Brad, If only the CIA were as clever as you suggest.
Or, the KGB as dumb as is suggested. The Soviet nukes appear to be old design graphite type. Don't think any of ours are. These conspiracy theories exude from the fanatics and over time become solidly factual. Can't be denied, can't be confirmed, can't be removed once installed. Oh, well. Harry ********************************* Henry George School of Los Angeles Box 655 Tujunga CA 91042 818 352-4141 ********************************* >-----Original Message----- >From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] >[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Brad >McCormick, Ed.D. >Sent: Saturday, June 03, 2006 6:16 AM >To: Darryl & Natalia >Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED]; [email protected] >Subject: Re: [Futurework] Back to Chernobyl > >Darryl & Natalia wrote: >> Thanks, Lawry, >> Any way to confirm this? I would think that Iran, and other nations >> foolish enough to consider the Russian product would appreciate this >> tidbit. Though I'm certain all reactors sold are to be "used only as >> directed", it would be useful info for those who need it for >accurate >> assessment or study. If correct, it really should be made >public. And >> I realize this could be difficult. > >Some things to be concerned about: > >(1) It is possible that the soviet reactor design contains >flaws that got there by them stealing designs that the U.S. >intentionally modified to have flaws in them to help Communism >self-destruct. I have read that this *was* the reason the >Soviet SST was crash-prone, because they copied Concorde plans >that we altered. > >(2) The Soviet Union and its "satellites" does not seem to >have always built to high engineering standards even when the >U.S. didn't "help" them screw up. > >(3) Iran may have fine engineers. But don't you worry a bit >when engineers are operating in a religious environment, as in >the United States today -- oops, I meant: as in Iran today? > >\brad mccormick > > > >> Natalia >> NAV scanned >> >> ----- Original Message ----- >> *From:* Lawrence de Bivort ><mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]> >> *To:* [email protected] >> <mailto:[email protected]> >> *Sent:* Friday, June 02, 2006 9:32 AM >> *Subject:* [Futurework] Back to Chernobyl >> >> Greetings, everyone, >> >> After our discussion some time ago on Chernobyl, we were >left with >> some uncertainty over just what happened. This >information is from >> a reliable source, one of the Russian engineering team that went >> into Chernobyl to assess the accident and its causes. They used >> robots, of course. >> >> The reactor is a graphite, and had no containment vessel. There >> were about 200 tons of enriched uranium (235) in Unit Four, the >> one that had the accident. The crew was experimenting with the >> possibility of increasing the heat yield (and thus the amount of >> steam that could run the electricity-generating >turbines) and lost >> control of the reactor. Steam built up rapidly within the core, >> and blew the top of the reactor off. Then there was a second >> explosion, equal they think to an 'inefficient' atomic bomb in >> power. This dispersed into the atmosphere, to a height of 70,000 >> feet, approximately 190 tons of the enriched uranium. Thus now in >> the reactor only about 10 tons of the material is left. It was >> covered hastily in a concrete 'sarcophagus.' The Ukraine >is asking >> for more international money to redo the sarcophagus, as it is >> deteriorating. The official story is that the great majority of >> the uranium is still in the sarcophagus, but photographs >show that >> this is not correct. >> >> This person did not look at the health impacts of the explosion. >> >> The remaining three units remain in operation today. This is the >> same model that the Russians have sold to the Iranians, in a deal >> made in '91 or '92. The Iranians are having to pay more and more, >> and they still don't have their reactor. >> >> Cheers, >> >> Lawry >> >> </DIV> <P> <HR> >> ><P></P>____________________________________________ ___<BR>Futurework >> mailing >> >> >list<BR>[email protected]<BR>http://fes.uw aterlo >> o.ca/mailman/listinfo/futurework<BR></BLOCKQUOTE> >> >> >> >> >---------------------------------------------------------------- ------ >> -- >> >> _______________________________________________ >> Futurework mailing list >> [email protected] >> http://fes.uwaterloo.ca/mailman/listinfo/futurework >> >> > > >-- > Let your light so shine before men, > that they may see your good works.... (Matt 5:16) > > Prove all things; hold fast that which is good. (1 Thes 5:21) > ><![%THINK;[SGML+APL]]> Brad McCormick, Ed.D. / [EMAIL PROTECTED] >---------------------------------------------------------------- - > Visit my website ==> http://www.users.cloud9.net/~bradmcc/ > >_______________________________________________ >Futurework mailing list >[email protected] >http://fes.uwaterloo.ca/mailman/listinfo/futurework > _______________________________________________ Futurework mailing list [email protected] http://fes.uwaterloo.ca/mailman/listinfo/futurework
