Skip to main content

Senator Schumer on Nuclear Plant Security

Senator Charles Schumer (D-N.Y.) has completed a report card on Homeland Security and was on CNN this morning to talk about it. Here's the passage that caught our attention (online link not yet available):
CNN 09/05/06 09:17:50: ...and this is -- you know when you think about how much effort the administration is put into the war on terror overseas, and then how little effort and resources in particular they put into the war at home. any basketball coach will tell you need a good offense and a good defense. this is a down the middle report. we give them credit in aviation Security and Nuclear plant Security...
This isn't the only instance when an independent study had positive things to say about nuclear plant security. Click here for a list. And click here for a link to the complete interview -- get it fast as the link may only work temporarily. As soon as we have an online reference to Schumer's report, we'll pass it along.

Technorati tags: , , , ,


Gunter said…
How curious that there is no aviation security for nuclear power plants, however.

According to a June 1982 Argonne National Laboratory report no US reactors were designed nor constructed to withstand aircraft collisions. The federal lab itself did not even analyze deliberate attack. However, ANL concluded that the hazard of collision, penetration, concussion, explosion and fire can have severe consequences with a possible core melt accident. Moreover, the severe accident could cascade from aircraft impact onsite other than the containment itself.

While some gains have been made on commercial airline security, general aviation aircraft an increasingly serious concern. A private aircraft can deliver a serious threat to safe operations of nucleasr reactors and no spent fuel pools are designed to withstand a deliberate suicidal attack with a fuel and explosive laden aircraft.

Its time to call an end to "faith based security" and for the industry to own up to the unique and real costs of security for nuclear power plants.

Anonymous said…
Gunter--the 1982 Argonne report on aircraft potentially damaging a nuclear power plant has been widely debunked and totally contradicted by the NRC since. Yet it continues to be used time and again by the anti-nuke zealots. It was flawed science then, and it flawed science now.

Popular posts from this blog

A Billion Miles Under Nuclear Energy (Updated)

And the winner is…Cassini-Huygens, in triple overtime.

The spaceship conceived in 1982 and launched fifteen years later, will crash into Saturn on September 15, after a mission of 19 years and 355 days, powered by the audacity and technical prowess of scientists and engineers from 17 different countries, and 72 pounds of plutonium.

The mission was so successful that it was extended three times; it was intended to last only until 2008.

Since April, the ship has been continuing to orbit Saturn, swinging through the 1,500-mile gap between the planet and its rings, an area not previously explored. This is a good maneuver for a spaceship nearing the end of its mission, since colliding with a rock could end things early.

Cassini will dive a little deeper and plunge toward Saturn’s surface, where it will transmit data until it burns up in the planet’s atmosphere. The radio signal will arrive here early Friday morning, Eastern time. A NASA video explains.

In the years since Cassini has launc…

How Nanomaterials Can Make Nuclear Reactors Safer and More Efficient

The following is a guest post from Matt Wald, senior communications advisor at NEI. Follow Matt on Twitter at @MattLWald.

From the batteries in our cell phones to the clothes on our backs, "nanomaterials" that are designed molecule by molecule are working their way into our economy and our lives. Now there’s some promising work on new materials for nuclear reactors.

Reactors are a tough environment. The sub atomic particles that sustain the chain reaction, neutrons, are great for splitting additional uranium atoms, but not all of them hit a uranium atom; some of them end up in various metal components of the reactor. The metal is usually a crystalline structure, meaning it is as orderly as a ladder or a sheet of graph paper, but the neutrons rearrange the atoms, leaving some infinitesimal voids in the structure and some areas of extra density. The components literally grow, getting longer and thicker. The phenomenon is well understood and designers compensate for it with a …

Missing the Point about Pennsylvania’s Nuclear Plants

A group that includes oil and gas companies in Pennsylvania released a study on Monday that argues that twenty years ago, planners underestimated the value of nuclear plants in the electricity market. According to the group, that means the state should now let the plants close.


The question confronting the state now isn’t what the companies that owned the reactors at the time of de-regulation got or didn’t get. It’s not a question of whether they were profitable in the '80s, '90s and '00s. It’s about now. Business works by looking at the present and making projections about the future.

Is losing the nuclear plants what’s best for the state going forward?

Pennsylvania needs clean air. It needs jobs. And it needs protection against over-reliance on a single fuel source.

What the reactors need is recognition of all the value they provide. The electricity market is depressed, and if electricity is treated as a simple commodity, with no regard for its benefit to clean air o…