Object intentionally dropped onto nuclear reactor from the air — “Plants are both vulnerable and unprotected from threats”

Published: May 22nd, 2013 at 8:54 am ET
By
Email Article Email Article
29 comments


Title: STOCKHOLM: Greenpeace drops item on Swedish reactor from glider to make point
Source: DPA
Author: LENNART SIMONSSON
Date: May 21, 2013

[...] Greenpeace on Tuesday said it flew a paraglider over a nuclear reactor building in south-western Sweden and dropped an item upon it from the air to show how vulnerable the facilities were.

“As evidenced by the new stress test, Swedish nuclear power plants are both vulnerable and unprotected from threats – antagonistic or accidental – from the air,” Annika Jacobson, head of Greenpeace in Sweden.

The motorized paraglider dropped an item attached to balloons onto the roof of one of the four reactors at Ringhals [...]

[...] The item weighed about a kilogram [...]

Full report here

Published: May 22nd, 2013 at 8:54 am ET
By
Email Article Email Article
29 comments

Related Posts

  1. Fire hits nuclear plant — Blaze started hours after reactor was restarted #Ringhals #Sweden June 12, 2013
  2. Nuclear Chief: Belgium reactor could have ’1,000s of cracks’ — Same as used at U.S. plants — Suggests permanent closure all but certain August 21, 2012
  3. Fire in reactor containment at Swedish nuke plant blamed on Vacuum cleaner — Over $250 Million in losses November 14, 2011
  4. Photo: Bomb squad called in after explosive device found near nuclear reactor March 3, 2013
  5. Photo: “Fire broke out at nuclear reactor” — “Plumes of black smoke could be seen from a considerable distance” June 7, 2013

29 comments to Object intentionally dropped onto nuclear reactor from the air — “Plants are both vulnerable and unprotected from threats”

  • Proton

    I wonder which surplus sale Greenpeace buys their unmanned drones from…


    Report comment

  • AGreenRoad AGreenRoad

    Atucha Nuclear Reactor Taken Over By Terrorists; via @AGreenRoad
    http://agreenroad.blogspot.com/2012/04/atucha-nuclear-reactor-taken-over-by.html

    Documentary Movie; "Nuclear Ginza" – Japanese Nuclear Industry Horrors via @AGreenRoad
    http://agreenroad.blogspot.com/2012/10/documentary-movie-nuclear-ginza.html


    Report comment

  • Heart of the Rose Heart of the Rose

    What is going to happen is security is going to be increased..those opposed..portrayed more radical.
    Security.. is only part of safety.
    They don't want to talk about the rest.


    Report comment

  • weeman

    Although these monstrosities of mankind are robustly made, you can not build a reactor to withstand all the variables manmade or natural and I can think of many ways a reactor can melt down that is beyond the control of mankind.
    Some could be rectified but no way, that costs money and you know and I know most of these death machines are at the end of there life span and they are going to run them into the ground with band aid fixes, ie. the pools are full and no intention of dry cask in a uncontained building, that should put it into perspective for you, bastards are playing with Armageddon and they are not good at this game.
    We do not require power produced by reactors, we can live without but we may not live to much longer if we continue down this path of boiling water.
    Suicide is no solution, cause that is what they are up to Russian roulette, are you game cause I am not.


    Report comment

  • An unbelievable statement.

    1. Naive?
    2. Not informed?
    3. Deception?
    4. Very misleading?

    "However Steve Kerekes, SPOKESMAN for the Nuclear Energy Institute, dismissed the possibility as 'completely speculative', and points to a 2002 study which found that U.S. nuclear containment structures can withstand even a crash from a commercial airliner." – from article

    However… IMO
    IF the plane/bomb hits the spent fuel pool(s) it really won't matter that the reactor's containment withstood the crash.

    IF backup and electrical systems are damaged it could lead to catastrophic failures which we now know can cause a 'containment' to breach. (ie… Fukushima x3)

    I think that's more the reality.


