely on poorly trained guards.

www.abovetopsecret.com...

[edit on 15-3-2005 by WyrdeOne]



posted on Mar, 15 2005 @ 06:38 PM
link   
The concrete structure housing the reactor is, in itself, strong enough to withstand a hit by a 911 style attack. The reason for the thick concrete is to keep the Neutron radiation from getting out of the reactor building during normal operations.

The problem would be the systems which are in the main structure of the plant...large steam lines to drive the turbines, emergency shut down systems, even the turbines themselves could wreak havoc if they ever 'jumped' their restraints.

But that's only local ...the steam is not contaminated, nor are the flying turbine parts...the reactor, still intact would go through an automatic shutdown, even if the control room took the direct hit.

In my experience, I think the nukes are MUCH better protected by local AF bases, a younger and improved security (although the illegal immigrant getting work in one makes me wonder), I know that local police and the regular army are training together regularly with the security forces.

I could go into more points about how a nuke always was kinda impervious to a 747 smacking into it. As well as being built earthquake proof, mainly because of those frisky turbines...but I never could figure out why they built one on an active fault line...maybe just want to see what it'd take.




[edit on 15-3-2005 by masqua]



new topics

top topics
 
0

log in

join