Go Back   IceInSpace > General Astronomy > General Chat

Reply
 
Thread Tools Rate Thread
  #1  
Old 28-03-2011, 11:39 AM
gary
Registered User

gary is offline
 
Join Date: Apr 2005
Location: Mt. Kuring-Gai
Posts: 5,999
32nd anniversary of Three Mile Island Accident - March 28th 1979

March 28th marks the 32nd anniversary of the Three Mile Island accident.

On 28th March 1979 the No. 2 reactor at the Three Mile Island Nuclear Generating Station
south of Harrisburg, Pennsylvania, underwent a partial meltdown.

As the Washington Post reported in a recent story the crises
"didn’t fully end until the last of the filtered water from the flooded
containment building finally evaporated in 1993."

A series of mechanical failures and human factors lead to the accident
which makes for interesting reading.

In the immediate aftermath of the event, the Washington Post published this
multiple-part account which appears in their archives -
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-srv...athappened.htm

Wikipedia also have an entry here -
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Three_Mile_Island_accident

As reported in a recent story in the New York Times, at the time of the accident,
the then Governor of Pennsylvania, Richard L. Thornburgh, asked an aide to
make sure the evacuation plans for the surrounding counties would work.

Quote:
Originally Posted by New York Times story by Gardiner Harris, March 21 2011

The aide came back ashen faced. Dauphin County, on the eastern shore of the river, planned to send its populace west to safety over the Harvey Taylor Bridge.

“All well and good,” Mr. Thornburgh said in a recent speech, “except for the fact that Cumberland County on the west shore of the river had adopted an evacuation plan that would funnel all exiting traffic eastbound over — you guessed it — the same Harvey Taylor Bridge.”

Nearly 250,000 people would have been sent in opposite directions over the same narrow bridge.
That New York Times article here -
http://www.nytimes.com/2011/03/22/he...er=rss&emc=rss

Last edited by gary; 28-03-2011 at 11:50 AM.
Reply With Quote
  #2  
Old 28-03-2011, 12:21 PM
AstralTraveller's Avatar
AstralTraveller (David)
Registered User

AstralTraveller is offline
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: Wollongong
Posts: 3,819
And I thought 'disaster planning' was meant to mitigate disasters, not magnify them.

It seems that every nuclear disaster, including the present one, demonstrates that disaster planning is not adequate. They not only don't plan for the 'unknown unknowns' they even fail on 'knowns' like backup cooling power or how to move people from the danger area. The truth with evacuation is that in the case of a meltdown of a reactor near a major population centre you probably can't move enough people quickly enough.
Reply With Quote
Reply

Bookmarks

Thread Tools
Rate This Thread
Rate This Thread:

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump


All times are GMT +10. The time is now 04:24 AM.

Powered by vBulletin Version 3.8.7 | Copyright ©2000 - 2025, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Advertisement
Bintel
Advertisement