Dounreay Dome

[Phill]

Recently there was a thread on the .org about the Atkins Heritage report which came to the conclusion the DFR Dome had to be scrapped as it couldn't be decontaminated and was going to cost too much.

Well, the report has been scutinised and, in our humble opinion, is somewhat lacking in accuracy and isn't truly independent.

Parts of the report appears at odds with it's own statements and the cost budgets seem exaggerated or just plain wrong. Also it has errors relating to the contamination / decontamination of the sphere, additionally scrapping the Dome is in opposition to the opinions of the majority of the stakeholders at Dounreay.

So rather than just rant on the .org we cobbled together this little response:

Dounreay Heritage Strategy: A Response (http://www.dounreaydome.org.uk/Dounreay%20Sphere%20Response%204%20Nov%202010-4.pdf)

Now it is a bit wordy and runs to 31 pages so below is a summary of our report:


1.The Dounreay Sphere is an empirical design from a Scottish company, which was built on a loose specification provided to them.
2.The crane within it is also of empirical design by a Scottish company, also built on a loose specification supplied to them.
3.The construction and engineering of it are unique feats of Scottish industry.
4.As such the two artefacts comprising the Sphere are in themselves emblematic of the second industrial revolution in Scotland, and of historic significance to the Scottish nation. Together they comprise a literal ‘masterpiece’ that cannot be replaced.
5.The success, in all its aims, of the fast breeder reactor housed in the Sphere represents a dazzling achievement in nuclear technology which is valuable, not only in terms of Scottish or UK heritage, but of world heritage.
6.The majority of the Dounreay Stakeholders were correct to oppose demolition of the Sphere in the context of its intrinsic importance.
7.The danger of radiation associated with the Sphere has been over-stated by association with other parts of the site.
8.The decontamination of the Sphere presents no significant challenge to engineering with equipment and expertise available on site.
9.To consider the Sphere within the site as a whole disallows consideration of its discrete and particular merits and taints it by association.
10.In this context a holistic approach to the site was prejudicial to the consideration of the Sphere and not the best way to proceed.
11.Hundreds of people access the Dounreay site every day and go past the Sphere. Access to the Sphere is possible and safe.
12.Parts of the site are to be de-licensed. The area around the Sphere is to undergo decontamination.
13.We believe that the costs of care and maintenance may be exaggerated by the need to incorporate overheads for unforeseen circumstances, and that the final costs are not necessarily as projected. These data are not given in the Atkins Heritage report. We demonstrate this by reference to commercial tender.
14.We do not wish to speculate what factors are influencing DSRL in over-riding the wishes of stakeholders on what we consider to be very unsafe grounds, but we are familiar with the concept of ‘Corporate Momentum’. We recommend strongly that DSRL revisit their findings with a critical eye.
15.Even the most superficial reading of the Atkins Heritage report reveals it to be such a flawed document that it is not fit for purpose in deciding the fate of the Dounreay Sphere.
16.Having asked if any radiation professionals outside DSRL have provided any opinion on radiation and contamination in the Sphere, we have failed to receive a response. In the absence of this, we are forced to assume that there was none.
17.If this is indeed the case, then the Atkins Heritage report cannot be described as ‘independent’, for it relies solely on insider information.
18.We suspect that this is so with regard to painting/coating estimates, which are far in excess of what an outside commercial tender would and does provide.

There is a Facebook Page (http://www.facebook.com/#%21/group.php?gid=141657212543519), a Petition (http://www.gopetition.com/petitions/save-the-dounreay-dome.html) and a website (http://www.dounreaydome.org.uk) if you want to show support for retaining the Dome.

[John Little]

The Atkins Heritage Report is such a compendium of misinformation and innuendo that demolishing the sphere on the grounds that it was infested with vampires would be more believable. [disgust]

[ducati]

The Atkins Heritage Report is such a compendium of misinformation and innuendo that demolishing the sphere on the grounds that it was infested with vampires would be more believable. [disgust]

Is it? :eek:

[John Little]

LOL! I couldn't possibly say!
You'd better put the question to DSRL.

But based on the Atkins report they will probably say yes.

And what will you do then? :lol:

[Alice in Blunderland]

And what will you do then? :lol:

Start a campaign to have it relocated to Portgower............... :Razz [lol]

[John Little]

:lol: Well if the standards of proof currently being applied to the sphere are applied in this case I do not see why that should not be possible. It would look quite good at Portgower.....;)

[Alice in Blunderland]

:lol: Well if the standards of proof currently being applied to the sphere are applied in this case I do not see why that should not be possible. It would look quite good at Portgower.....;)

You could use it as a tunnel for the train to go through.



Would the train make it out the other side :eek:

[John Little]

Probably not - the giant hamster and the vampires would have a field day.

[John Little]

But I'm afraid it's a pipe dream As we have all been reliably informed the Dome is so contaminated that it practically glows in the dark and cannot be accessed. And the vampires could never afford the diamond encrusted paint so I'm sorry - it is but a fantasy :(

Mind you fantasy seems very in right now.

[Phill]

For those that may be interested the website (http://www.dounreaydome.org.uk/) has been receiving quite a few hits from UKAEA & Atkins.

:confused

[John Little]

It's a thing well said that a prophet has no honour in his own country; except in this case the steel sphere is the object in question. There's quite a few people who see it as just another old industrial building that could and should be demolished.

The sphere is my Facebook photo at the moment.

An American friend of mine was intrigued by this and asked me what this building was. So I told her about the sphere and that it was going to be demolished.

She was astonished. That we should even contemplate the tearing down of such an iconic and unique structure is 'unfortunate'.

Just an outsiders' view really - bit like my own if it comes to it. But I found it interesting.

[badger]

Demolishing the dome would be sheer vandalism, it is one the few really well known structures in Caithness. I don't know enough about the technical side, and am quite prepared to accept Phill's opinion, but I never did believe the estimated cost of repainting. Who knows what might not have been invented by the due date? Of course it should be kept.

[John Little]

Demolishing the dome would be sheer vandalism, it is one the few really well known structures in Caithness. I don't know enough about the technical side, and am quite prepared to accept Phill's opinion, but I never did believe the estimated cost of repainting. Who knows what might not have been invented by the due date? Of course it should be kept.

It's funny you should say that. Somewhere on the internet, if you can be bothered looking for it, there's a news release claiming that the struts supporting the dome need to be replaced at a cost of £35 million.

I sort of blew up laughing wondering what the Dome would look like with platinum or gold struts.

We did not bother asking for a commercial tender for that one because it never appeared in the Atkins Heritage report.

I wonder why?

Actually;
http://thescotsman.scotsman.com/dounreay/39Heritage-strategy39-plan-for-Dounreay.3838426.jp

One wonders what all that cash was to be spent on.

But as I said - it's not in the Atkins report.

Some folks will believe anything.

[Phill]

We believe Historic Scotland are to review the situation in light of the response we've put together and have asked DSRL & Atkins to respond to our report.

We still need you to show support though, petition here (http://www.gopetition.com/petitions/save-the-dounreay-dome.html) & Facebook group here.
(http://www.facebook.com/group.php?gid=141657212543519)

[John Little]

I suppose that the grave and reverend Professors who compiled the report will be stroking their beards and putting a response together.

Well I hope that there are some grave and reverend professors. I would hate to think that the fate of the Sphere would be decided without at least one History professor in the process.

Because if it turned out that such a report was written by executives, amateur historians and a young corporate archaeologist, then it would not carry as much weight as it appears to.


Would it?

[John Little]

I mean, generally speaking, in matters of this magnitude and of such importance, it would be reasonable to expect that the people making the decisions were very highly qualified as well as being leaders in their fields.

Wouldn't it?

But if it turned out that there was not a PhD or Professor amongst them?
Or that no university departments had been consulted?

How much weight would such a report have?

Especially if its validity were so much in question.

Would not such a report stand entirely discredited?

[Loafer]

And yet again John Little takes over a thread with his pro-dome sleverings.

If you like the thing so much, why not purchase it and rebuild it in Kent??

And no, I'm not some anti-Dounreay nut, I have worked there for over 20 years.

The Loafer

[crayola]

I think John Little and the others have done a good job. Their report is better than the one produced by DSRL and their co-author from Atkins. The original document is an overly long attempt to justify DSRL's plan to demolish the dome and the bulk of the report contains little but unjustified opinions and unreferenced and unsupported claims. I found the historical bit interesting but the rest is the sort of content-free corporate crud that too many of us spend too much of our working lives dealing with.

In contrast, the report by John and his co-authors is more factual and is in my opinion a genuine critical analysis.

Demolishing the dome but opening an exhibition with a few artifacts and documents would be like demolishing the pyramids and justifying that action by putting a few mummies in a museum. Or levelling Versailles but keeping the French crown jewels.

[TudorRose]

Demolishing the dome but opening an exhibition with a few artifacts and documents would be like demolishing the pyramids and justifying that action by putting a few mummies in a museum. Or levelling Versailles but keeping the French crown jewels.

Totally agree with your comment. People come from around the World to see the Dounreay Dome. Very sad, if such an iconic building should be demolished. Like others who have commented, I feel this is all about money, but once it is demolished. It is too late to suddenly realise its importance! :)

[Loafer]

Totally agree with your comment. People come from around the World to see the Dounreay Dome. Very sad, if such an iconic building should be demolished. Like others who have commented, I feel this is all about money, but once it is demolished. It is too late to suddenly realise its importance! :)

I am speechless! "people come from all over the world to see the Dounreay dome"

I can see the holidaymakers saying at the Sphinx "To hell with this 100 degree sunshine, I canna be bothered with this 5,000 year old thing of beauty, let's go and see ee the manky 50 year old Dome o' Discovery in the peein rain"

As the well known saying goes "What a load of pish"

I have heard it all now.

The Loafer

[scotsboy]

I am speechless! "people come from all over the world to see the Dounreay dome"

I can see the holidaymakers saying at the Sphinx "To hell with this 100 degree sunshine, I canna be bothered with this 5,000 year old thing of beauty, let's go and see ee the manky 50 year old Dome o' Discovery in the peein rain"

As the well known saying goes "What a load of pish"

I have heard it all now.

The Loafer

Not everyone goes on holiday for Sunshine Loafer;)

[Loafer]

Not everyone goes on holiday for Sunshine Loafer;)

True, I am not a sunshine lover myself, just trying to make some sort of comparison.

Come on, the dome isn't herds of wildebeast, Sydney Opera House or the Hanging Gardens of Babylon (apologies to Mr B Fawlty) is it??!!

I certainly haven't met strange accents in Thurso asking in awe of "The Dounreay Dome"

The Loafer

[TudorRose]

I am speechless! "people come from all over the world to see the Dounreay dome"

I can see the holidaymakers saying at the Sphinx "To hell with this 100 degree sunshine, I canna be bothered with this 5,000 year old thing of beauty, let's go and see ee the manky 50 year old Dome o' Discovery in the peein rain"

As the well known saying goes "What a load of pish"

I have heard it all now.

The Loafer

Hi Loafer,

Sorry if my post offended your sensibilities. I stand by my statement having worked at the Dounreay Visitor Centre for four years, I did indeed welcome thousands of visitors from around the World. Strange as it seems the people that had travelled so far, did indeed want to see the 'Dome'. Agreed, sometimes with our Caithness weather it wasn't always visible, white being the wrong colour when the harl comes in from the sea! :)

[TudorRose]

Not everyone goes on holiday for Sunshine Loafer;)

Thank you Scotsboy for that comment. We are all individuals with likes and dislikes. Some people like the Dome, some do not. Although I do have to say, I met an awful lot of Engineers from around the World during my time at the Visitor Centre.