    Report comment

    • m a x l i

      @ChasAha, your citation is from the article Lion76 linked to, not the original ENENEWS article – two similar Greenpeace air "attacks" on nuclear power plants, one in Sweden, one in France.

      I think you are correct about the spent fuel pool, the backup and electrical systems and so on. Additionally the burning kerosine would do some damage to those systems, no matter if the containment could withstand the hefty impact.

      That statement you cited is not naive or uninformed, it is only the usual pathological lying of the pukers (abbreviation of "pro-nukers"). A nuclear power plant is, like every technical system, comparable to a chain of links – some strong and some weak. We know a chain rips apart always at the weakest link. The pukers have a habit of pointing their finger at the strongest link and saying: "Look how strong this is, this chain can never fall apart."


      Report comment

  • combomelt combomelt

    The paraglider flew by and left a little 2lb package of dogdoo on the RCB which was attached to weakly filled helium balloons. Is this guy crazy?? "He could have collapsed the whole damn building!!!?? Greenpeace is sooo irresposible sometimes, they have 0-cred left,0, and by endangering the world with this stunt, they have shown their true colors." is how the pronukes will spin this protest.


    Report comment

  • Sickputer

    "However Steve Kerekes, spokesman for the Nuclear Energy Institute, dismissed the possibility as 'completely speculative', and points to a 2002 study which found that U.S. nuclear containment structures can withstand even a crash from a commercial airliner."

    SP: Unfortunately they only have this strong layer of concrete and steel to protect fissile fuel in the containment vessel.

    Used fuel rods are dangerous for 10,000 years and sit in steel-line swimming pools with a flimsy Mes-Tex roof:

    "The spent fuel pools in boiling-water reactors are located only within the secondary containment of the reactor—the reactor building—and not within the more robust primary containment that is designed to keep radiation released from the reactor vessel during an emergency event from escaping into the environment. Thus, any radiation released from a spent fuel pool is more likely to reach the outside environment than is radiation released from the reactor core. Moreover, because it is outside the primary containment, the spent fuel pool is more vulnerable than the reactor core to certain terrorist attacks like deliberate aircraft crashes."

    http://m.ucsusa.org/nuclear_power/nuclear_power_risk/safety/safer-storage-of-spent-fuel.html


    Report comment

  • combomelt combomelt

    Who are they kidding, every npp is vulnerable to a host of threats from sea, land and air. Gimmee a freakin break! someones gotta do a stunt like this to even attempt to make the point to a world full of idiocracy citizens?
    What other conclusion can be reached other than they are vulnerable, and as such vulnerability exists, we must ask why. Why, because from the air in a jet, the npp is a huge, huge HUGE target! Sitting isolated from other developments, they scream, please fly into me if you are a maniac. A npp doesnt have any radar, or defensive automated weaponry. Like the Penn plant recently, the security guard was fired upon in his jeep far from the plant. Good sec-ops over there! lol Theres no "iron dome" for u.s. npps, or any other plants for that matter. (well maybe a few around the world)
    Considering what we have seen from 9/11 buildings and fully fueled jets crashing into them, does anyone really think a building like any of the 6 reactor buildings at daiichi, or the 3 reactor buildings at SONGS, where 2 of the reactor domes are 7 feet thick, would be intact after a new Boeing 747-8 or Airbus A380 comes screaming in after topping off at JohnWayne Airport about 25 miles to the north? There is NO npp that can withstand an impact from a common passenger jet.


    Report comment

  • Cisco Cisco

    Based on several news articles and public discussion, there's a group of mechanical engineers and heavy equipment experts that doubt all emergency generators in place could perform long term with the hard startups that are required to immediately supply electric to the emergency pumps. From start to full bore in seconds is what's required.

    If stress tests were run against this prerequisite, I suspect there'd be a lot of fails. That's a show stopper?


