Who do you think you are kidding?

[scotsboy]

The Goebbels doctrine is alive and well and currently being espoused by DSRLs Managing Director Simon Middlemass. In the October edition of the Dounreay news we are told that


Many of the remaining properties, including the sphere, continue to perform important roles in the containment of nuclear hazards until we can complete their decommissioning. But many are rotten with radioactivity and, despite extensive soul-searching and consultation, we've not been able to identify any practical proposal for their retention.

You may notice that the above does not directly state that the sphere is rotten (sic) but ties it by implication..........the field has been cultivated, the seeds sewn.

I am not going to get into the use of tabloid hyperbole in an official Dounreay publication, but would suggest that a facility that led the World in nuclear innovation is now seen as a total laughing stock with a workforce unable to decontaminate a relatively flat impervious metallic surface..........as Jim Royale would say experts my arse!

[hunter]

Did you respond during the consultation period about what should happen to the sphere?

[scotsboy]

No I wasn't aware of the consultation process.

[John Little]

Well I cannae speak for Scotsboy but I wisnae on the Org at that time. I think they consulted some of the local community and these folk they call 'Stakeholders'

These stakeholders were consulted as to whether or not the Dome should stay and by a fairly large majority they said that it should.

Then what they said was over-ridden by DSRL on rather spurious grounds- a load of havers designed to stir up a fairly predictable reaction.

At which it succeeded.

I think Scotsboy has it absolutely spot on.

[hunter]

'fraid I disagree with you both

If this was such a national treasure, such a superb achievement for the nation, how come it's all been chucked in the bucket?

I mean, we usually keep things we find useful. The boffins might have been in ectasy getting to playing with all these lovely things.

But it turned into a huge white elephant. Billions spent on a technology the country doesn't want and billions more to clean it up. And what did we get from it? Nowt from what I can see. Where are all the fast reactors powering every town in the land?

Middlemas got it right, I think - it's a pile of radioactive junk. Bring on the bulldozers and let's not make such stupid mistakes again.

[John Little]

Disagreeing is fine.

So is answering.

It's being chucked in the bucket because it would cost £500,000 to paint every 10 years.

The stuff about radiation, contamination and access just does not stand up to closer scrutiny - as Scotsboy has made very clear.

So it's about cash.

We do not only keep useful things. Darby's blast furnace is a heap of old bricks - yet they have built a glass pyramid over it to protect it. It has no use yet many humans like to preserve artefacts that are notable from their past as waymarks in history.

Utilitarian people do not see it quite that way though.

White elephant it was not. New technologies were pioneered at Dounreay which are now in use all over the world. The world's first ever fast breeder reactor was built there - in the Dome. It was never a working power station - but always a testing ground.

I know the Atkins report plays down the historic importance of Dounreay but as Scotsboy tells you that the radiation stuff is propaganda, so I tell you that the subjective playing down is also propaganda. If Darby's heap of bricks, Titus Salt's Mill and Cromford Mill are important enough to be heritage sites, then so is Dounreay.

We do not have a lead in nuclear technologies any more because our politicians took the decision to save money and use Scotland's oil instead. If they had not, then logically we should have had Dounreay style reactors because they were a far better design than Magnox - so my father always maintained.

Lastly, the Dome is not radioactive. As Scotsboy keeps saying - it is contaminated and there is quite a difference for one can be cleaned and one cannot.

As to bulldozers - if it comes to that, then so be it. But if it happens then let it be for the right reasons - not half-truths and misinformation, but the plain honest truth.

'We can't afford it-that's our reason' might be a start.

It could also be a problem that people might feel they could talk about and maybe get to grips with.

[Dadie]

Its actually quite facinating to watch the dome being painted...last time it was done on the exterior they used abseilers for the top half anyway!
Interior is more tricky with scaffolding and the goliath crane being in operation...

[hunter]

nah, you missed my point.

It's the entire technology that's been chucked in the bucket.

If, as you say, it was such a success, why did Britain throw it away. I haven't seen anyone demanding its return.

Why would anyone spend money preserving something that turned out to useless to modern society?

Maybe they proved the science, sure. But if no-one actually wanted what they made, it's a bit pointless aint it?

That place spewed out so much toxic stuff that it'll be too dangerous for the public to be allowed in for the next 300 years. You really want to spend money preserving that? Maybe as a warning to future generations not to be so stupid in the future.

[John Little]

nah, you missed my point.

"It's the entire technology that's been chucked in the bucket."

I think you'll find that there are 'graduates' of Dounreay working in nuclear technologies all over the world who might not agree with you.


"If, as you say, it was such a success, why did Britain throw it away. I haven't seen anyone demanding its return."

In Dounreay we had the most efficient and safest reactor built. Ever. But it was also the most expensive. Our government preferred American ones which were designed originally for nuclear submarines - larger versions were made for use in land power stations - but they were never as safe as Dounreay. 3 Mile Island was of this type.

"Why would anyone spend money preserving something that turned out to useless to modern society?"

LOL. It's very had to explain this to Utilitarians and you most definitely are that - you aren't in Science are you? It's to do with heritage and roots and knowing where you come from.
And you keep reiterating that Dounreay was useless. Well it wasn't and a lot of people in Caithness put their life's work into it and I doubt they share your view. I don't anyway.

Maybe they proved the science, sure. But if no-one actually wanted what they made, it's a bit pointless aint it?

Oh I think that's a take on it that the older generation would not recognise. It was political decision to scrap the Dounreay venture and that technology in Britain.

But other countries find it far more seductive - I think fast breeders will be back big time.
But there's surely enough atomic experts round Thurso and Wick to speculate on this far better than I.

