Was America's Nuclear Energy Program Sabotaged?
By James Donahue
There is a theory that the 1979 incident at Pennsylvania's Three Mile Island nuclear electric generating plant was an act of sabotage designed to destroy America's confidence in nuclear powered electric generating plants.
This “accident” exactly one year after the release of the Hollywood film, The China Syndrome that portrayed the horror of a total meltdown of a nuclear power plant, helped manipulate the public to fear the use of nuclear power as a way of solving America’s energy problem.
That the meltdown at Three Mile Island's second reactor on March 28, 1979, was an almost exact replica of the disaster portrayed in the film may not have been an accident. Suppose an over-zealous plant worker saw that movie and was subconsciously persuaded or was purposefully decided to sabotage one of the plants at Three Mile Island.
Whatever the reason, someone closed a key valve on an important coolant water line, thus setting off a chain of events that came close to triggering an uncontrolled nuclear meltdown..
This incident occurred exactly one year and 12 days following the release of the movie. The Three Mile Island problem was perfectly timed to tweak the minds of the masses and cause most people to distrust nuclear power as an alternative energy source.
That the Chernobyl disaster involving a complete meltdown occurred only seven years after Three Mile Island, only helped support the propaganda machine. Was Chernobyl also a sabotaged plant, or was it a result of operator blundering?
Also the earthquake and tsunami that destroyed the Fukushima Nuclear facility in Japan in 2011 created an even stronger fear of nuke plants.
The public reaction to nuclear power remains a hotly contested issue in the United States to this day, even though legislators and scientists are frantically looking for alternatives to coal and oil for generating a growing demand for electricity under skies thick with the carbon monoxide generated in the last century.
Strangely overlooked is the fact that military ships, and especially submarines, have been operating successfully and safely on nuclear energy now for decades. And 440 other nuclear powered electric generating plants are running successfully in nations around the world.
World leaders have talked about alternative energy sources, including the construction of nuclear power plants. Despite the three mishaps, nuclear power can be produced safely. Its biggest drawback is the toxic by-product, plutonium, which can be used in building deadly nuclear weapons and the volumes of polluted cooling water that can leak into lakes and oceans.
A major issue the Biden Administration has with the Iranian and North Korean governments is their interest in the development of nuclear electric generating facilities and the weapons that would spin off them. The United States, Israel and some European leaders have expressed concern that Iran will use the plutonium created at that plant to build nuclear bombs. Yet Iran, like other nations throughout Europe and Asia, is demanding the right to seek alternative energy sources.
It appears that the impact of the Three Mile Island incident continues to have its effect on the minds of Americans, even to this day.
Hearings that followed the accident, and mountains of news stories, technical reports and other research, failed to point to sabotage at Three Mile Island. A careful study of the report, however, notes that certain check valves and gauges designed to prevent such a disaster malfunctioned for unknown reasons.
There were at least 12 different workers in the plant at the time of the "accident," and all were thoroughly questioned about their part in what occurred.
The official conclusion was that Three Mile Island's accident was caused by "a combination of design flaws, mismanagement and operator errors."
The mishap destroyed one of the two nuclear reactors on about the second day that it went on line. While there were no lives lost at the time of the incident, there was so much radiation released that health officials feared a high rate of cancer and other health problems among people living for miles downwind of the plant.
The Fukushima disaster in Japan, caused by an earthquake and a tsunami that followed has only intensified public fears.
The worst damage of all was exactly what the film and the "accident" were designed to create. There was "a profound change in American public attitude toward nuclear power."
So who would benefit from such a scheme, and why would anyone want to sabotage a nuclear power plant in America? In the late 1970s we had just gone through our first energy crisis and experienced the first major increase in the cost of gasoline, heating oil and natural gas. Also environmentalists were making us aware of the damage carbon-based emissions were doing to our atmosphere. Nuclear power appeared then, as it does today, to be a good alternative source of power to meet the growing demand for electric power.
But the world had not yet reached the threat of peak oil and there are still billions of dollars to be made in the areas of continued sale and burning of the carbon fuels so it has been a general resistance to using wind and solar systems to stem the growing threat of global warming. coal.
Most electric power plants in the United States still use coal to run their generators. The construction of nuclear power plants all over the country would have put a lot of coal miners out of work.
