- Joined
- Sep 30, 2005
- Messages
- 18,264
- Reaction score
- 6,649
- Location
- Utah
- Gender
- Male
- Political Leaning
- Moderate
as for informing you, I hope you can be willing to learn...the year I spent in Nuclear Power School was academically the hardest thing I have ever done. You have to test very well for the recruiters just to get into the school and you have to have an "A" school in electronics, or electrical or mechanical trades first. Then nuke school is balls to the wall saturation training.... Class all day 5 days a week, lots of homework, math,physics, chemistry, thermodynamics, metallurgy, radiation types and their effect on the human body, etc. is the first half, then you go to prototype training (12 hours a day shift work, 7 days, a day off, 7 swings, 2 days off, 7 mids, 5 days off) at an operating reactor and study it with the goal of understanding (and drawing from memory) all the systems that allow us to operate them safely, and more. Mine was in 1966, not sure what they do now, but I suspect it hasn't changed much. after all that, you get to go to a ship and pretty much repeat the prototype school training. They don't let just anybody operate their reactors.Greetings UtahBill! I thank you for taking the time to respond to my initial post.
While there has not been an attack on a nuclear power plant in our country (thankfully), I am sure that we can agree on the point that just because something has not happened in the past does not mean that it cannot happen in the future. Also, I do agree that there are easier ways to go about acts of terrorism (unfortunately, we have seen it happen in our lifetimes); however, I am sure that you would agree that this does not prevent a nuclear power plant from becoming a potential target.
Without going too far off topic from the original poll question, I would like to link below a report from the Congressional Research Service, dated August of this year. This report was created by Mark Holt and Anthony Andrews.
Nuclear Power Plant Security and Vulnerabilities
A couple of statements taken from the summary at the beginning of the report should indicate its value to our discussion:
“More than a decade after the 9/11 attacks, security at nuclear plants remains an important concern.”
“During the 136 inspections, 10 mock attacks resulted in the simulated destruction of complete target sets, indicating inadequate protection against the DBT (Design Basis Threat)…”
“Nuclear power plant vulnerability to deliberate aircraft crashes has been a continuing issue.”
“Other ongoing nuclear plant security issues include the vulnerability of spent fuel pools, which hold highly radioactive nuclear fuel after its removal from the reactor, standards for nuclear plant security personnel, and nuclear plant emergency planning.”
While this is just a single government report on the issue, there are many other reports (governmental and otherwise) out there that do agree with concerns presented here.
I appreciate your candor, and do not conclude that it is some form of argumentum ad hominem. One of the reasons that I registered here at Debate Politics was to challenge my beliefs about subjects and to learn from others. Perhaps you would be kind enough to explain a bit about where I am misinformed, or at the least direct me to sources that may explain the issues clearer to me?
In any event, I hope that you enjoy the rest of the holiday weekend, and look forward to a reply at your convenience!
I would expect you to read and try to learn, but there is no way I can duplicate for you what the Navy taught me.
Last edited: