[ShabazKillaX]

when your too busy going to frat parties

EXCLUSIVE:ABC Investigation Finds Gaping Lapses in Security at Nuclear Reactors

EXCLUSIVE: ABC Investigation Finds Gaping Lapses in Security at Nuclear Reactors

A four-month ABC News investigation found gaping security holes at many of the little-known nuclear research reactors operating on 25 college campuses across the country. Among the findings: unmanned guard booths, a guard who appeared to be asleep, unlocked building doors and, in a number of cases, guided tours that provided easy access to control rooms and reactor pools that hold radioactive fuel.

ABC News found none of the college reactors had metal detectors, and only two appear to have armed guards. Many of the schools permit vehicles in close proximity to the reactor buildings without inspection for explosives.

[Goofus Maximus]

Considering that you will not find any weapons-grade material at College and University facilities, ABC is doing a nice little bit of fear-mongering. Still, when the guards are likely students themselves, this isn't really a big surprise.

[Drakkon]

at the U of A you can walk right into the building, right by the reactor, without even being questioned. Like mentioned theres nothing in there weapons grade though.

[ShabazKillaX]

Originally Posted by Goofus Maximus

Considering that you will not find any weapons-grade material at College and University facilities, ABC is doing a nice little bit of fear-mongering. Still, when the guards are likely students themselves, this isn't really a big surprise.

You should have read the article -

The NRC would not publicly identify the schools under investigation but NRC investigators told ABC News they were looking at possible breaches of security protocol at schools including University of Florida, University of Wisconsin, Purdue, Ohio State and Texas A&M. Four of the five schools under investigation use highly enriched, weapons-grade uranium to operate their reactors. (A full listing of the ABC News findings and university reactions accompanies this article.)

[MSP]

Even non-weapons grade material could be used as a weapon. Dirty bomb anyone?

[Wedge_]

Dirty bomb = more fear mongering. Everything I've read suggests that the conventional explosives would be responsible for more deaths than the radioactive material they are intended to disperse. Read the Wikipedia article and the references at the bottom. If they want to kill people, it sounds like just using greater quantities of conventional explosives would be the way to go.

[Goofus Maximus]

Strangely enough, it's the radioactive waste that will make good material for a dirty bomb. Nuclear fuel simply isn't radioactive enough outside of specialized reactor environments; a uranium (weapons-grade) dirty bomb wouldn't hurt a population of people very significantly at all. These research reactors are too small in fact to generate enough heat to go Chernobyl, and the amount of highly radioactive waste at such facilities isn't enough to mount a serious health threat. Unless you believe the green-party freakazoids who think living within a mile of a Nuclear Power Plant gave them cancer, while a homefull of Radon is okay because that's "natural" radiation...

Having read the article, it's typical non-scientific reporters reporting on scientific matters and getting it distorted, using statements by irrelevant authorities to make matters sound dire, when they aren't really. The security is lax, but the desirability of such places as targets are overblown and overdramatized in the article.

[j0k3r]

Dirtybomb wouldn't be the issue. Walking in to the plant and causing a meltdown or dropping a 10 kiltoton bomb onto the reactor, now that would be a problem.

Soft security around nuclear facilities is inexcusable no matter which way you look at it.

[ShabazKillaX]

Originally Posted by j0k3r

Dirtybomb wouldn't be the issue. Walking in to the plant and causing a meltdown or dropping a 10 kiltoton bomb onto the reactor, now that would be a problem.

Soft security around nuclear facilities is inexcusable no matter which way you look at it.

Thank you, someone who gets it.

[Goofus Maximus]

Research reactors don't have enough fissile material to melt down, not to mention that our light-water reactors don't melt down like the graphite reactors, because there's no positive-feedback to cause a runaway reaction. bombing them would just be a mildly dirty-bomb style attack. Heavy metal poisoning would be more of a problem than the radiation.

[NoseMaster]

I didn't even know they had nuclear reactors in college grounds... who the fuck hired random college kids to man them in the first place?

[Goofus Maximus]

Where do you think they learn? That's also why these reactors aren't large enough to cause problems; they're for training college kids who're hung over from the Frat Party of the night before!

We have one of these facilities in the St. Louis area, run by the University of Missouri St. Louis. It's called the Dalton Research Reactor.