Joking aside their is an awareness in other parts of the World of the great contribution made by the early pioneers of the nuclear industry at Dounreay. :)

[TudorRose]

I certainly haven't met strange accents in Thurso asking in awe of "The Dounreay Dome"

The Loafer

Have you thought Loafer maybe they didn't stop in Thurso. The people I met were either going on to Orkney or travelling West!

Just a thought! :)

[achingale]

I am speechless! "people come from all over the world to see the Dounreay dome"

I can see the holidaymakers saying at the Sphinx "To hell with this 100 degree sunshine, I canna be bothered with this 5,000 year old thing of beauty, let's go and see ee the manky 50 year old Dome o' Discovery in the peein rain"

As the well known saying goes "What a load of pish"

I have heard it all now.

The Loafer

According to books written about the Dome this is actually true Loafer. People have come from all over the world to see it. I have friends who have come for visits from abroad and they wanted to visit Dounreay because they had heard about it on the news or seen articles in magazines about the pioneering work done there. Ok it is not high on the agenda like Groats, Wick or Thurso but people do want to see it. I think it should be preserved and always have because I was led to believe that was precisely what was going to happen a few years back. I for one back the campaign although I wait and see if it makes the slightest difference, but at least there are people out there giving it a go and they can turn round and say they tried to preserve our modern history.

[John Little]

"The UKAEA frequently uses the word 'iconic' in their publications when writing about the Dounreay sphere. It is an appropriate description, its silhouette is universally recognised in much the same way as, for example, the Forth Road Bridge.
But it is also more than that. It is a symbol of how man's quest to stretch the boundaries of his knowledge in pursuit of energy took him to the north coast of Scotland; how there, a construction force gave form to the dream of both scientist and engineer, and how it all changed forever the social and economic structure of the area.
In short, it forms part of the evolving history of Caithness.
But the sphere has a symbolism that stretches beyond Caithness. In itself, and what it represents, it is triumph for British
engineering. With little more than their own intuition and a blank piece of paper, engineers and scientists set down their thoughts on what they considered to be the holy grail, energy that reproduced itself. Once they were satisfied that they had the answer to this alluring quest, there remained the type of structure in which to contain their dream.
The answer was a sphere, the shape ancient Greek scholars considered to be the perfect shape. Its construction was a major engineering feat. Shaped from flat pieces of steel, it formed the largest spherical object in the world.
Today, the sphere is dramatic evidence of a golden period for British scientists, engineers and craftsmen whose skills ensured that the dream of that group who sat down with that blank sheet of paper, bore fruit.
Wouldn't it be ironic if UKAEA destroyed the very symbol of their own presence in Caithness?"

http://www.dounreay.com/UserFiles/File/archive/Dounreay%20News/Dounreay_News_Mar07.pdf

[orkneycadian]

If they are anyways like Orkney Islands Council, I wouldn't get too nostalgic.

OIC had a prime chance to save an equally iconic (for Kirkwallians) piece of heritage in the shape of the Black Building (http://www.secretscotland.org.uk/index.php/Secrets/KirkwallSectorOperationsRoom), but despite protests, petitions and whatnot, they tore it all down anyway and are in the process of turning it into housing plots! :roll:

[Phill]

Some interesting points of view so far.

We will be adding a page to the website where people can share their thoughts, views, experiences and support for the Dome. Or any other input they like to share, anecdotes, working experience, photos etc.


Please feel free to email: info@dounreaydome.org.uk
(Privacy will be respected)

or PM me directly.

[John Little]

The DFR, which featured in a postage stamp in the 1960s, was the world's first fast-breeder reactor to produce electricity. It was included along with the Forth road and rail bridges on a list of modern sites of significance drawn up by the International Council on Monuments and Sites.


http://www.johnogroat-journal.co.uk/news/fullstory.php/aid/2399/Study_could_seal_the_fate_of_DFR_dome.html

[achingale]

Maybe this thread and the 'demolish' thread should be merged??

[crayola]

I read the following in the Groat article from 2007 posted above....

The UKAEA and Historic Scotland had a so-called gentlemen's agreement that the sphere would not be listed until after it is stripped out and decontaminated. But that would be shelved were the current study to condemn the building.

Two senior officials from Historic Scotland, chief inspector Malcolm Cooper and Deborah Mays, head of listing, visited the site last Wednesday. Dr Mays said yesterday: "We had a positive meeting with Dounreay's managers and discussed plans to devise a heritage strategy for the future of the iconic features of the site.

"There is a lot of interest in seeing the dome preserved as it is a popular landmark but this must be balanced with the critical realities of the decontamination exercise. The heritage strategy will consider the options and include consultation with the public and UK heritage experts.
"We will continue to work with UKAEA to look at options for recognising this technological achievement within the context of the decommissioning process."

The DFR, which featured in a postage stamp in the 1960s, was the world's first fast-breeder reactor to produce electricity. It was included along with the Forth road and rail bridges on a list of modern sites of significance drawn up by the International Council on Monuments and Sites.Dr Deborah Mays is quoted as saying

There is a lot of interest in seeing the dome preserved as it is a popular landmark but this must be balanced with the critical realities of the decontamination exercise.

I have read the DSRL/Atkins report and I fail to see any advice from any independent radiation contamination experts!

Did DSRL consult any experts at all or did they they convince Atkins and Historic Scotland that they are the experts and that independent corroboration is not required? It seems to me that the dome's condemnation due to claims of contamination is purely down to DSRL. An inside job if you like.

Have Historic Scotland and perhaps also Atkins been duped by DSRL? The response to DSRL's report suggests to me that that is indeed the case and that is something I suggest is not good. Indeed it seems to me that no independent experts have been consulted at all!

Where are the historians' reports? Where are the independent engineers' reports? Where are the architectural historians' reports? And where are independent radiation experts' reports?

From what I read in DSRL's report, Atkins have been paid by DSRL to do a job and they have done the job that DSRL paid them to do. Where is the objectivity in that? :confused

[Phill]

Where are the historians' reports? Where are the independent engineers' reports? Where are the architectural historians' reports? And where are independent radiation experts' reports?

From what I read in DSRL's report, Atkins have been paid by DSRL to do a job and they have done the job that DSRL paid them to do. Where is the objectivity in that?


Errm, well.......in summary.....errrr....well spotted!

[hunter]

Does your misty-eyed nostalgia for a golden era include the same people who spewed the toxic crap from the dome into the seabed.

That's the sort of fruit I can liove without, thank you.

Maybe your energy would be better spent finding a way to clean up the mess left by these people, than painting them as some sort of angels who saved the universe blah blah.

They turned the land into a toxic no-go zone and they've done the same with the sea.

Keep the dome by all means - as a reminder of how stupid and wreckless people can be with the environment and people's health.

Heroes?

I dont think so.

[rob murray]

Fair points, which are unchallengable, Dounreay "management" over the years, have a lot to answer for..my basic point is to keep the Dome so as to commerate the thousands of ordinary people involved in the construction process and thereafter the day to day running of the place..the unsung heroes if you like...Dounreay was and is the economic centre of Caithness and North West Sutherland. I also believe that if you can "commodify" the Falls and Shankill as tourism attractions, then you can easily turn the Dome and related historical / scientific achievements into a post Dounreay, viable tourism centred business..I sincerley believe this. Maybe the powers to be wish to eradicate the Dome, but that lets them of the hook doesnt it..erase it and erase over 50 years of human experience...good bad and indifferent ! Im for a permanent memorial.

[rob murray]

Does your misty-eyed nostalgia for a golden era include the same people who spewed the toxic crap from the dome into the seabed.

That's the sort of fruit I can liove without, thank you.

Maybe your energy would be better spent finding a way to clean up the mess left by these people, than painting them as some sort of angels who saved the universe blah blah.

They turned the land into a toxic no-go zone and they've done the same with the sea.

Keep the dome by all means - as a reminder of how stupid and wreckless people can be with the environment and people's health.

Heroes?

I dont think so.

Heres a quote I pulled from the Org

"It is not clear how history will finally judge the fast reactor concept. What is not in doubt is the vision of the engineers and scientists behind the concept. When they started out they had no detailed template for the design of a 60MW reactor. All they had to guide them was their brilliant engineering and scientific design intuition"

Fair enough...dependant on your view point of history, the entire project impact can be seen positively or negatively.... pushing the boundaries yes indeed...but no mention of the footsoldiers..the concrete labourers, steel fixers, scaffolders etc who built the thing !

[John Little]

Rob - you are in the right of it and that's about as eloquently as I have ever seen a thing. I've seen the videos and photos of the guys who actually built that thing- knee deep in sea water in winter and working all weathers.

It's about them building something unique in the world and the biggest of all that were built.

I suppose it takes a local to see it clearly but you have the heart of the matter - I take my hat off to you sir.

[Phill]

The Facebook group currently has over 300 members showing their support for the Dome.

We are also very pleased to have the support of Sir Tam Dalyell, the former MP has taken a keen interest in and strongly supports our campaign to save the Dome.

[Phill]

Lord Maclennan
Jamie Stone MSP
Anything Radioactive (http://www.anythingradioactive.com/)
Authors Daud Sutton & Rene Cochlin

And more importantly a slow but steady growth to the Facebook group.

Do not be sold the easily the idea that after the scientific achievements and the hands on work by many, many people that UKAEA / DSRL / Govt' can walk away after leveling the site and fencing it off.

The area deserves acknowledgment. The people who built and worked the DFR, and the whole site, deserve celebration.

What better way than through the world recognised iconic structure?

[hunter]

I've read a lot of misty-eyed love for a giant rusting ball, but no-one seems to have any idea what to use it for or how they will pay for it.

The ringmaster here can't be campaigning to keep it for the asthetic value, since he lives in Kent and would need the eyesight of Superman.

I laugh when you accuse the nuclear industry of exaggerating the danger of radiation. That must be a first!

[Phill]

Interesting you think there is a 'ringmaster'!

And it ain't rusting if yer paint it, oh, that's an interesting point!

[hunter]

Came across this on You Tube

Will this make the fan club laugh or cry?

Lovely old scenes of the sphere. Lots of scenes of buildings being torn down.

The Dounreay Story (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=g31fBlP0ylc)

I rather like the old view of a flat landscape!

http://www.cartoonstock.com/newscartoons/cartoonists/gri/lowres/grin1250l.jpg

[Phill]

I like the cartoon. Funny the imagery used.

Interesting film too, and the same image was seen time and time again. Even from that film this is what Caithness was sold as part of the cleanup:
http://i805.photobucket.com/albums/yy337/Phill_Rawlins/itsalljustrandom/dounreaypostcleanup.jpg

The story of Dounreay is not a perfect one, yes UKAEA / DSRL etc. would like us all to view it through rose tinted spectacles but the symbol of Dounreay is now the dome, let the dome be the focus for all the history - good, bad and the ugly.

As has been mentioned on another thread why not let this be the centre piece of a tourist facility where the complete past can be uncovered, the castle, the battle, the archeology.

Or fence it off and in true government spirit forget it ever happened?

[rob murray]

I like the cartoon. Funny the imagery used.

Interesting film too, and the same image was seen time and time again. Even from that film this is what Caithness was sold as part of the cleanup:
http://i805.photobucket.com/albums/yy337/Phill_Rawlins/itsalljustrandom/dounreaypostcleanup.jpg

The story of Dounreay is not a perfect one, yes UKAEA / DSRL etc. would like us all to view it through rose tinted spectacles but the symbol of Dounreay is now the dome, let the dome be the focus for all the history - good, bad and the ugly.