    Report comment

    • Fred

      Actually, instantaneous power is applied from 4 hour battery banks (US, 8 hours outside US). That gives you 4 hours to get the generators up and running and synchronized, which only takes a few minutes. The scrammed reactor needs the pumps after a few hours to refill the cooling water and the spent fuel pools will take days to boil off before they become dangerously overheated. That's what Fukushima's blasts represent….it was days before they blew up.


      Report comment

  • WindorSolarPlease

    ALL nuclear power plants are both vulnerable and unprotected from threats. They are dangerous, and uncontrollable

    ~World closure of Nuclear Plants~


    Report comment

  • m a x l i

    "Tommy Nyman of the Halland County police told dpa an initial investigation centered on whether the object dropped from the paraglider could have posed danger to someone on the ground."

    Now, while police are in the area anyway, it would be a good time to start an investigation whether the nuclear power plant could pose a danger to someone on the ground. Why do they always keep themselves busy with the petty criminals and look the other way when big, organised crime is jumping into their face?


    Report comment

  • TheBigPicture TheBigPicture

    Meltdowns are always a surprise and caused by something new each time, as proven by every meltdown that has occurred to date. The concept of man controlling fission didn't work.


    Report comment

  • Lion76 Lion76

    Germany is the only country who took an appropriate response. I bought a German car soon after to show my support. I hope Germany is rewarded for their bold and intelligent decision making in the long run.

    The country I was born in no longer feels like "home" and that's pretty sad but it isn't because of anything that "I" did to change that, I'm still the same person. It's the country I live in that changed. Acting like petulant children and arrogant ignorance–nothing to find respect in about that. This country has rested on its laurels since WW2 and the "gimmick" has worn thin. I hate to say I feel this way but if anyone has learned anything from my posts, I wear my heart on my sleeve most of the time. Since 2001 things have really been "embarrassing" to say the least.


    Report comment

  • Flapdoodle Flapdoodle

    If terrorists really wanted to sabotage the nuke industry, they would only have to blow up the duct tape factories.


    Report comment

  • CB CB

    Duct tape has a half-life of 6 months when exposed to various enviormental weather conditions. Source ~ CB


    Report comment

  • ToBeExpected ToBeExpected

    What I always find fascinating and somewhat nincompoop'ish, is that someone (apologies to Enews… ) would write online, for all to see, how exactly to compromise a nuclear power plant of all things – ? The folks who would do this dastardly deed only need to trawl the Internet to come up with ideas … and just as killers copy cat the movies and their sick content, someone will copy cat Greenpeacs content and hey… everybody's up in arms at… errr… why has this happened?

    Doesn't anyone see the senseless of this anymore..?? Just tell the criminals how to do their jobs….now that's the ticket!


    Report comment

    • Lion76 Lion76

      it doesn't take a genius to figure this stuff out.

      terrorists have thought of flying planes into nuke plants for decades now.

      not everyone is so "clueless" as you want to believe they are. maybe you've heard of things like the 'anarchist cookbook' which have been around for decades and have plenty of information in them to "aid terrorists" they don't need help. It's simple. Drain the water supply or cut power to nuke plant, and BOOM. Einstein level logic not needed for this.


      Report comment

    • 16Penny 16Penny

      If nuclear technology is so safe and plant designs are so safe, what's the problem? These are obstacles that should have been overcome before the plants were built, during the design and feasibility stages. Same as their susceptibility to natural disasters. Now we find ourselves fighting just to get them to filter radioactive particles out of steam emissions.

      Unsafe is unsafe weather you want us to discuss it or not. Nuclear power is unsafe. Period. Not talking about it will make it better just about as well as smiling will prevent radiation poisoning. Go back to the talking points and pick a different thread, that one os weak and tired.


      Report comment

  • ftlt

    Already on Eco Terrorist lists everywhere..

    Greenpeace with this nuclear first strike has now have joined the list of nuclear terror rogue states and groups…

    HAHAHAHAHA… If not so sad..

    We need to get the BEAM out of our eye… Not the mote in others..


    Report comment

You must be logged in to post a comment.