By James Donahue
There is a theory that the 1979 incident at Pennsylvania's Three Mile Island nuclear electric generating plant was an act of sabotage designed to destroy America's confidence in nuclear powered electric generating plants.
This “accident” exactly one year after the release of the Hollywood film, The China Syndrome that portrayed the horror of a total meltdown of a nuclear power plant, helped manipulate the public to fear the use of nuclear power as a way of solving America’s energy problem.
That the meltdown at Three Mile Island's second reactor on March 28, 1979, was an almost exact replica of the disaster portrayed in the film may not have been an accident. Suppose an over-zealous plant worker saw that movie and was subconsciously persuaded or was purposefully decided to sabotage one of the plants at Three Mile Island.
Whatever the reason, someone closed a key valve on an important coolant water line, thus setting off a chain of events that came close to triggering an uncontrolled nuclear meltdown..
This incident occurred exactly one year and 12 days following the release of the movie. The Three Mile Island problem was perfectly timed to tweak the minds of the masses and cause most people to distrust nuclear power as an alternative energy source.
That the Chernobyl disaster involving a complete meltdown occurred only seven years after Three Mile Island, only helped support the propaganda machine. Was Chernobyl also a sabotaged plant, or was it a result of operator blundering?
Also the earthquake and tsunami that destroyed the Fukushima Nuclear facility in Japan in 2011 created an even stronger fear of nuke plants.
The public reaction to nuclear power remains a hotly contested issue in the United States to this day, even though legislators and scientists are frantically looking for alternatives to coal and oil for generating a growing demand for electricity under skies thick with the carbon monoxide generated in the last century.
Strangely overlooked is the fact that military ships, and especially submarines, have been operating successfully and safely on nuclear energy now for decades. And 440 other nuclear powered electric generating plants are running successfully in nations around the world.
World leaders have talked about alternative energy sources, including the construction of nuclear power plants. Despite the three mishaps, nuclear power can be produced safely. Its biggest drawback is the toxic by-product, plutonium, which can be used in building deadly nuclear weapons and the volumes of polluted cooling water that can leak into lakes and oceans.
A major issue the Biden Administration has with the Iranian and North Korean governments is their interest in the development of nuclear electric generating facilities and the weapons that would spin off them. The United States, Israel and some European leaders have expressed concern that Iran will use the plutonium created at that plant to build nuclear bombs. Yet Iran, like other nations throughout Europe and Asia, is demanding the right to seek alternative energy sources.
It appears that the impact of the Three Mile Island incident continues to have its effect on the minds of Americans, even to this day.
Hearings that followed the accident, and mountains of news stories, technical reports and other research, failed to point to sabotage at Three Mile Island. A careful study of the report, however, notes that certain check valves and gauges designed to prevent such a disaster malfunctioned for unknown reasons.
There were at least 12 different workers in the plant at the time of the "accident," and all were thoroughly questioned about their part in what occurred.
The official conclusion was that Three Mile Island's accident was caused by "a combination of design flaws, mismanagement and operator errors."
The mishap destroyed one of the two nuclear reactors on about the second day that it went on line. While there were no lives lost at the time of the incident, there was so much radiation released that health officials feared a high rate of cancer and other health problems among people living for miles downwind of the plant.
The Fukushima disaster in Japan, caused by an earthquake and a tsunami that followed has only intensified public fears.
The worst damage of all was exactly what the film and the "accident" were designed to create. There was "a profound change in American public attitude toward nuclear power."
So who would benefit from such a scheme, and why would anyone want to sabotage a nuclear power plant in America? In the late 1970s we had just gone through our first energy crisis and experienced the first major increase in the cost of gasoline, heating oil and natural gas. Also environmentalists were making us aware of the damage carbon-based emissions were doing to our atmosphere. Nuclear power appeared then, as it does today, to be a good alternative source of power to meet the growing demand for electric power.
But the world had not yet reached the threat of peak oil and there are still billions of dollars to be made in the areas of continued sale and burning of the carbon fuels so it has been a general resistance to using wind and solar systems to stem the growing threat of global warming. coal.
Most electric power plants in the United States still use coal to run their generators. The construction of nuclear power plants all over the country would have put a lot of coal miners out of work.