Posted on 01/19/2014 10:12:01 AM PST by Pontiac
Updated (Jan 19, 2014 at 01:45 am) The pattern is not completely clear, and there are pieces missing from the puzzle, but I have found enough bits of evidence to convince me that it is more likely than not that someone purposely initiated the Three Mile Island (TMI) accident.
This is a difficult story to tell; it’s not easy to revise history. It’s even harder to it successfully when there is sure to be disbelief, dismissal, and efforts to discredit. I prefer being respected and strive to avoid the potential of being marginalized as a crackpot. However, I feel a strong inner push to share what I have learned so far. It would be okay to have someone disprove my postulated sequence of events. It’s quite possible that sharing my version will encourage others to add puzzle pieces that make the story even more complete.
SNIP
At the time of the initial investigations, the possibility of sabotage was considered and officially rejected due to a lack of evidence. However, the historical record is reasonably clear about the lack of high-level interest in finding any evidence of malice. Chapter 11 of the Conclusions and Recommendations section of the Rogovin Report – Three Mile Island: A Report to the Commissioners and the Public is titled Sabotage, Bribery, and Coverup. The report’s authors were unable to determine why the emergency feed water valves were shut, and left it as an open issue in their final report.
(Excerpt) Read more at atomicinsights.com ...
it. The greenies wouldn’t sabotage a nuke plant to advance their agenda would they?
if not the greenies, then the weather underground or the anthroprogal global warming extremists would
Two words: Reactor Operator. Too fixated on one indicator (Pressurizer Level). Manually overrode safety functions, not once, not twice, but three specific times to come withing 20 minutes of a ‘meltdown.’ Saved, in the end by the designers, who pointed tolerances on metallurgical equations in the most conservative directions so that the core actually ‘slumped’ away from a focused pool of mass. Stupid design. Compared to most pressurized water nuclear reactors, TMI’s control/surge volume was tiny. Like trying to steer an 18-wheeler with tricycle handlebars. Shoddy construction - paraphrasing their own testimony, unit 1 was like a Mercedes Benz, Unit 2 was a ‘59 Rambler. Net result to local population? same radiation exposure as a flight to Denver. Catastrophe compounded by the governor, who as a DOJ attorney wrote a well-received report stating that the Federal Government should exacerbate small disasters to make them bigger and test population effects. One of the things he suggested in the report was a gag order so the press could only speculate. So guess what Dick Thornton did as Governor of Pennsylvania? Yep - a gag order. Plus ça change, plus c’est la même chose! (The more things change, the more they stay the same...)
You have to train your people, think of the system. Never over ride a safety system with out verification.
A Control Room Operator is only one person in the chain.
I’m an engineering supervisor at a nuke. You are absolutely right. The operating crew did not understand they had a steam bubble in the reactor, and thought they had a solid pressurizer. So they reduced water in the core. The rest is history. No sabotage, no grassy knoll.
Coolant water was leaking out of the core through a faulty valve. The operators misread the control panel and thought the opposite was happening. So instead of correcting the fault, they accidentally made it worse.
It would be difficult to prove or disprove anything now.
Sabotage possible at TMI? Sure it’s “possible”.
Is it likely? I doubt it. The envirowackos we
now deal with were still in their infancy and the
kind of people who would be willing to sabotage a
nuclear plant for their green agenda are NOT the
kind of people to put in the time and effort to
learn the needed skills in order to become employed
at one. Could someone have been paid to booger up
things there? Sure...but never attribute to malice
that which can be explained by incompetence, stupidity
or crappy instrumentation. There are plenty of more
realistic reasons behind what happened. But people
LOVE a good conspiracy theory.
I have heard that explanation but the man worked at the nuclear plant for a long time. How can he have made such a dumb mistake without investigating further?
Make sure you read part 2.
In part 2 the author points out the disturbing parallels between the movie The China Syndrome and the sequence of events at TMI. Start about half way down if it too much.
It almost seems that TMI may have been set up to make publicity for the movie.
I know it seem a stretch but when there are that many similarity it is just too many to be a coincidence.
I would suspect that the author of The China Syndrome did his research about reactor design, talked to industry insiders about things that could go wrong and wrote a book then a script that was realistic....too realistic.
I truly doubt the enviroweenies could successfully infiltrate a reactor crew
as an employee....true math and science is not their forte. I also find it difficult to believe that a movie production company could pay off or coopt
an employee to act in their interest.
As stated a connection is certainly not impossible......just extremely improbable.
*shrug* I was about 8 at the time, so I'm in no position to offer a post-mortem.
Sometimes, when you're under pressure, you don't take in needed data in quite as effective a fashion as you would otherwise. That's all I can suggest.
TMI Ping.
Interesting reading, but way beyond my technical pay-grade. Yes, I remember “China Syndrome”. Who knew TMI would follow that flick so closely?
That is the real question isn’t it?
Was it an accident? Or was it a publicity stunt that worked too well?
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Olympic_Pipeline_explosion
This brief article is about the pipeline explosion in Washington state. Not in the article - but it was partly a result of Y2K computer problems (switching in a hurry to new software). The software had shown several times a false indicator that a valve down line was closed, when in fact it was open. The first few times they would send a person the xx miles to check on the valve out in the field.
After numerous false alarms, this time when the software showed it to be closed (”Oh yeah - that thing is always wrong, let it flow”) it WAS closed. And the pipe burst with all of the aviation fuel hitting the closed valve.
If it weren’t for two little boys (RIP) playing with a lighter in the woods, the fuel would have made it into the populated town and exploded there.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.