Those sources included the Energy Information Administration’s 2010 outlook, University of Chicago, MIT, and four or five British, Canadian and European groups.

Is it your policy to combat terrorist by removing targets? Do you want to let Islamic extremists dictate your life?

What about things like sporting events, concerts, parades, water supplies, and food supplies? Surely you are opposed to all of these things. Each of these would kill FAR more people than a nuclear power plant if attacked by a terrorist.

I think terrorism is a lousy reason to not do something and I also know that you think this way as well. I know the reason you use terrorism as a tool in your ill-advised crusade against nuclear power is because it’s politically convenient and has nothing to do with some fictional interest in national security.

I still fly. I still go to games. One day I hope to have kids and take them to a parade. All the while I will not let a terrorist change my mind. All the while I will live with my family within a few miles of the nuclear reactor where I work knowing they are perfectly safe regardless of your well financed PR campaign.

Mr. Riccio’s job is to spread FUD (Fear, Uncertainty, and Doubt), and this is yet another example of this work. The video of the F4 Phantom hitting the concrete target is simply a useful illustration, which vividly shows what happens to a plane when it hits a hard target. As can be seen, almost all of the plane disintegrates immediately upon impact.

Does this one test conclusively prove that a plane could not penetrate a containment dome? No. Nevertheless, it and tests like it have provided extremely useful test data for engineering analysis to assess and understand what the consequences of an aircraft impact would be. Sandia performed other tests as well, including impacting a TF-30 engine into a two foot thick concrete wall, and impacting a TF-30 engine into an earth-concrete structure (which of course was not allowed to move).

The results of these tests are used to assess the validity of models that have been developed to analyze the consequences of a jet impact into heavily reinforced concrete walls. These calculations are what give us confidence in the protection provided by the thick walls of a containment structure, not just this one test, however fascinating the video might be.

Repeating false claims of nuclear plant invulnerability does not make it so!

The link should only cover the word “highway” Thanks for fixing that

Looking forward to the FAQ and more articles!

David Phillips

The idea of spreading the word to the younger generation is right on target. While Jack will be giving his presentation at the local Rotary Club this week, it would be good if he could put together a presentation for high school students who are being fed mis-information from many of their left-leaning teachers.

Sorry for the continuous link in my post. I missed the close link evidently.

I would love to see your rework. You have a great design now. Take the time to do it well and we will all be thankful.