Got to hand it to Greenpeace.

They do emotionally manipulative propoganda really well. I suspect any hijacked plane anywhere near a nuclear power station in the UK would be shot down. I also note that attacks get made on other energy installations, albeit with less devastating consequences.

I'm no nuclear advocate, but blantantly manipulative ploys like this *really* annoy me, and deserve to backfire. Next straw man please.

1 Comments:

James, I found this comment of yours on RadDecision quite relevant...

"There's been a lot in the news lately about the vulnerability of spent fuel while still in the fuel pool. (Picture a jet liner smacking into the building.) While the reactor itself is surrounded by lots and lots of steel and concrete, the fuel pool's protection is not nearly so robust. I don't know the details regarding how robust the pools at various plants are, and this is clearly a valid issue that needs to be addressed. One point to be made, however, is that a fuel pool is a very small target for the very large plane, travelling at high speed, that is likely required to do some real catastrophic damage. It's a much smaller target than the World Trade Center or the Pentagon. Same for shoulder-fired missles - and its hard to picture such a weapon being both portable and powerful enough to really do some damage to either a fuel pool or a shipping cask - though I admit my missile technology knowledge isn't cutting edge."

By  John Connors, at 10:07 pm  

Post a Comment