• Format
  • Publications (documents)
• Type
  • Text
• Source institution
  • Western Carolina University
• Identifier
  • HL_WesternCarolinian_1975-10-16_Vol41_No14_05

THURSDAY. OCTOBER 16, 1975 Nuclear reactor's poisons pollute our environment THE WESTERN CAROLINIAN Page 5 (Editor's note: This is the second part of a weekly column alerting people to facts and dangers of nuclear energy. Information is courtesy of Senator Mike Greenel, Alaska.) It is in the reactor that nuclear fuel is made to "go critical" and sustain a fission chain reaction. It is here that the radioactive poisons are produced as heat and electricity are generated. Although reactors are only one of several places where dangerous radiation can escape into our environment, much of the nuclear controversy has centered on these plants. CATASTROPHIC ACCIDENT The worst possible accident at a nuclear reactor is the fuel meltdown. In normal operation, uranium fuel rods are kept at manageable temperatures by circulating a coolant, usually water, through the reactor vessel. If this coolant is lost, the reactor can be "scrammed"--that is, the fissioning process can be stopped. But radioactive wastes generate heat even when the fissioning has ceased, and without the coolant, the fuel can become hot enough to melt through the reactor vessel and into the earth. Scientists have called this the "China syndrome." About 20 per cent of the reactor wastes are in gaseous form, and if these were to escape the reactor building in a meltdown, they could travel in an invisible but lethal radioactive cloud. Particles of non-gaseous wastes might also be released, notably strontium and cesium. The extent of damage would depend on the kind and amount of radioactive material released and on the weather. In the worst accident, the meltdown would take place just prior to refueling, when the largest amount of waste had accumulated; and a gentle wind would be blowing in the direction of a populated area, while a temperature inversion kept the radioactive cloud near the ground. In 1956, the AEC made a study of the possible consequences of such an accident and found that 3,400 persons might be killed, 43,000 injured, with property damages of S7 billion. The study was updated in 1965 as power reactors were becoming larger. The new report found that 45,000 might be killed, with property damage of 817 billion to as high as S280 billion. The study said an area the size of Pennsylvania could be contaminated, (This report was suppressed until 1973 when AEC was threatened with a Freedom of Information suit.) Several partial fuel meltdowns have taken place, and although three reactor workers were killed in one accident in 1961 no member of the public is known to have been injured. In 1965, however, a partial fuel meltdown occurred at the experimental Fermi 1 breeder reactor near Detroit. A University of Michigan study later found that had radioactivity been released from Fermi 1, as many as 133,000 persons could have been killed. In short, a reactor catastrophe could inflict the worst peacetime damage in history. Critics maintain that even if the chances of reactor accident are lower than the chances of other industrial accident, the possible consequences are so great that the nuclear option is unacceptable. Dr. Hannes Alfven, Nobel 1 laureate in physics, wrote in 1972: "We are facing risks the nature of which we have never before experienced. The consequences of nuclear catastrophes are so terrible that the risks which are considered to be normal are unacceptable in the field," Dr. Edward Teller has called this the "zero- infinity" dilemma: even if the chance ofaccident approaches zero, society should think carefully about consequences which could be so devastating. Dr. Teller advocated buildingnuclear plants under ground. Energy, environment workshop conducted ECCS A separate debate has taken place over the Emergency Core Cooling System (ECCS), which is meant to prevent catastrophe in a loss-of-coolant accident. The ECCS is meant to operate instantly if reactor coolant is lost, preventing fuel melting and steam explosions which could scatter radioactive poisons, The system has never been tested in a full-scale loss-of-coolant situation, and critics say it is not reliable. The ECCS, poven only by computer models, failed six out os six semi-sclae tests. The emergency coolant never reached the model reactor core. Testing on a full-scale reactor is to take place at a site in Idaho, but the program is almost ten years behind schedule, even though AEC called it the "largest and most vital" safet> research to be performed. Reactors which rely on ECCS back-ups have continued to be licensed while the testing remained delayed. Dr. Henry Kendall, phxsics professor at MIT, testified in 1973 on the importance of the ECCS "The hazard is losing control, and you have about one minute when the emergency systems have to get in there and exert control before the accident slips be\ond your grasp and proceeds to meltdown." Another dispute concerns the reactor vessel itself. The AEC claimed it would be impossible for the vessel to rupture, but others -- including British government scientists -- aren't so sure. They have pointed rut, among other things, that radiation can make maial increasingly brittle. If the reactor vessel can burst, the release of radioactivity would have to be considered a more likely possibility, since the ECCS might be of no use in such a situation and, in the words of Peter Morris of the AEC, no design is available for a building "which could withstand the consequences of pressure vessel failure," PROBABILITY The AEC's last study of reactor safety was issued in 1974. It is commonly known as the Rasmussen Report, named after the director of the study, Norman Rasmussen of MIT. This study claimed that the chances of catastrophic accident were "vanishingly" small: one in a billion per reactor each year. As soon as the report was issued, it became a new source of contention in the nuclear debate. Critics, especially the Union of Concerned Scientists and the Sierra Club, identified a variety of weaknesses in the study: —The analytical method was questionable. The "fault-tree" analysis used by Rasmussen had been developed, and later discredited, by the Defense Department. The method proved unsatisfactory in predicting failures in the space program. It requires that all accident sequences be known. According to testimony before the California Assembly, the Rasmussen group tied a variety of analytical techniques and may have chosen the one that ga\e the desired results. —The report underestimated the waste that would accumulate in a large reactor, —Human error and malice were not accounted for, even though a large number of known