As has been mentioned on another thread why not let this be the centre piece of a tourist facility where the complete past can be uncovered, the castle, the battle, the archeology.

Or fence it off and in true government spirit forget it ever happened?

Well there we are then, at sometime someone must have take the decision that the Dome was to stay

[SuzieTee]

I hope you're a patient bunch - the damn thing will be around for at least another decade or so.

[hunter]

That image of Dounreay after decommissioning has been around for a lot of years.

Remember it was going to take 60 odd years to do the job at first, so I doubt if they spent a great deal of time on a picture of something so far into the future.

I think they kept the sphere in the picture to keep Historic Scotland off their backs. They'd been talking on and off for years about whether the sphere should be listed or not.

I think what's happened now is that, as the timescale shortened, they've had to paint a more detailed picture of what the site will look like, because the end is now within our lifetimes.

They ought to spray paint it out now, I guess.

[Moira]

I came across this link while digging around looking for "Operation Snowdrop" stories. I thought it an interesting article along with the photo of the Dounreay Sphere under construction.

http://www.iprom.co.uk/archives/dounreay/doun4.htm

[SuzieTee]

As has been mentioned on another thread why not let this be the centre piece of a tourist facility where the complete past can be uncovered, the castle, the battle, the archeology.

Just don't understand why you would want Caithness to be remembered for a failed experiment that has contaminated the land at Dounreay and fouled the beaches.

Why not push Caithness as a centre for outdoors holidays, shooting, fishing, walking, climbing, rather than a place where you don't want to walk on the beaches?

[crayola]

A failed experiment it was not. A very successful pair of experimental fast reactors it was.

The dome is an icon. It is an icon to the proponents of its success and it is an icon to the detractors of nuclear-anything. To the latter it is an icon of things they don't like but it is an icon nevertheless and as such it should be preserved.

[theone]

Just don't understand why you would want Caithness to be remembered for a failed experiment that has contaminated the land at Dounreay and fouled the beaches.

Why not push Caithness as a centre for outdoors holidays, shooting, fishing, walking, climbing, rather than a place where you don't want to walk on the beaches?

A failed experiment?

Nonsense.

Fast Reactor technology is being used all over the world, following the lessons learned in Caithness. Ask the Japnese. They've got a number of reactors producing energy based on the PFR design with great success.

It's a little known fact that one of the biggest failures or defects of PFR was it's steam turbine. The component that converts the heat energy produced into electrical energy for use. Any failure, or mistakes, were down to technology 100 years old at the time of build, nothing to do with the nuclear side of things.

Our failure is not using the technology we developed, by leaving it at the experimental stage.

[hunter]

I spy a fence all the way round the site in that post-decommissioning image.

The ground is so minging with radioactive waste that no-one will be allowed near for centuries.

You really think a giant empty ball sitting on top of that toxic dung heap will be tourist attraction?

Yeah, sure.

If you're one of the mad scientists, I suppose.

I mean, Chernobyl is a real hotspot with tourists isn't it?

Or Gruniard island? They were queuing up to go there too.

"Oh darling, course it'll be a nice holiday - you can go deep diving in the shaft while I potter around in these unusual looking weeds. I bought some special sun cream just in case - its Factor 1005 with extra lead."

Me thinks a dose of reality is needed here.

If that is a success, God help us all when you have a failure.

I'll back your campaign if you want to keep it as a tombstone for the mad scientist. May we never see their like again.

[Moira]

I spy a fence all the way round the site in that post-decommissioning image...

I'm guessing you are Herbie Lyall or closely related. :)

[hunter]

I'm guessing you are Herbie Lyall or closely related. :)

I'm the founder of his fan club

:roll:

[Moira]

I'm the founder of his fan club


You'll have you seen the latest then?!
http://www.johnogroat-journal.co.uk/news/fullstory.php/aid/9009/An_emotional_case_for_a_metal_dome.html

[hunter]

You'll have you seen the latest then?!
http://www.johnogroat-journal.co.uk/news/fullstory.php/aid/9009/An_emotional_case_for_a_metal_dome.html

Enjoyed reading that. I like his emphasis on people instead of lumps of metal.

[John Little]

My prime concern about the sphere is that the reasons given for demolition simply do not hold water and that the claims of radiation and contamination serve only to close down debate. If the thing is to be demolished then let it be for transparent reasons. Those pertain to finance and the fact that no suggestions have been made as to what to do with it.

Some people hate the Sphere. And some do not. Arguing about it on here is really a waste of time because I ain’t going to change Hunter’s mind nor he mine.

But that debate surely should be something that the public had among themselves?

Believe me, if I thought that the overwhelming majority of locals wanted it demolished then I for one would subside into silence despite the fact that I think it’s really a matter of national heritage. But I do not think it is so.



The NDA had plans to build a very expensive nuclear archive on land at Wick airport - a thing which would cost up to £20 millions according to some reports. I have spent some time in archives and I know that most of the people there are genealogists - 75% of them. Who would visit a nuclear archives outside Wick?

Not many I think. And not many jobs would be created by it either – they say 20. And how long would they last in the grave like hush between visits from the academic elite? Now it’s been cancelled, ironically because no long term funding has been identified for it. Shelved they say.

A white elephant has been shelved.



Dounreay is not just a sphere. It is a battlefield from the Clan Wars; it has a 16th century castle; it was the scene of a siege by the New Model Army in 1651. It has unexcavated neolithic remains and a World War 2 airfield. So much History in one small area. It also has a rather good golfcourse next door to it.

Caithness is having to diversify its economy as Dounreay shuts down. One of the things that it is doing is trying to encourage Tourism.

For the money that was going to be spent on a white elephant for a few visitors at Wick, a Highland Heritage centre could ideally be sited at Dounreay with the sphere at its heart. A small seasonal museum devoted to the site's history and exhibitions of Caithness Stone cutting, herring fishing, crofting etc. They could even reconstruct some buildings there. I think of the Eden Project or of Beamish - or even of Blists Hill with re-enactors. Something to draw tourists north; something with a shop, a cafe, a car park with ample space on a rainy day. Something worth visiting on the north coast- with push buttons and quiz trails for children. Caithness Horizons writ large.

Something to provide far more jobs than a nuclear archive. The archive could even be in the Sphere. Caithness Horizons gets funding from all over the place- they could even run Dounreay as a seasonal outreach. Something that could start small and expand in time- and pay for itself in admission fees.
In fact the mechanisms for running Horizons seem tailored to run such a place.


£20 million buys a lot of potential tourism- better spent than on 20 jobs for it has potential to create more. Even starting small.

A cinema (no cinema north of Inverness) to draw people for miles round, a dance floor, a museum. A Planetarium.... theatre Multi-use for the same space…. etc etc

There seems to be plenty of money about to demolish the power station. And a commercial company will be taking over next year. They are not doing that from the goodness of their hearts but because there is profit to be made. If there is a lot of cash to be made from that place so that companies bid for the privilege of running it, then why not some cream-off to develop the site itself as something of benefit to the community?

The NDA has made a commitment on preserving Dounreay’s heritage, yet the Archives is scuppered for now. There has now to be another route.

Would the £20 million that was available still be available for developing part of the site as a tourist centre? If it charged admissions and paid its own way?

If so, would the companies who set up Beamish or Blists Hill be interested in doing such a thing in Caithness?

I am sure that given discussion with some of the best minds in Scotland something could be done with that 150 acre site, only a small proportion of which is contaminated. Dounreay, on the face of it, has far more going for it onsite than the Weald and Downland museum at Singleton, or Blists Hill at Coalbrookedale, and even more so with a world famous structure at its heart.

But the reasons given for demolition are misleading- that much I know.


Caithness is not so rich in tourist places that it can throw one away for dubious reasons - at least in the opinion of the group I am privileged to be part of.

The flat case has been given that the Sphere has to be demolished - that there is no choice- end of story.

Yet this is not so. It does not have to be demolished.

That is not to say that it should not be- but that is another matter.

It fulfills all of the criteria for listing - but it was the matters of radiation, contamination, and access that prevented Historic Scotland from doing so. My group believes that the Atkins Report overstated those matters, and our response to it sets that out.

It has ample car parking space, a good road to Thurso and if this place;

http://www.ironbridge.org.uk/our_attractions/blists_hill_victorian_town/

or this place;

http://www.beamish.org.uk/

or this place;

http://www.wealddown.co.uk/

can draw in tourists, then I do not see why a modest venture of the kind at Dounreay should not do likewise.

Beamish employs 90 people full time, rising to over 200 during the summer.

With a major tourist attraction, a golf course next door and the beauty of the area, maybe a small hotel.....?

[bekisman]

"The NDA had plans to build a very expensive nuclear archive on land at Wick airport"

At WICK!?

What a stupid idea - that's like having an interpretive centre 30 miles away from where the subject is...:confused

[John Little]

http://www.johnogroat-journal.co.uk/news/fullstory.php/aid/8986/_Moral_duty__to_deliver_on_archive_plan.html

Depends who you read Bekisman - some reports say £20,000,000.

That could do a lot on the Dounreay site....

[theone]

"The NDA had plans to build a very expensive nuclear archive on land at Wick airport"

At WICK!?

What a stupid idea - that's like having an interpretive centre 30 miles away from where the subject is...:confused

I believe the archive is not just for Dounreay, but all of Britain's nuclear archives.




The NDA had plans to build a very expensive nuclear archive on land at Wick airport - a thing which would cost up to £20 millions according to some reports. I have spent some time in archives and I know that most of the people there are genealogists - 75% of them. Who would visit a nuclear archives outside Wick?

Not many I think. And not many jobs would be created by it either – they say 20. And how long would they last in the grave like hush between visits from the academic elite? Now it’s been cancelled, ironically because no long term funding has been identified for it. Shelved they say.

A white elephant has been shelved.



I'm not sure if I agree with that. The archives won't be there purely as a museum. It's not going to be a landmark of rememberance but a store of knowledge.

The archive is to digitise all the information gained from the nuclear programme. To risk losing this information would be a disgrace. We pioneered the technology for many years and it would be wrong not to preserve that knowledge and those lessons learnt.

I believe the NDA (or DSRL?) has a legal obligation as part of their remit to store all this information, and so, I believe, they should.

Whether pro nuclear or anti nuclear, I don't believe anyone could justify binning all that was discovered.

[John Little]

"Whether pro nuclear or anti nuclear, I don't believe anyone could justify binning all that was discovered."

I was not suggesting that.

I do not see why the archive could not be housed at Dounreay along with other things to bring visitors.

Having done research in quite a few archives I know that they are not very populated. The National Archives get quite full but they are mostly genealogists.

Or another example might be the archives at the Imperial War Museum. The museum seethes with people. The archives dept usually has a few visitor by appointment. Putting the archives with a museum seems appropriate.

[theone]

Fair enough.

I must agree that maybe Dounreay would be a better location.

I just think any archive would certainly not be a white elephan,t but a lasting legacy that could in many ways justify the expense and effort of 60+ years work.

[crayola]

My prime concern about the sphere is that the reasons given for demolition simply do not hold water and that the claims of radiation and contamination serve only to close down debate. If the thing is to be demolished then let it be for transparent reasons. Those pertain to finance and the fact that no suggestions have been made as to what to do with it.

Some people hate the Sphere. And some do not. Arguing about it on here is really a waste of time because I ain’t going to change Hunter’s mind nor he mine.

But that debate surely should be something that the public had among themselves?

Believe me, if I thought that the overwhelming majority of locals wanted it demolished then I for one would subside into silence despite the fact that I think it’s really a matter of national heritage. But I do not think it is so.



