[net.politics] Containment domes & Grapite Reactors

mvs@meccts.UUCP (Michael V. Stein) (07/16/86)

In article <858@whuts.UUCP> orb@whuts.UUCP (SEVENER) writes:
>This is not true.  There are 8 nuclear plants operated by the Dept.
>of Energy in order to make nuclear materials for nuclear weapons which
>have no containment domes.  These plants also are graphite core
>reactors exactly like the one at Chernobyl.

1.  I know of only two US graphite plants.   There is the one at Fort
    St.Vain in Colorado. (It is thorium fueled, helium cooled and
    graphite moderated. I am not even sure this is used for plutonium
    production.)  The other one is at Hanford.  Where are the other
    six?

2.  Neither of these plants is very similar to Chernobyl.  The Fort
    St. Vain plant has 9 to 14 ft pressurized concrete vessel and by
    using helium I get the impression that some scientists think this
    might even be  safer then PWR. (Anyone know much about this?)

    The Hanford plant is different then Chernobyl in a number of
    ways.  The Hanford facility has concrete surrounding the core. It 
    uses mettalic uranium which is better able to conduct heat.  It has a
    secondary set of pipes for ECS and on fuel failure the reactor
    will automatically shut down.  Chernobyl had none of these
    features from what I can tell.   (Indeed Chernobyl wasn't even
    shut down during refueling.)  Chernobyl also generated 18 times 
    more power then the reactor at Hanford.

3.  Of course this whole debate is somewhat irrellavent.  The point of
   debate is the safety of commercial nuclear power - not weapons making.
-- 
Michael V. Stein
Minnesota Educational Computing Corporation - Technical Services

UUCP	ihnp4!dicome!meccts!mvs