incidents have been caused bv human rather than machine failure. In addition, unrealistic assumptions were made about evacuation. CENSORSHIP The debate over the ECCS led to hearings that revealed another problem: the AEC was censoring its own safet> researchers and curtailing safety work. From its inception, the AEC was Charged with promoting the nuclear Industry as well as regulating it. Safety research money was filtered through the agency's promotional arm. Researchers said their projects were referred to industry executives, who were unhappv with high safet\ expenses and who did not want to arouse public suspicion of nuclear safety. EVACUATION Another issue of growing importance concerns evacuation in the event of a catastrophic accident. \n evacuation plan is required for each plant, but the plans usually are not publicized. Sometimes it is difficult even to locate the plans, and in some other instances, more than one plan exists, giving contradictory instructions. In California, the Nuclear Safeguards Initiative would require that evacuation plans be publicized. In other states, nuclear opponents have released balloons at reactor sites to show that radioactivity could drift beyond the areas where evacuation plans are read}. vi'VT WF.EK: INSURANCE The "Citizens' Workshops on Energy and the Environment", now in the third year, have been conducted to give the American public a better perspective on the energy problems facing us. Dr, T. W. Richardson, Ass't, Professor ofChem- istry, North Georgia College, Dahlonega, Ga., is involved as a researcher for the Energy- Research and Development Administration and will be the guest speaker for the October program meeting of the WENOCA group of the Sierra Club at Blue Ridge Technical Institute Auditorium in Hendersonville, Wednesday, October 29th at 7:30 p.m. His subject will be: "Energy Environment Simulator," An analog computer developed by the Oak Ridge Associated U- niversities, Oak Ridge, TN., has been made available to educate citizens in the need for and difficulty informualtingen- ergj policy. With this computer, Dr. Richardson will allow the audience to participate in an energy use simulation which demonstrates pointedly just how long or short a time we have to solve our problems. During the simulation, the audience is required to find a balance between energy sources and energy demands.. At the same time allowances for environmental impact such as pollution and qualitv of life must be made, The results of the energy-environment simulation may be surprising to many peo ple and everyone should learn that solutions are not easy. The program is open to the public and all interested persons are cordially invited to attend. Students needed by SGA Student representatives are needed bv SGA to serve on policy and recommendation making committees of the Faculty-Administration Senate. Openings exist on the following committees: Institutional affairs, academic affairs, admissions, library, teacher education council, student affairs, business affairs, athletics, healthy and safety, long range planning and traffic, safety and security, Mike (Painter) Killam explained, "this is an excellent way for the students to voice their opinions directly to the faculty and administration. We really need to have good student representation." Interested persons should go by the SGA office today from 1 p.m. to 5 p,m. or call 299 or 405. Ward explains tickets worth Assistant Food Service Director Cecil Ward reported Wednesday that commuter meal tickets are worth Si,25 at the evening meal, that they state on the backs what each ticket is woth at lunch Monday through Saturday, and that he informs students buying commuter meal tickets what they are worth. Ward said that the commuter ticket program was initiated "some time ago upon the request of the Student Senate," He said that at that time the tickets were exclusively used for lunch, Monday through Saturday, which is one meat entree, two vegetables, a drink and a dessert. Since then, he said students, have had extra tickets which thej did not use for lunch, so Food Services began honoring them recently for any breakfast, and for Si,25 at dinner. Ward continued to say that some commuting students use commuter tickets because they would rather risk them than risk carrying around money, but according to Ward, if one loses a meal ticket, commuter or regular, it is like losing the money he spent on it. The cafeterias cannot feasibly give refunds for lost or stolen tickets. Ward concluded by again stressing the fact that commuter tickets are for commuters who eat "one meal a day on campus," lunch, and that Food Services at WCU extended the "privilege" of honoring the tickets at breakfast and dinner purely for the sake of the com muting student. He added that those commuting students wishing to eat three meals a day on campus would be "better off buying a regular meal ticket," Students honored Seventeen students have been initiated into the Western Carolina University Chapter of Phi Kappa Phi national honor society, They are Susan Sadler Wei- din and Patricia Ellen Liles Hutchinson of Cullowhee; Betty Hyatt Cooper and Sharon Grant Trantham of Asheville; Deborah Rosetta Moire of Hudson; Ruth Henderson Barker of New Bern; David Roy Shumate of North Wilkesboro; Susan Andrew Parrott of Kinston; Daniel Henry Holder and James Larry Stockton of Candler; Nancy Siler Gentry of Franklin; Mary Ann Berryhill Patterson of Hendersonville; Beverly Sanders Ash- more of Tryon; Stanley Wade DeJarnett of Marietta, Ga.; Victoria Swoope Grey of Moore Haven, Fla,; James H. Lindsay Jr, of Charleston, SC; and Ronald L. Rusnak of Petersburg, Va. Phi Kappa Phi is the oldest campus-wide scholastic organization in the U„S, To be eligible for membership, students must rank in the upper tenth of their class and have a quality point ratio of 3,5 or above,

The Western Carolinian is Western Carolina University's student-run newspaper. The paper was published as the Cullowhee Yodel from 1924 to 1931 before changing its name to The Western Carolinian in 1933.

• Creator
  • Western Carolina University
• Format
  • Publications (documents)
• Type
  • Text
• Date
  • Date original: 1975-10-16;
  • Date digitized: 2017-12-13
• Extent
  • Dimension: 11.5" x 11"
  • Pages: 8 pages
• Subject - Topic
  • College student newspapers and periodicals
  • Cullowhee (N.C.) -- Newspapers
  • Universities and colleges -- North Carolina -- Cullowhee -- Newspapers
• Location
  • Jackson County (N.C.)
  • Cullowhee (N.C.)
• Source institution
  • Western Carolina University
• Source Collection
  • WCU Students Newspapers Collection
• Identifier
  • HL_WesternCarolinian_1975-10-16_Vol41_No14
• Repository
  • Western Carolina University Hunter Library