The NDA had plans to build a very expensive nuclear archive on land at Wick airport - a thing which would cost up to £20 millions according to some reports. I have spent some time in archives and I know that most of the people there are genealogists - 75% of them. Who would visit a nuclear archives outside Wick?

Not many I think. And not many jobs would be created by it either – they say 20. And how long would they last in the grave like hush between visits from the academic elite? Now it’s been cancelled, ironically because no long term funding has been identified for it. Shelved they say.

A white elephant has been shelved.



Dounreay is not just a sphere. It is a battlefield from the Clan Wars; it has a 16th century castle; it was the scene of a siege by the New Model Army in 1651. It has unexcavated neolithic remains and a World War 2 airfield. So much History in one small area. It also has a rather good golfcourse next door to it.

Caithness is having to diversify its economy as Dounreay shuts down. One of the things that it is doing is trying to encourage Tourism.

For the money that was going to be spent on a white elephant for a few visitors at Wick, a Highland Heritage centre could ideally be sited at Dounreay with the sphere at its heart. A small seasonal museum devoted to the site's history and exhibitions of Caithness Stone cutting, herring fishing, crofting etc. They could even reconstruct some buildings there. I think of the Eden Project or of Beamish - or even of Blists Hill with re-enactors. Something to draw tourists north; something with a shop, a cafe, a car park with ample space on a rainy day. Something worth visiting on the north coast- with push buttons and quiz trails for children. Caithness Horizons writ large.

Something to provide far more jobs than a nuclear archive. The archive could even be in the Sphere. Caithness Horizons gets funding from all over the place- they could even run Dounreay as a seasonal outreach. Something that could start small and expand in time- and pay for itself in admission fees.
In fact the mechanisms for running Horizons seem tailored to run such a place.


£20 million buys a lot of potential tourism- better spent than on 20 jobs for it has potential to create more. Even starting small.

A cinema (no cinema north of Inverness) to draw people for miles round, a dance floor, a museum. A Planetarium.... theatre Multi-use for the same space…. etc etc

There seems to be plenty of money about to demolish the power station. And a commercial company will be taking over next year. They are not doing that from the goodness of their hearts but because there is profit to be made. If there is a lot of cash to be made from that place so that companies bid for the privilege of running it, then why not some cream-off to develop the site itself as something of benefit to the community?

The NDA has made a commitment on preserving Dounreay’s heritage, yet the Archives is scuppered for now. There has now to be another route.

Would the £20 million that was available still be available for developing part of the site as a tourist centre? If it charged admissions and paid its own way?

If so, would the companies who set up Beamish or Blists Hill be interested in doing such a thing in Caithness?

I am sure that given discussion with some of the best minds in Scotland something could be done with that 150 acre site, only a small proportion of which is contaminated. Dounreay, on the face of it, has far more going for it onsite than the Weald and Downland museum at Singleton, or Blists Hill at Coalbrookedale, and even more so with a world famous structure at its heart.

But the reasons given for demolition are misleading- that much I know.


Caithness is not so rich in tourist places that it can throw one away for dubious reasons - at least in the opinion of the group I am privileged to be part of.

The flat case has been given that the Sphere has to be demolished - that there is no choice- end of story.

Yet this is not so. It does not have to be demolished.

That is not to say that it should not be- but that is another matter.

It fulfills all of the criteria for listing - but it was the matters of radiation, contamination, and access that prevented Historic Scotland from doing so. My group believes that the Atkins Report overstated those matters, and our response to it sets that out.

It has ample car parking space, a good road to Thurso and if this place;

http://www.ironbridge.org.uk/our_attractions/blists_hill_victorian_town/

or this place;

http://www.beamish.org.uk/

or this place;

http://www.wealddown.co.uk/

can draw in tourists, then I do not see why a modest venture of the kind at Dounreay should not do likewise.

Beamish employs 90 people full time, rising to over 200 during the summer.

With a major tourist attraction, a golf course next door and the beauty of the area, maybe a small hotel.....?That's a fabulous post John. It summarises the paucity of argument from those who would destroy the dome due only to lack of money and fear of their unknown. This is the same fear of the unknown that George Gunn espouses in the Groat. Although why those who understand the issues that George Gunn clearly doesn't should be feart remains a mystery to me.

What I have always found strange is Dounreay's willingness to commit money to Caithness Horizons in Thurso and the would-be national nuclear archive in Wick whilst wanting to demolish the real thing that is the true heritage at Dounreay. That strikes me as the equivalent of demolishing Edinburgh Castle and moving Mons Meg and the crown jewels to Glenrothes for safe keeping. Or building Wimpey houses on the battlefield at Culloden and moving selected archaeological remains to an empty bookshop at the retail park. Or demolishing the Finnieston crane and putting up an A0 poster of it in the toilets over the river at the Science Centre or Harry Ramsden's.

The dome has been a tourist attraction for decades and it could become a much bigger one with a little thought and investment.

I would be delighted to contribute a little witchcraft to the scientific mix. ;)

Double, double toil and trouble;
Fire burn and cauldron bubble.

[John Little]

LOL. I think a little magic may be in order Crayola, but please make it the white sort.

But I do think that George Gunn has done the right thing in drawing the matter to the open attention of the community. There is a lot of ex cathedra finality about the sphere since the Atkins report came out, and not a lot of open questioning of what it says - though people talk about it privately.

Love it or hate it, Caithness undoubtedly has something that is completely unique in the world. Caithness was not consulted about its arrival.

But we live in a more democratic age and Caithness should be consulted over its departure or not.

And I mean a real consultation - not a mockery where 21 of 38 stakeholders vote for retention and 17 vote against- then the majority gets over-ridden by newly discovered "insoluble" problems. That's just going through the motions.

George Gunn wants the people to speak and I agree with him 100%.

[hunter]

I agree with a lot of people have been saying these past few posts.

Lots of very good thoughts and ideas.

I'm all for investing in things of value.

Where I think I diverge - and where I side with George Gunn - is people's preoccupation with the "bricks and mortar" thing.

A giant, dirty steel ball is just that - nothing more. It's a rusting lump on the landscape. Its preservation serves no practical purpose, other than as a source of nostalgia for people who look at the world through engineering goggles.

It's the people who made Dounreay what it was, for better or for worse. It is their story, their experience that is worthy of preservation.

Dounreay's place in history depends not on salvaging a decrepit lump of metal but in capturing people's experience, their memories, their telling of the story.

Boffins might understand why the sphere at Dounreay is of great technical value and it is far more important to keep for ever and day than, say, Longannet power station. But to most people they mean exactly the same thing - electricity. The only difference is that one looks a little prettier than the other.

[John Little]

The only thing we reallydiffer on Hunter is our perception of the Dome. However, if you remove the aesthetics from it then it could be of great benefit to the community. This describes how Beamish got up and running; it echoes some of what you are saying I think about the people, their story and their experience. And love it or hate it, Dounreay is part of that.

If Geordies can do this then I do not see why Caithness could not do something similar if some of that £20,000,000 were still available and some buildings could be refurbished instead of demolished at Dounreay. Not everything is contaminated and remediation is, according to their own blurbs, very possible.

"The beginnings of Beamish go back to 1970, when Frank Atkinson, first Director and founder, and his small band of colleagues first came to Beamish. The idea, however, to establish an 'open air museum' of the Scandinavian type goes back to 1958, when Frank had just been appointed Director of the Bowes Museum at Barnard Castle. Frank realised that the North East region was changing dramatically, the old industries of coal mining, shipbuilding and iron and steel manufacture were disappearing along with the communities that served them. He was most concerned that the region was losing its identity, "customs, traditions and ways of speech" were dying out. Frank proposed that the new museum would "illustrate vividly the way of life ... of the ordinary people", and would "attempt to make the history of the region live".

Frank adopted a policy of "unselective collecting ... you offer it to us and we will collect it". The imagination of the people of the region was captured and they donated objects of all sizes, from steam engines to shops and sewing machines. A whole army camp of 22 huts and hangers at Brancepeth was rapidly filled, creating a bond between museum and community, which has never been lost.

A group of Friends actively collected for and supported the idea of the museum and eventually, after much discussion and argument, the politicians of the region representing nine local authorities within the North East, agreed to a joint financial and management arrangement. The search was then on for a suitable site. A basin shaped valley of about 300 acres, with steep slopes, a river, woodland areas, some level ground and a south facing aspect, was thought to be ideal. Beamish, one of many sites considered and once the home of the Shafto and Eden families was available and was ideal for the purpose, having buildings of some antiquity already in situ. The land was acquired and the rest is history.



The Role and Purpose of the Museum

Beamish plays a major role in the preservation of the heritage of the North East of England. It is now established as a major museum with outstanding collections of national and international importance and is one of the major tourist attractions in the North of England.

Beamish was established as a regional open air museum, its collections are drawn from the geographical counties of Northumberland, Tyne & Wear, Durham and Cleveland. The periods within which collections are sought cover mainly the eighteenth, nineteenth and early twentieth centuries. At present the period areas represent the early 1800s leading up to 1825, when the Stockton and Darlington Railway was opened with George Stephenson's Locomotion, and the early 1900s leading up to 1913, immediately prior to the First World War. These periods were particularly selected in order to represent the importance of certain aspects of regional history and development. The museum however does collect outside these dates."

http://www.beamishcollections.com/background/default.asp

[hunter]

Beamish is a fabulous experience.

But it's not "rotten with radioactivity" and neither did it need to be fenced off for 300 years to protect the public from any nasties.

Do you honestly think something with hazard warning signs around it is the sort of tourist attraction Caithness ought to be developing?

It's an odd sort of tourist who'll be attracted to that.

[John Little]

Dounreay is not rotten with radioactivity Hunter. The phrase is meaningless. It's a piece of propaganda.

And most of the site is going to be delicensed in the end. A very small part will be fenced off.

The radiation bit is dealt with here;
http://www.dounreaydome.org.uk/Dounreay%20Sphere%20Response%204%20Nov%202010-4.pdf

by a bloke who knows about it.

Pages 6 to 8

[hunter]

Every image I've seen shows most of Dounreay fenced.

The land where the dome sites will be fenced off too.

What's the point of keeping the ball when no-one will be allowed near it.

Forgive my cyncism, but I never thought I'd live to see the day when the nuclear industry is accused of exaggerating its danger.

[John Little]

The images are produced by DSRL are they not?

Well I have no doubt there would be a fence - even farms have fences round them. Most of the land is to be returned to agricultural use I understand.

Even the heavily contaminated bit round the castle has been remediated by the removal of the earth to sufficient depth and back-filling with rubble. DSRL have presented that, rightly, as a triumph for the decontamination industry. They even say that they have shown that even the most contaminated areas can be cleaned up.

2000 people work on that site now. Perhaps you could ask yourself why DSRL say that the site is dangerous and will have to be fenced off for 300 years when they happily allow 2000 people into it every day?

LOL - there was this guy called Hunter, if I remember correctly, who thought that the claims of nuclear contamination on Dounreay golf-course had been exaggerated...

Things get exaggerated if there is gain to be had.

If you read those pages of our response then you will understand that not only will it be possible to access the Dome but to enter it when the reactor has been removed and the contamination removed from the inside. I absolutely believe the man who wrote it. I also believe the quotation on the following pages which makes a nonsense of the allegations that it would cost £500,000 every ten years to paint.

And in the month and a half since we brought our report out, no-one has contradicted it.

Look H - I can see where you are coming from; you hate the thing. Cool.

But it's there. It can be used in a way that suits your aims as well as ours. A force for good at the heart of a centre for heritage that brings in money and jobs for the area.