[Dadie]

You would get less of a dose wandering around in the sphere for a day than you would on a transalantic flight or an x-ray.

[hunter]

It was a hellishly expensive job creation exercise, if the only benefit was to train people up.

As for the science, if there's no practical benefit from it, spend your own money on it, not mine. I dont count a pile of toxic waste as much in the way of benefit to be honest.

[John Little]

I do not believe that I described it as such.
I believe that what was pioneered at Dounreay is in use in nuclear power stations all round the world - but I also said that there are people better placed to answer that than I.

That is not the issue here. I am speaking of a steel dome. It is not toxic waste- as I keep telling you and as Scotsboy has said more eloquently. If you choose to disbelieve it then I cannot help it.

And I was not proposing to spend your money on it. I'm happy to spend some of mine if there is a fund to contribute to..

Now I'm off to bed. Goodnight.

[hunter]

And what you use it for?

As a giant billboard perhaps, to paint a huge glow-in-the-dark warning sign on the side to tell the public to stay away because of the danger all around?

http://www.labelsourceonline.co.uk/ProdImages/Page040/rlw22.gif

It's funny, really.

People don't trust the nuclear industry because they underplayed the dangers.

You're criticising the industry because they're overplaying the danger.

Hmmmm . . .

If there was no danger, why keep the public out for the next 300 years?

.

[gillsbay]

One thing which I always found interesting about radioactive materials is that it depends on where there are! When Dounreay was cleaning up North sea oil equipment it was taken ashore, loaded on lorries and driven to Dounreay, once it was on site (this being a designated area) it could not be removed until it was cleaned, not a problem before it arrived as the levels were very low but this seems to me to be a good example of what the problem is with people not realising what different levels of radioactivity mean in different places. The levels of radioactivity given off by granite are higher than in most of Dounreay and if a block of granite was taken there it would not be allowed to leave nor would it be allowed to be used for building.

[John Little]

And what you use it for?

As a giant billboard perhaps, to paint a huge glow-in-the-dark warning sign on the side to tell the public to stay away because of the danger all around?

http://www.labelsourceonline.co.uk/ProdImages/Page040/rlw22.gif

It's funny, really.

People don't trust the nuclear industry because they underplayed the dangers.

You're criticising the industry because they're overplaying the danger.

Hmmmm . . .

If there was no danger, why keep the public out for the next 300 years?

.

Irony aside, apart from the preservation of an iconic and historic structure, it would serve as the memorial to what was done there- a great stride in human progress. A bit like the Scott memorial or the Commando one near Fort William- but bigger.

The industry is over-playing the danger because there is an interest in them doing so - economy.

Some of the site indeed will have to be closed for 300 years.
The Dome is not in that area. It may be approached in perfect safety.

[theone]

nah, you missed my point.

It's the entire technology that's been chucked in the bucket.

If, as you say, it was such a success, why did Britain throw it away. I haven't seen anyone demanding its return.

Why would anyone spend money preserving something that turned out to useless to modern society?

Maybe they proved the science, sure. But if no-one actually wanted what they made, it's a bit pointless aint it?

That place spewed out so much toxic stuff that it'll be too dangerous for the public to be allowed in for the next 300 years. You really want to spend money preserving that? Maybe as a warning to future generations not to be so stupid in the future.

Britain threw the technology away because of politics.

The technology hasn't been "thrown in the bucket" and it certainly isn't useless.

The French, Russians, Indians and Japanese operate these reactors, with more being planned.

[oldchemist]

I did respond to the "what to do with the sphere" consultation via a link on here. £500,000 sounds like a lot of dosh but don't forget that is over 10 years, £50k per year. That would not cover an MPs expenses so it is peanuts. The inside of the sphere is contaminated with tritium, a low energy beta emitter which is not really going to hurt anyone unless they swallow it or breathe it in. The problem with decontaminating the sphere is that the tritium is tightly bound to the steel so it is very difficult to remove. Or put it another way, the tritium ain't going anywhere so it is not a hazard. So there is no great problem and no great expense in keeping this historical monument.

[northener]

People don't trust the nuclear industry because they underplayed the dangers.

.....

Ahem,

Some people don't trust the nuclear industry. Please don't speak on my behalf, I'm pro- Nuclear.

If modern nuclear technology is so dangerous, could you explain why the Royal Navy has been using nuclear reactors with no life-threatening incidents for so long?
Comparing, say, Doureay or Winscale to what can be built now would be like comparing Stevensons Rocket to a modern Inter-City train on the safety front.

[Skerries]

Ahem,


Comparing, say, Doureay or Winscale to what can be built now would be like comparing Stevensons Rocket to a modern Inter-City train on the safety front.

Yes but, em, the European pressurised water reactor isn't exactly doing that well just now in France or Finland. How many billions is it over budget by?

[northener]

Yes but, em, the European pressurised water reactor isn't exactly doing that well just now in France or Finland. How many billions is it over budget by?

But this isn't about cost.

Hospitals and schools go well over budget and we don't say that we should stop building them.......

[buffy]

[quote=hunter;771282]Billions spent on a technology the country doesn't want and billions more to clean it up. And what did we get from it? /quote]

What did we get from it? Take a look around. This town was built and still survives on Dounreay's back. Enjoy it while it lasts cos we ain't got long left!

[John Little]

Pity Donald Trump would not be interested in a hotel and golf complex there too..... bet the contamination idea would disappear pretty quick if that happened......

[John Little]

I wonder if I can find his email........

http://www.evancarmichael.com/Famous-Entrepreneurs/560/Contact-Donald-Trump.html


Hm...... anyone from Caithness interested in contacting a multi-billionaire.... prime hotel site for redevelopment......



donald.trump@trumpthinklikeachampion.com

Might create jobs too....