Nuclear Reactor Design Chosen - Not Because It Was Safe - But Because It Worked On Navy Submarines → Washingtons Blog
Nuclear Reactor Design Chosen - Not Because It Was Safe - But Because It Worked On Navy Submarines - Washingtons Blog

Monday, June 20, 2011



Called "light-water reactors", this design was not chosen for safety reasons. Rather, it was chosen because it worked in Navy submarines.

Specifically, as the Atlantic reported in March:


Every variable in building an immensely complex industrial plant was up for grabs: the nature of the radioactive fuel and other substances that form the reactor's core, the safety systems, the containment buildings, the construction substances, and everything else that might go into building an immensely complex industrial plant. The light water reactor became the technological victor, but no one is quite sure whether that was a good idea.

Few of these alternatives were seriously investigated after light water reactors were selected for Navy submarines by Admiral Hyman Rickover. Once light water reactors gained government backing and the many advantages that conferred, other designs could not break into the market, even though commercial nuclear power wouldn't explode for years after Rickover's decision. "There were lots and lots of ideas floating around, and they essentially lost when light water came to dominate," University of Strasbourg professor Robin Cowan told the Boston Globe in an excellent article on "technological lock-in" in the nuclear industry.



President Lyndon Johnson and his administration sent the message that we were going to use nuclear power, and it would be largely through the reactor designs that already existed, regardless of whether they had the best safety characteristics that could be imagined. [Nixon also fired the main government scientist developing safer types of reactors, because he was focused on safety instead of sticking with Nixon's favored reactors.] We learned in later years that boiling water reactors like Fukushima are subject to certain types of failure under very unusual circumstances, but we probably would have discovered such problems if we'd explored the technical designs for longer before trying to start building large numbers of nuclear plants.

The Atomic Energy Commission's first general manager - MIT professor Carroll Wilson - confirmed in 1979:


(Wilson also notes that the engineers who built the original reactors didn't really think about the waste or other basic parts of the plants' life cycle.)

Ambrose Evans-Pritchard argues that there was another reason why all safer alternative designs - including thorium reactors - were abandoned:

As Boing Boing notes:

Reactors like this [are] flawed in some ways that would be almost comical, were it not for the risk those flaws impart. Maybe you've wondered over the past couple of weeks why anyone would design a nuclear reactor that relied on external generators to power the pumps for it's emergency cooling system. In a real emergency, isn't there a decent chance that the backup generators would be compromised, as well?

It's a good question. In fact, modern reactor designs have solved that very problem, by feeding water through the emergency cooling system using gravity, rather than powered pumps. Newer designs are much safer, and more reliable. But we haven't built any of them in the United States ...

Not the Navy's Fault


There are some things to know about Navy reactors:

  1. They don't store thirty years worth of used, spent fuel rods next to the reactor.
  2. They don't continue to operate a reactor that had a design life of 25 years for 60 years.

There Are No Independent Regulators and No Real Safety Standards


Unfortunately, no ...

As AP notes today:






Regulations are loosened, and the reactors are back in compliance.

Of course, the Nuclear Regulatory Commission - like all nuclear "agencies" worldwide - is 100% captured and not an independent agency, and the NRC has never denied a request for relicensing old, unsafe nuclear plants.










  1. Get real. Get rid of fission plants.

  2. The meatballs over at the NRC are well past their pull date.

  3. Excellent, George, if that is your name, as usual!

    Gangs took over America, decades ago, after the attempted coup was thwarted. The UK suffered a slightly different fate as a result of religious strife. It became a refuge for the persecuted of Europe mainly protestants and those who refused to convert from Judaism. They were benign rulers, except towards the strategic threat of Ireland. As Papism declines, due to subversion mainly, attitudes are changing.

    When the motive is to enrich a small group of greedy families, there are no limits to their stupidity until their own existence is threatened.As they may leave, being so wealthy that anywhere safe is also comfortable, the plain folks of the Northern Hemisphere may live or not, to rue their stupidity in allowing such monsters to prosper.

    Having been one of the few to question Aceh, with Joe Vialls, I find it interesting that some now question how natural the Fukushima tsunami was!

  4. It seems that the prospect of deaths among babies and multiple cancers for those who survive is not going to motivate scientists, who are again, notably silent. They would of course, suffer retaliation as they depend upon government for their income.

    Those who remain silent, permit this to happen!

    I remain hopeful that the US military may intervene. By hollowing out the middle class, the aristocrats expose themselves to any with belief and discipline!

  5. The siting of Fukushima was no accident, and GHWB was ambassador to the UN and attended Bohemia Grove as did his dad to mingle AND plot with the Whitey eugenicists. The wind patterns and jet stream seasonal changes and character were well known, and the near instantaneous meltdowns were GUARANTEED by the designs with all cooling systems vulnerable to the next major tsunami, which was also guaranteed to occur. Meltdown> small explosions(as Noted)>radiation to Europe's two major competitors. So like the rival skater, Tonia Harding having a friend break Nancy Karrigan's kneecap, somebody put Nixon's AEC up to this. See Ben Fulford's interviews and interviewing at Bilderberger meetings. He was an executive assistant to the Japanese finance minister and a number of other highly responsible positions. He says the fault line just off shore was nuked, and provides details. I tend to believe the guy because his inside info, though unique, has been correct. Also, get over to The sitemaster just returned from radiation monitoring in the West U.S. and his study of chemtrail/HAARP circle> weather disasters is worth every second of consideration. I thought 'BS' under my breath until I witnessed his coming up with three sets of chemtrail/HAARP circle> weather disaster series and predictions in a row LIVE.
    America has been under concerted attack since the 9-11-2001 kick-off with the CFR running interference and cooperation of NSA General and head of the American satanic church Michael Aquino. The same one mixed up in that San Francisco Presidio pedo business in 1986. On 9-11-2001 he was reported to be the General in charge of all psychological warfare for the U.S. military. I have found info to back this allegation, such as yes he made general in the NSA after Army lieutenant colonel rank. Nothing genius, just excessive psychopathic social and lethal backstabbing and torture of innocents at Abu Ghraib and Guantanamo prisons, which I find highly objectionable.

  6. There was a compelling reason for the standard US reactor design. It produced maximum by products for building nuclear weapons. We killed 2 birds with one stone.

  7. wow
    i used to think that those who said that we should shut down all nuclear plants in the country and that they were for the most part unsafe....i disagreed...until reading this...i mean AT LEAST shut down the problematic ones, while at the same time phasing out the old technology in favor of safer more new technology...also the last poster who stated the part about the byproducts for nuclear weapons....very interesting...






-- Comments that explicitly call for violence