I do not see why a package of propaganda and misinformation should be allowed to stifle even consideration of such a course of action.

Do you?

[hunter]

Most of the land is to be returned to agricultural use I understand.


I suggest you check your facts. I'm told there is no plan to decontaminate or delicense any of it now. The country's broke; Caithness isn't short of land.

I don't hate the thing. I just think there's much better things to spend our money on than trying to salvage a heap of radioactive scrap metal that was redundant 30-odd years ago.

Engineers like gadgets, I accept that. That's all it is - a gadget. A bloody expensive one at that.

£4,000,000,000. Not to build it. Or to operate. Thats just the cost of cleaning up the mess.

A penny on income tax for every person in the UK for a year, just to get rid of the rubbish created by "heroes".

Its redundant. Its finished. And those who created it have left you and I with a whopper of a bill for it. Now you want to spend even more money on it.

Throwing good money after bad, me thinks. The country's broke. It's junk. Not just junk. Toxic junk. Who in their right mind wants to keep and celebrate that.

PS I dont know anything about a golf course at Dounreay. If you look at what's happening at Buldoo, you'll see that the area of land that's contaminated is about to increase, not decrease. You're welcome to potter about in radioactive waste if you like. I wont be joining you, thanks.

[John Little]

I do check my facts Hunter,

"25. There is a small amount of radioactive and non-radioactive contaminated soil on the Dounreay site. This has to be managed as part of the restoration of the Dounreay site. It is assumed that any contamination will either be removed or managed in-situ. Any residual contaminated soil left in-situ, with or without additional engineering measures, will only be allowable if the regulators agree the residual risk is well below regulatory safety limits, presenting ‘no danger’."

http://www.dounreay.com/UserFiles/File/archive/Site%20end%20state/Site%20End%20State%20-%20Stakeholder%20Panel%20Paper%202.pdf

It contradicts what is fed to the newspapers. No?

'Small amount' does not equate with 150 acres, much of which is either uncontaminated airfield or agricultural land that was never developed.

I also corresponded with some people who do not accept all they read about Dounreay. That's why we wrote a response to the Atkins Report. If you choose not to believe it then I cannot help you for there is nothing more to say.

The money to clean up Dounreay is going to be spent anyway. It's ring-fenced and the site cannot be left. Either Babcock or Caithness Solutions will take over next year as PBO and cream off what they can of £2.5 bn as corporate profit.

I don't see why some slice of that cannot be used for what I have suggested.
But if you are happy with that situation, fine.



http://forum.caithness.org/showthread.php?t=14290

[hunter]

The biggest financial crash in living memory has happened since that report was written.

£2,500,000,000 is just the cost of knocking it down and packing up the waste.

£4,000,000,000 is the total bill that includes getting rid of the waste and keeping you and I out for the next three centuries.

How many jobs will an empty steel ball create? Er, one painter maybe. Part-time?

We need proper jobs. Not memorials.

If you're telling me not to trust what the nuclear industry says, fair enough. They have a long history of underplaying and lying about the danger.

[John Little]

Your post indicates that I am talking but you are not listening. I suggest that you re-read the last two pages of this thread.

When the steam stops then I will reply. Until then - arrivederci! :lol:

[sandyr1]

Report released Oct 2/2010.
UK....1 trillion pounds in debt. Experts believe that this number could be upwards of 4T pounds.
The cuts have not yet become real.......methinks that de-commissioning could be down to a razor wire fence with guards!
It has occurred in other places.

[John Little]

I hope that you are wrong Sandy. That is a doomsday scenario which spells disaster for Caithness. It would be a stupid government that did such a thing.

The political price for such a thing would be unacceptable - I don't believe our politicians are that mad.

[John Little]

Mrs Lyndall Leet, an architect of standing and reputation, much experienced in conservation work and architectural heritage matters, wishes to add her name to the list of people wishing to retain the dome.

We value and welcome her support.

She will be widely known to many Orgers as the Vice President of Thurso Heritage Society, but it should be clear that she is not speaking for the society, but for herself.

[crayola]

Report released Oct 2/2010.
UK....1 trillion pounds in debt. Experts believe that this number could be upwards of 4T pounds. So 1 trillion pounds could be in excess of 4 trillion pounds? :roll:

What are you on about now? I wish you would either explain what you are saying or if you don't understand then please quote your sources. You make DSRL's claims seem well researched. :lol:

[hunter]

Nuclear boffin John Little says the sphere is dramatic evidence of a golden period for British scientists, engineers and craftsmen whose skills ensured that the dream of that group who sat down with that blank sheet of paper, bore fruit.

Nuclear boffin John Large (http://www.johnogroat-journal.co.uk/news/fullstory.php/aid/8911/Particle_find_shows__callous_disregard_for_public_ safety_.html) says the same people showed a callous disregard for public safety and ought to be ashamed.

Little and Large . . . who should I listen to?

Are they by any chance related?

[sandyr1]

I hope that you are wrong Sandy. That is a doomsday scenario which spells disaster for Caithness. It would be a stupid government that did such a thing.

The political price for such a thing would be unacceptable - I don't believe our politicians are that mad.

Yes, I know what you are saying, but this report reads that each successive UK Gov't has been hiding this debt. No one has the '..........s' to say.....Things have got to change.
I think I said 2010/ this was discovered in 2009 under G. Brown/ perhaps my mistake......
In April 2009 Darling said that they were going to borrow another 700B pounds.........on top of the Trillions owed in debt.
When does this 'thing' become unsustainable?
I am sure you know better than I, but there seems to be a problem and I suspect the North of Scotland does not fare well when it comes to work, particularly when the Scots turned down Nuke!

[John Little]

Now we descend from argument to ridicule.

Is bar room raving all ye have left?


When you are in arguing mode you are good to bandy with. Not now. [disgust]

Not you Sandy - him above you.

[hunter]

As I understand things, Sandy, all the cuts announced by the coalition don't even touch the debt. They just balance the books each year and stop us running up even more debt. Someone, at some point, is gonna have to repay the trillions.

[hunter]

Now we descend from argument to ridicule.

Is bar room raving all ye have left?


When you are in arguing mode you are good to bandy with. Not now. [disgust]

Not you Sandy - him above you.

Oh dearie me . . .

Mr Little is right and Mr Large is wrong?

[thirsaloon]

It’s good to see such an interest in the preservation/demolition of the Dome. Don’t get me wrong, I’m not trying to belittle its role and what positives it brought to the county or the negatives of it. I’m if anything disappointed that the same active interest isn’t taken when it comes to the preservation of other historical buildings in the county be they iconic or not so. As for Caithness Horizons taking it over I would suggest that would be practically impossible.

[sandyr1]

As I understand things, Sandy, all the cuts announced by the coalition don't even touch the debt. They just balance the books each year and stop us running up even more debt. Someone, at some point, is gonna have to repay the trillions.

Seems that way....April 2009. A. Darling states that they are borrowing another 700B on top of what is owed. Then new Gov't somes in....It seems they are 'trying' to balance the debt! But with several trillions owed. One report sad perhaps 2060 might be a good year!

[sandyr1]

So 1 trillion pounds could be in excess of 4 trillion pounds? :roll:

What are you on about now? I wish you would either explain what you are saying or if you don't understand then please quote your sources. You make DSRL's claims seem well researched. :lol:

Peanut on ignore!

[John Little]

It’s good to see such an interest in the preservation/demolition of the Dome. Don’t get me wrong, I’m not trying to belittle its role and what positives it brought to the county or the negatives of it. I’m if anything disappointed that the same active interest isn’t taken when it comes to the preservation of other historical buildings in the county be they iconic or not so. As for Caithness Horizons taking it over I would suggest that would be practically impossible.


The Caithness Horizons suggestion was/is just that Thirsaloon. It just struck me that you have a class museum in Thurso and class people running it, and already has a range of funding bodies supporting it. It seemed logical.

I'm prepared to accept that it's practically impossible but wonder if you would mind running through why it's that way?

[hunter]

Apparently, the UK is paying £3,800,000,000 a month just in interest on the debt.

I don't know how many noughts are in a trillion.

But the total debt this month is one of them, apparently. A trillion, I mean.

I thought Dounreay was a huge liability. It's a month's payment of the interest!

Spend money on a rusty ball? We don't have any money to spend on anything!

[crayola]

Peanut on ignore!You and hunter are peas in a pod. You are both out of your depth so you either run away or resort to childish insults.

I don't think you have any idea what you are talking about when it comes to government debt just like he doesn't when talking about riddling radiation. Prove me wrong and I will withdraw my broom.

[thirsaloon]

The Caithness Horizons suggestion was/is just that Thirsaloon. It just struck me that you have a class museum in Thurso and class people running it, and already has a range of funding bodies supporting it. It seemed logical.

I'm prepared to accept that it's practically impossible but wonder if you would mind running through why it's that way?

Totally understand that it was a suggestion John and I can understand where you’re coming from. In my opinion it would take a lot of resources, something that only a big company combined with a substantial funding could concentrate on. I should point out that I am not speaking on their behalf though.

[John Little]

Totally understand that it was a suggestion John and I can understand where you’re coming from. In my opinion it would take a lot of resources, something that only a big company combined with a substantial funding could concentrate on.


Ah - well that was exactly my thought. There are two bidders for the PBO are there not? And a large amount of money set aside to decontaminate Dounreay.

So logically the successful corporation derives its profit from whatever is left over after the decommissioning project is complete. And that profit will be greater the sooner decommissioning is finished?

And during the decommissioning a certain amount of the available cash was to be used to sweeten the bitter pill of closure locally and make it politically and economically acceptable. That money to be spent on apprenticeships, archives, harbour improvements and so on.

£20,000,000 was set aside for a combined national nuclear archives and Highland archives at Wick. That funding was withdrawn pro tem last week because no long term funding could be identified and archives are not self funding.

So my question is, if a way of spending that £20,000,000 could be found so that it was not clawed back, but spent, as the decommissioning plan stipulates, on something that could be made to be self-sustaining- like a larger Highland Heritage centre, then would it become available again?

You say a large company could do it.

So they could. DSRL could do it.

[sandyr1]

The Caithness Horizons suggestion was/is just that Thirsaloon. It just struck me that you have a class museum in Thurso and class people running it, and already has a range of funding bodies supporting it. It seemed logical.

I'm prepared to accept that it's practically impossible but wonder if you would mind running through why it's that way?

There are lots of ideas....BUT getting the people past Inverness is the problem. When Maps are cut off at Inverness, and most bus tours that I have seen do not include anything past 'Nessie'.
Somehow the Counties in the North have to be included and I can assure you they are not.
Promotional material I have seen from people wanting to visit their 'Heritage' do not normally include the 'far North'.
I just talked to a family who were there...Scotland....for 10 days and they were told the 'roads are bad'! Aghhhhhhhhhhhhhh......
And then some beaches near Dounreay were cordoned off with Nuke warning signs...well it was so 2 years ago!

FYI...A few days ago on the plane I spoke with a woman who is President of a substantial Surfing Apparrel Company. She was flying back to California from somewhere in Europe....I told her of Caithness and the surfing that is there. She had never heard of it, but she will be checking it out as they specialize in Wet Suits..She asked for contacts and I gave her Caithness.org.......who knows!

[John Little]

Then give them something to go north for and stop being so negative about Caithness.

I am getting fed up with half-empty people.

Half empty people should go and jump off Dunnet Head!

Let's have some positive talk for heaven's sake!

can't can't can't...............won't won't won't. [disgust]

[sandyr1]

You and hunter are peas in a pod. You are both out of your depth so you either run away or resort to childish insults.

I don't think you have any idea what you are talking about when it comes to government debt just like he doesn't when talking about riddling radiation. Prove me wrong and I will withdraw my broom.

You are just too funny. As one great person said...if it fits Peanut!!! You are a good sport!

Perhaps 'We are the Way'.

[thirsaloon]

Point taken, the archives in Wick badly need some form of assistance, lacking in a number of areas. Building a larger Highland Heritage Centre I’m not sure is the right direction as this would perhaps conflict with what Caithness Horizons is trying to offer and after the money injected into this facility would it be ideal.

To be honest though perhaps relocating the archives to a site more suitable for all to access and with proper storage conditions would be a start. Perhaps there are/is existing building/buildings which could be made suitable for such a use. Like any debate though there are pro’s and con’s.

[hunter]

You and hunter are peas in a pod. You are both out of your depth so you either run away or resort to childish insults.

I don't think you have any idea what you are talking about when it comes to government debt just like he doesn't when talking about riddling radiation. Prove me wrong and I will withdraw my broom.

Very true.

The company in charge of Dounreay says it will too dangerous for the public to go near it for 300 years.

There are those in here who cry rubbish, it's not true, its perfectly safe.

Then another expert comes in and says there has been callous disregard for public safety.

I haven't a clue to believe.

I'll trust my instincts. Radioactive waste is horrible stuff. Keep away from it.

[sandyr1]

Then give them something to go north for and stop being so negative about Caithness.

I am getting fed up with half-empty people.

Half empty people should go and jump off Dunnet Head!

Let's have some positive talk for heaven's sake!

can't can't can't...............won't won't won't. [disgust]

I totally agree/ but it is perhaps the 'planners' who are paid to do this 'stuff', that someone needs to get their hands on....
You and others in the UK/Scotland/ Caithness have to get to the people who put these info programs/ tourist packages etc etc together.
I am not complaining...This is 'feedback'! Things that perhaps people should look at....Don't shoot the messenger!
And FEEDBACK......is the Breakfast of Champions!...Decipher that one Peanut!

[John Little]

Very true.

The company in charge of Dounreay says it will too dangerous for the public to go near it for 300 years.

There are those in here who cry rubbish, it's not true, its perfectly safe.

Then another expert comes in and says there has been callous disregard for public safety.

I haven't a clue to believe.

I'll trust my instincts. Radioactive waste is horrible stuff. Keep away from it.

And you always believe what Dounreay says or has said.

And 2000 people go in and out of there every day - yet it's so dangerous that it has to be sealed off for 300 years.

Dr Large refers to the seabed and you extrapolate it to mean the land.

You call me a nuclear boffin when I have never made such a claim - indeed I link you to our response to the Atkins report where you can see the name of our scientist.

I tell you that the money is going to be spent on Dounreay anyway and you launch into a diatribe about the national debt.

It's like talking to a wall.

So yes - trust your instincts for that is all you have in the end. May they serve you well.

[John Little]

I totally agree/ but it is perhaps the 'planners' who are paid to do this 'stuff', that someone needs to get their hands on....
You and others in the UK/Scotland/ Caithness have to get to the people who put these info programs/ tourist packages etc etc together.
I am not complaining...This is 'feedback'! Things that perhaps people should look at....Don't shoot the messenger!
And FEEDBACK......is the Breakfast of Champions!...Decipher that one Peanut!

Ar you talking to me? Or Crayola? I do not understand this at all. :confused:

[bekisman]

Hunter, just a quick one;
Are you actually anti-nuclear? Do you believe in nuclear-powered generation?, do you think it is correct that England will be building nuclear stations?
May seem trivial, but just wondered where you are coming from.

[hunter]

I tell you that the money is going to be spent on Dounreay anyway and you launch into a diatribe about the national debt.

It's like talking to a wall.

So yes - trust your instincts for that is all you have in the end. May they serve you well.

Lolololol . . . I think you'll find that the person who introduced the topic of the national debt was Sandy . . . and the first person to pick up the subject of the national debt and run with it was, er . . . now, let me see . . . yes, Mr Little.

So less of your havering.

I didn't realise quoting the figures of the national debt amounted to a diatribe but hey ho, there we go.

[hunter]

Hunter, just a quick one;
Are you actually anti-nuclear? Do you believe in nuclear-powered generation?, do you think it is correct that England will be building nuclear stations?
May seem trivial, but just wondered where you are coming from.

No, I'm not anti-nuclear. I'm pro-electricity. Not too fussed where it comes from, unless:

a) I'm getting ripped off

b) Its spewing fumes my way

I don't really care if England builds nuclear power stations or not. I dont live there. It's up to them.

[sandyr1]

Ar you talking to me? Or Crayola? I do not understand this at all. :confused:

Actually I was making a point which I hope all will take with some 'niceness'!
And for Crayola: To decipher...Feedback is the breakfast of Champions!

Yes, I brought up the debt, 'cause I have been reading about it and hear about it on the BBC.
And Bekisman....You, the Scots turned down Nuke power, so does it matter/ to me it seems a shame to turn down work/industry. We are spending approx $20B on new Nukes.....Clean electricity at a reasonable price. Yes I wish someone could find a better way but until then....c'est la vie!

You might not believe this...but somewhere/sometime, spending money that one does not have has to stop. That is my thought....And I don't slag/ put down the UK. We are all at it. As they say in the Bible.....there will be a day of reckoning. That being my case-I rest it.

[bekisman]

And Bekisman....You, the Scots turned down Nuke power, so does it matter/ to me it seems a shame to turn down work/industry. We are spending approx $20B on new Nukes.....Clean electricity at a reasonable price. Yes I wish someone could find a better way but until then....c'est la vie!

You might not believe this...but somewhere/sometime, spending money that one does not have has to stop. That is my thought....And I don't slag/ put down the UK. We are all at it. As they say in the Bible.....there will be a day of reckoning. That being my case-I rest it.

I ain't a Scot, - like you ain't a Canadian. And it was that little prat Ecky - who won't be here quite soon - who turned down nuke ;)

[John Little]

Lolololol . . . I think you'll find that the person who introduced the topic of the national debt was Sandy . . . and the first person to pick up the subject of the national debt and run with it was, er . . . now, let me see . . . yes, Mr Little.

So less of your havering.

I didn't realise quoting the figures of the national debt amounted to a diatribe but hey ho, there we go.

Hunter what on earth are you talking about? I know nothing of the national debt or what we owe and I do not pretend to.

Where have I picked it up and run with it on this thread?

Please show me?

[sandyr1]

I ain't a Scot, - like you ain't a Canadian. And it was that little prat Ecky - who won't be here quite soon - who turned down nuke ;)

Yes, why did you.....OK.....they(Democracy) turn it down.
And you know Dounreay, like many other things, will be decided on Economics and Votes...Both yours and my adopted Countries, are the same....Polls are done and trial baloons are floated to see what the public would like(vote for).. It is an awful way to do business, but it is the best there is!
Perhaps I diluted this thread by bringing in another thread, which was 'How to save the North', in particular Caithness (Rob Murray started it)..I am not against Caithness ......I just see such flagrant ignoring(ignorance), of the Northern Counties.
I suggested a good Ocean Golf Course with 'reasonable' accomodation. People do travel to Scotland and Ireland from the United States and Canada, and do the 2 Country golf tour. Numerous of my friends have been to Royal Dornoch, and rave about the wind, the weather and the wildness of it. My opinion is that you need something specific to get people up there.
A recent report from some Highland Committee on Caithness, suggested a tourist increase of 30% in 10 years...3% a year............. with words such as 'Sector Intelligence, challenge, stimulate, encourage......all the good buzzzzzzzzzz words, but no substance.....especially with the economic downturn.
Would people travel to Caithness to see the Dome? I highly doubt it!
But now I have committed Treason! Aghhhhhhhhhhhhh.

OH......I paid my $12.00, and am a Canadian!

[John Little]

You are right. I doubt they would, despite it being world famous.

Yet if something were done with it along the lines I suggest then they might. There is more to Caithness than Dounreay but a prime tourist site would help.


Or would you prefer nothing? Big blank?

[bekisman]

Blinking heck Sandyr1, I see your Tourism blokes worry about windfarms, like they do from the place you were from, well darn me! AND the outfitters; that's a BIG percentage drop!

Tourism Industry of Ontario
1.. . . . We ask that due consideration be given to the potential negative impacts on tourism businesses when locating proposed wind farms. We strongly recommend establishing minimum distance guidelines for sighting of wind turbines near tourism destinations particularly for those areas that rely on maintaining an unblemished viewscape for visitors.

2. Well 2009 sure was a tough tourism year for Northern Ontario outfitters. Based on the inquiries we received in our inquiry system urban tourism had a good spike in the spring, fishing was down about 50%, and hunting was down about 40% over recent years... ;)


2 http://www.thunderbaytourism.com/tourism_outlook_2010.html (http://www.thunderbaytourism.com/tourism_outlook_2010.html)
1. http://windconcernsontario.wordpress.com/2010/03/23/tourism-industry-of-ontario-wants-setbacks-from-tourist-destinations/ (http://windconcernsontario.wordpress.com/2010/03/23/tourism-industry-of-ontario-wants-setbacks-from-tourist-destinations/)

[Dadie]

I for one would like the dome to stay.
Its the most iconic symbol of what the Dounreay site was in its heyday, and what the site managed to do.
I met my husband in the sphere, so, I think it has a special place in my heart...for all the sentimental reasons.
But on a more serious note it is the "bit" of Dounreay that is portrayed in the news anytime Dounreay is mentioned even though the sphere is nowhere near where the news is about:eek:
The image of the sphere is a powerful one...and I dont think there is many if any that couldnt "place" the sphere and name it, up here!

[sandyr1]

Blinking heck Sandyr1, I see your Tourism blokes worry about windfarms, like they do from the place you were from, well darn me! AND the outfitters; that's a BIG percentage drop!

Tourism Industry of Ontario
1.. . . . We ask that due consideration be given to the potential negative impacts on tourism businesses when locating proposed wind farms. We strongly recommend establishing minimum distance guidelines for sighting of wind turbines near tourism destinations particularly for those areas that rely on maintaining an unblemished viewscape for visitors.

2. Well 2009 sure was a tough tourism year for Northern Ontario outfitters. Based on the inquiries we received in our inquiry system urban tourism had a good spike in the spring, fishing was down about 50%, and hunting was down about 40% over recent years... ;)


2 http://www.thunderbaytourism.com/tourism_outlook_2010.html (http://www.thunderbaytourism.com/tourism_outlook_2010.html)
1. http://windconcernsontario.wordpress.com/2010/03/23/tourism-industry-of-ontario-want (http://windconcernsontario.wordpress.com/2010/03/23/tourism-industry-of-ontario-wants-setbacks-from-tourist-destinations/)s-setbacks-from-tourist-destinations/ (http://windconcernsontario.wordpress.com/2010/03/23/tourism-industry-of-ontario-wants-setbacks-from-tourist-destinations/)

Windfarms are supposed to be where there is wind. A gale here is 25 mph!
And Yes, there is some thought where to put them. Smart I would say!

Tourism is down due to the US and Arab Countries being in trouble.
People flew in from around the World for the fishing and hunting.
We are OK so far,but in my City 7 years ago we were making approx 1 million vehicles for General Motors. Now approx 150,000...Hurts.

[ducati]

Windfarms are supposed to be where there is wind. A gale here is 25 mph!
And Yes, there is some thought where to put them. Smart I would say!

Tourism is down due to the US and Arab Countries being in trouble.
People flew in from around the World for the fishing and hunting.
We are OK so far,but in my City 7 years ago we were making approx 1 million vehicles for General Motors. Now approx 150,000...Hurts.

Look on the bright side. With 850,000 less cars you will need less windmills.

[rob murray]

You are right. I doubt they would, despite it being world famous.

Yet if something were done with it along the lines I suggest then they might. There is more to Caithness than Dounreay but a prime tourist site would help.


Or would you prefer nothing? Big blank?

Spot on John, a tourism / visiter centre would be a good Dounreay spin off business, creating jobs. The archives were to be housed in Wick probably keeping a handful of people in non jobs, but thats not tourism, in any case word has it that that project is being withdrawn.

[hunter]

I'm all for investment in tourism. But let's move on from Dounreay.

Contaminated beaches etc probably has done more to deter tourists than anything else.

Anyone who thinks they can sell Caithness by marketing it as Costa Del Dounreay is bonkers, frankly. People would pay you to stay away from that stuff.

Caithness has a lot going for it. A dirty old derelict nuclear site isn't one of them.

[John Little]

Hunter I would be most obliged if you would answer my question in my last post to you.

If you want to move on from Dounreay then please do so but it may have escaped your notice that this thread is actually about the Dounreay Dome.

It occurs to me that your feelings on this matter are so strong that you could actually help to stimulate debate by starting your own thread.

Something like 'Let's pull down the rust ball'

That might be truly useful and would serve a much better purpose than the stuff you were slinging about yesterday. And your relentless negativity has, on this thread anyway, made its point very well.

[sandyr1]

Hunter I would be most obliged if you would answer my question in my last post to you.

If you want to move on from Dounreay then please do so but it may have escaped your notice that this thread is actually about the Dounreay Dome.

It occurs to me that your feelings on this matter are so strong that you could actually help to stimulate debate by starting your own thread.

Something like 'Let's pull down the rust ball'

That might be truly useful and would serve a much better purpose than the stuff you were slinging about yesterday. And your relentless negativity has, on this thread anyway, made its point very well.

Hiya,
I know you are not John Little, but are you from Caithness???
Tks....s

[John Little]

Like you I am a former resident.

Are you drunk?

[sandyr1]

"The UKAEA frequently uses the word 'iconic' in their publications when writing about the Dounreay sphere. It is an appropriate description, its silhouette is universally recognised in much the same way as, for example, the Forth Road Bridge.
But it is also more than that. It is a symbol of how man's quest to stretch the boundaries of his knowledge in pursuit of energy took him to the north coast of Scotland; how there, a construction force gave form to the dream of both scientist and engineer, and how it all changed forever the social and economic structure of the area.
In short, it forms part of the evolving history of Caithness.
But the sphere has a symbolism that stretches beyond Caithness. In itself, and what it represents, it is triumph for British
engineering. With little more than their own intuition and a blank piece of paper, engineers and scientists set down their thoughts on what they considered to be the holy grail, energy that reproduced itself. Once they were satisfied that they had the answer to this alluring quest, there remained the type of structure in which to contain their dream.
The answer was a sphere, the shape ancient Greek scholars considered to be the perfect shape. Its construction was a major engineering feat. Shaped from flat pieces of steel, it formed the largest spherical object in the world.
Today, the sphere is dramatic evidence of a golden period for British scientists, engineers and craftsmen whose skills ensured that the dream of that group who sat down with that blank sheet of paper, bore fruit.
Wouldn't it be ironic if UKAEA destroyed the very symbol of their own presence in Caithness?"

http://www.dounreay.com/UserFiles/File/archive/Dounreay%20News/Dounreay_News_Mar07.pdf

Very well said but that ain't bringin' people from around the World!

I think if you read some more, you will find the reason Caithness got 'IT', was there was no where else to put IT!
The barreness, lack of population, a location closest to one on the most tidal areas in the World to dissipate the effluent....And it did to a point....But then there is Sandside Beach, and the machines I think on Dunnet Sands, digging up the radio active bits!

You cannot sell that to anyone I am afraid!

But my opinion! Not negative////just realistic!

[hunter]

Hunter I would be most obliged if you would answer my question in my last post to you.

If you want to move on from Dounreay then please do so but it may have escaped your notice that this thread is actually about the Dounreay Dome.

It occurs to me that your feelings on this matter are so strong that you could actually help to stimulate debate by starting your own thread.

Something like 'Let's pull down the rust ball'

That might be truly useful and would serve a much better purpose than the stuff you were slinging about yesterday. And your relentless negativity has, on this thread anyway, made its point very well.

Oh get a life, for pete's sake.

Anyone can look back the threads and see who responded first to the post about national debt when it was introduced.

Unlike you, I have a vested interest in a positive future for this area. One built around real jobs when Dounreay has gone. Not an empty eyesore that employs no-one, but reminds us all of the mess left behind by a previous generation.

[sandyr1]

Like you I am a former resident.

Are you drunk?

Pray tell me why u asked???

[sandyr1]

Oh get a life, for pete's sake.

Anyone can look back the threads and see who responded first to the post about national debt when it was introduced.

Unlike you, I have a vested interest in a positive future for this area. One built around real jobs when Dounreay has gone. Not an empty eyesore that employs no-one, but reminds us all of the mess left behind by a previous generation.

'Twas me who mentioned the Nat debt, 'cause that is going to decide what happens to the Dome and everything else.....
Not only you but the World! You may actually keep it for a while, when they put the fence around it.....

[John Little]

Well excuse me for not bowing to your superior knowledge.

Look I am getting a bit fed up chasing my tail saying things that I have said before. If you can be bothered to cut through the dross and check your history instead of repeating myth then you will find that the truth is a mixture of the two.

IT was built in Caithness because the local MP lobbied frantically for it. He saw nothing but decline and depression for his county and went out of his way to court the UKAEA to build their power station where it is now.

If you can't be bothered checking your facts before you sling stuff then I do not think I shall bother answering your posts. The stuff you need to see is in the Highland archives and I quoted it before - maybe even earlier on this thread - I shall look.

And yes you are negative.

You WANT to believe the worst and no matter what anyone says to you in your purblindness you will go on believing it because your mind is shut.

Period.

I am making a rule for myself now. I will respond to you and to Mr Hunter IF you say something worth saying.

Until then I have you in my head as trolls. You will get no more reaction from me

[John Little]

Oh get a life, for pete's sake.

Anyone can look back the threads and see who responded first to the post about national debt when it was introduced.

Unlike you, I have a vested interest in a positive future for this area. One built around real jobs when Dounreay has gone. Not an empty eyesore that employs no-one, but reminds us all of the mess left behind by a previous generation.

Quote me Mr Hunter. Indulge me.

[hunter]

I don't live in the past, so I've no wish to go crawling around archives. I live in the present and I live here. And believe what I see with my own eyes.

I see funny looking vehicles crawling over beaches looking for the radioactive waste that spewed out that place. I see fishermen banned from fishing near in case the fish are poisoned and people fall ill. I see a site that is going to be fenced off for 300 years so the public doesn't get harm by the crap that's in the ground. I see a nuclear dump being built and the neighbours pulling their hair out. I could go on.
Thats the legacy we're gonna have to live with a very very long time. You won't find that in some dusty old archive. Radioactive waste washing up on beaches. Big hazard warning signs around a derelict, dirty site. Nuclear waste dumped in the ground. Fishing grounds polluted.

That is the reality. Here. Not in Kent.

I'm all for getting it cleaned up. But I know a lot of it will never be cleaned up. It will be a toxic stain on this place for centuries to come. Call that negative if you like. I call that the reality.

If you can sell that image to tourists, you're in the wrong job. Thats why I think the future of Caithness is best served by leaving Dounreay where it belongs, in the past.

The day I see you up here selling postcards of Sandside Beach is the day I'll believe all your nostalgic claptrap.

[sandyr1]

I don't live in the past, so I've no wish to go crawling around archives. I live in the present and I live here. And believe what I see with my own eyes.

I see funny looking vehicles crawling over beaches looking for the radioactive waste that spewed out that place. I see fishermen banned from fishing near in case the fish are poisoned and people fall ill. I see a site that is going to be fenced off for 300 years so the public doesn't get harm by the crap that's in the ground. I see a nuclear dump being built and the neighbours pulling their hair out. I could go on.
Thats the legacy we're gonna have to live with a very very long time. You won't find that in some dusty old archive. Radioactive waste washing up on beaches. Big hazard warning signs around a derelict, dirty site. Nuclear waste dumped in the ground. Fishing grounds polluted.

That is the reality. Here. Not in Kent.

I'm all for getting it cleaned up. But I know a lot of it will never be cleaned up. It will be a toxic stain on this place for centuries to come. Call that negative if you like. I call that the reality.

If you can sell that image to tourists, you're in the wrong job. Thats why I think the future of Caithness is best served by leaving Dounreay where it belongs, in the past.

The day I see you up here selling postcards of Sandside Beach is the day I'll believe all your nostalgic claptrap.

I concur, but said more eloquently than me.

[bekisman]

My goodness me, I've actually read through all of Hunters postings, he's certainly pretty animated and charged - I must admit I first thought he must be a Green? or at least anti-nuclear?, thought it was a bit pointless comparing Chernobyl with Dounreay, and 'Gruniard Island' - that was Anthrax.. just seems unusual to get so excited and dare I say it a bit abusive (is that too strong a word?): ."Oh get a life, for Pete's sake". . ."Does your misty-eyed nostalgia toxic crap. as a reminder of how stupid and wreckless people can be with the environment and people's health. Chernobyl .Gruniard island.keep it as a tombstone for the mad scientist. a source of nostalgia for people who look at the world through engineering goggles.It's junk. Not just junk. Toxic junk.People would pay you to stay away from that stuff.Caithness has a lot going for it. A dirty old derelict nuclear site isn't one of them. all your nostalgic claptrap".

He turns to tourism: "If you can sell that image to tourists, you're in the wrong job".. "It's an odd sort of tourist who'll be attracted to that".. "that toxic dung heap will be tourist attraction?" - it may seem strange but yes it could be a visitor attraction. Having run one of the 'Top 20' Guesthouses in UK for two decades, a vast majority of our guests visited Dounreay when it was open to the public, pinning on the film badge, operating some of the equipment, they found it fascinating, much like the 100,000 visitors to Sellafield - see below.

Anyway that's my thoughts, I hope I have not appeared excited, or indeed denigrating - as I don't get carried away in the heat of the moment - it's only a bloody forum!


"Calder Hall Power Station was the site of the world’s first nuclear reactor to be connected to a national electrical distribution grid. Currently shut down and awaiting defuel and decommissioning, there is an opportunity to preserve the reactor, and its associated buildings, and open them to the general public.
This feasibility study has assessed the heritage value of Calder Hall and its viability as a tourist attraction, assessed the physical condition of the Reactor buildings and the mechanical and electrical plant and has determined the scope of work required to allow public access and the through-life cost of preservation and public access. Calder Hall - its buildings, fixtures and fittings - reflects an important part of our 20th entury political, economic, social and technological history. Not only was Calder
Hall the first commercial nuclear power plant in the world, but the buildings are very evocative of the era with many examples of 1950’s architecture and British engineered equipment. The site also has an important social value through the collective memories of people who have worked at and lived around Calder Hall over the last 50 years. The site also has an educational importance, with the potential to inform a wide range of technical, social and historical subjects specifically related to Calder Hall and to nuclear power in general. It has a place on the spectrum of industrial development sites and world “firsts” which form an integral part of the UK’s heritage portfolio.
It was felt that Calder Hall could become a viable tourist attraction, given that the Sellafield Visitor Centre already receives c. 100,000 visitors per annum, without any access to the interior of a nuclear power station. Tourism is the largest industry in Cumbria, and the development of new tourist attractions is a clear strategic aim of the current local and regional plans. It is not known what number of visitors would be attracted to Calder Hall"

http://www.nda.gov.uk/documents/upload/NDA-Calder-Hall-Nuclear-Power-Station-Feasibility-Study-2007.pdf

[John Little]

George Gunn does write very well and his style is good and clear. He is not sour or crabbit or terminally introspective, but a sharp observer and commentator. He's also very well informed and I found this piece of his almost eerily predictive, when speaking of the decommissioning of Dounreay;

"The second deal was no deal at all. It is possible that not many people are aware of it because, unlike the renewable leases story, which was on the front page of the Caithness Courier, the story about the dropping of a community dividend from the contract announcement by the Nuclear Decommissioning Authority for whoever wins the management contract for the remainder of the clean-up of the Dounreay site, was buried at the back of the same edition.
It has always been believed, by the Dounreay Stakeholders Group and others, that the socio-economic compensation for the run-down of manpower at the site and the negative impact which that will have on the infrastructure of Caithness was part of the decommissioning deal. But not so."

So I would imagine that the cancelling of the archives will come as no surprise to him.

The rest of the article is here; and it deserves a read.

I don't agree with George Gunn about the Sphere. He'd like to see it go. I know there's a lot of Caithness folk want to keep it. Because they've told me so - and they don't seem to mind where I was born or where I live for me to comment on a matter of national heritage.

He's a rational man with rational reasons and I respect what he says even if I don't agree with everything he says.

But from what he says I doubt that £20,000,000 is available after all. He seems to imply that it never was a guarantee.

I love this bit;

"If the consortium led by URS is awarded the Dounreay contract by the NDA the revenues from decommissioning will flow to San Francisco. "

"For how much longer are we going to be happy to be publicly confused, to be the passive recipients of corporate 'good faith', or to be lied to?"

Maybe it's a good job I don't live in Caithness because if I did I would not be just in a group trying to save a piece of architecture.

I'd be getting very very angry- and if George threw up some barricades I'd join him..

http://www.scottishreview.net/GGunn240.html

[crayola]

I for one would like the dome to stay.
Its the most iconic symbol of what the Dounreay site was in its heyday, and what the site managed to do.
I met my husband in the sphere, so, I think it has a special place in my heart...for all the sentimental reasons.
But on a more serious note it is the "bit" of Dounreay that is portrayed in the news anytime Dounreay is mentioned even though the sphere is nowhere near where the news is about:eek:
The image of the sphere is a powerful one...and I dont think there is many if any that couldnt "place" the sphere and name it, up here!Thank you for seeing what others can't or won't. It's an icon as well as an engineering feat and the visitor centre and tour were popular even when they weren't promoted widely.

Scotland's Secret Bunker (http://www.secretbunker.co.uk/) in Fife is a popular tourist destination despite being off the beaten track in the middle of nowhere.


Scotland's best kept secret...... until now !!

Scotland’s best kept secret for over 40 years, Hidden beneath an innocent Scottish Farmhouse, a tunnel leads to,
Scotland’s Secret Bunker. 24,000 square feet of Secret accommodation. The size of two football pitches, one on top of another, On two levels 100 feet underground.

Had there been a Nuclear War, this is where Scotland, would have been Governed, from within.

Discover the twilight world of the Government Cold War.
Take the opportunity to discover how they would have survived, and you wouldn’t !!!…

One of Scotland’s Deepest and Best kept Secrets.

For Opening Times & Contact Details, click here. (http://www.secretbunker.co.uk/visitingus.asp)

Barnton Quarry Survey Completed click here. (http://www.secretbunker.co.uk/barnton/survey-2009.html)

[rich]

What would you say to the idea of running a special train, one a month, from Inverness to Caithness offering the complete Caithness experience. We could throw in some bed and breakfast places so the visitors could spend a couple of days. Plus of course a tour of the Flow Country. Another idea would be to establish an alliance with the Scandinavian tourist authorities so people could take the old Viking path from Iceland and Norway to Scotland.
The opportunities are limitless....
By the way, the science fiction opportunities should be exploited.
Brillian young scientist exposed to radiation turns green and short-tempered....oh, it's been done you say. Maybe but not with a subsidiary cast of Viking werewolves and vampires, among whom Sigurd Skull Splitter plays a crucial role. (It's all there in Torfaeus!)

[SuzieTee]

I don't live in the past, so I've no wish to go crawling around archives. I live in the present and I live here. And believe what I see with my own eyes.

I see funny looking vehicles crawling over beaches looking for the radioactive waste that spewed out that place. I see fishermen banned from fishing near in case the fish are poisoned and people fall ill. I see a site that is going to be fenced off for 300 years so the public doesn't get harm by the crap that's in the ground. I see a nuclear dump being built and the neighbours pulling their hair out. I could go on.
Thats the legacy we're gonna have to live with a very very long time. You won't find that in some dusty old archive. Radioactive waste washing up on beaches. Big hazard warning signs around a derelict, dirty site. Nuclear waste dumped in the ground. Fishing grounds polluted.

That is the reality. Here. Not in Kent.

I'm all for getting it cleaned up. But I know a lot of it will never be cleaned up. It will be a toxic stain on this place for centuries to come. Call that negative if you like. I call that the reality.

If you can sell that image to tourists, you're in the wrong job. Thats why I think the future of Caithness is best served by leaving Dounreay where it belongs, in the past.

The day I see you up here selling postcards of Sandside Beach is the day I'll believe all your nostalgic claptrap.

FINALLY someone talking sense in this totally pointless thread.

Get a grip guys, the thing is history. John, would you want the thing,and its radioactive legacy, if it was next to your lovely house in Kent? Doubtful.

[John Little]

Got Dungeness down the road- don't mind it. Nuclear happens other places too- even in Kent.

Hasn't got a sphere though, let alone the first. That's unique.

As far as I am concerned this has absolutely nothing to do with nuclear power.

It's about a unique piece of architecture.

[rob murray]

FINALLY someone talking sense in this totally pointless thread.

Get a grip guys, the thing is history. John, would you want the thing,and its radioactive legacy, if it was next to your lovely house in Kent? Doubtful.

Your spot on...it is history and history attracts tourists / vistors who in turn spend, which in turn contributes to, an almost certain declining local economy.

[John Little]

That I am not a local is true. I looked at the proposed demolition of the Dome and saw it not as a local issue but as one of national heritage. Then I made contact with people who were local and together we wrote a response to the Atkins Heritage Report which was the basis for condemning the Dome. My co-authors are very busy people and I seem to have more time on my hands – and I like writing, so I end up doing most of the talking, yet we are equals in this. For without their knowledge I could say not a lot. I do not claim to know about radiation. But one of us does.
I do not claim to know about building conservation and painting to a high spec.
But one of us does. That I am not local and two of my co-authors are local does not disqualify me from comment- or maybe it does?

If I thought that then I would leave this Org- so maybe someone could organize a poll suggesting that mudbloods have no right to comment on certain matters….

The Dome is History we are told.

People object to the Dome for all sorts of reasons – it’s an eyesore, it’s ugly, it’s polluted with radiation etc etc etc.

But the Dome is History.

Good. That’s my field.


History is about perception. We see through a glass- sometimes darkly and sometimes clearly and we come up with a version that approximates to some sort of truth based on the evidence that is available. If you start with an idea then try to use the evidence to prove what you say then you are not an historian – you are a polemicist which is a different thing altogether.

My co-authors and I – and quite a few other people- have a version of truth which is at odds with that put out by DSRL and Atkins. The main differences in our perception may be set out as follows.


They say –
The Dome is contaminated
We say –
The Dome is contaminated at low levels but will be cleaned up anyway and can be done with what is on site. The cost of cleanup is unavoidable.


They say –
The Dome is not accessible
We say-
There is free access to the area round the Dome right now. After cleanup the Dome may be entered in perfect safety


They say-
The land is contaminated and will have to be closed off for 300 years
We say-
DSRL have remediated the land by the castle. Most of the site is clear and will be delicensed by end state. A small proportion of the 150 acres will remain fenced off. 2000 people access the site every day.

They say (in their magazine)
There is no area so contaminated that it cannot be cleaned up.
We say-
Well done. There are some areas near the Dome which will have to be fenced off, but at end state will present no hazard to the visiting public


They say-
The Dome, stripped of its interior is of no historical value
We say-
The Dome is a unique piece of design, engineering and construction, first and largest of its kind. It is listed by ICoMOS.


They say
No use can be made of it
We say
That debate has been stifled by statements about the Dome which are inaccurate. Suggestions are available


They say
To paint it would cost £500, 000 every ten years and £100,000 to maintain.
We say
Including painting every 15 years and taking into account NDA’s commitment to heritage spending - £36,000 a year. We have an estimate to prove it.


They say
No long term funding has been identified for it. Or the Wick Archive.
We say
No wonder – who would invest in something ‘rotten with radioactivity’?
Trouble is that it ain’t. And DSRL could turn it into something of an attraction which would pay its way and provide jobs.



Also worth remembering is that removal of heritage from an archaeological site for exhibition elsewhere is contrary to the Charter of the International Council for Monuments and sites.


So that is the nub of what the issue is. Not rust, not eyesores, not nuclear, but truth.

It’s about truth and versions of it.

Which version is true?

We await a response to our document. Aside from urban myth and propaganda and innuendo, is anything that we say not accurate?

Are there answers to our contradictions?

Or silence?

Some people reading this are professionally qualified to answer.

[Moira]

Hi John. I'll stand with you in the defence of the Dome.

I'm local. :)

[piratelassie]

too expensive to maintain long term , also its a visual reminder of the mess made of a beautiful part of caithness

[John Little]

I think you might read what I wrote.

But I think you are missing my main point. This is not about maintenance money or beauty.

If DSRL/Atkins Heritage told you that black was white, would you agree?

That's the point.

[SuzieTee]

They say
No use can be made of it
We say
That debate has been stifled by statements about the Dome which are inaccurate. Suggestions are available

They say
No long term funding has been identified for it. Or the Wick Archive.
We say
No wonder – who would invest in something ‘rotten with radioactivity’?
Trouble is that it ain’t. And DSRL could turn it into something of an attraction which would pay its way and provide jobs.

DSRL is only the contractor responsible for knocking down the site. If you have suggestions - and please GOD not another bloody hotel complete with Fast Breeder Honeymoon Suite - then send them to the Dounreay Stakeholder Group.

[John Little]

Done................................ you can read it earlier on this thread.

Mind you - their wishes do not seem to count for much


And what I would like is for some person from DSRL or Atkins Heritage with appropriate professional qualifications to come forward and state with all their professional credibility behind it, that what we say is incorrect.

[bekisman]

Done................................ you can read it earlier on this thread.

Mind you - their wishes do not seem to count for much


And what I would like is for some person from DSRL or Atkins Heritage with appropriate professional qualifications to come forward and state with all their professional credibility behind it, that what we say is incorrect.
Been following this with interest, bit confused; if your version reads so different to what DSRL and Atkins are saying - if what you say is true then they must be lying. Is that what you mean?.. just wondered :confused

[John Little]

Oh Bekisman! What a question!

You may say that.

I can see why you might think that.

But, like Francis Urquhart, I couldn't possibly comment.

[hunter]

And what I would like is for some person from DSRL or Atkins Heritage with appropriate professional qualifications to come forward and state with all their professional credibility behind it, that what we say is incorrect.

You're a bit late. The report was published a year ago. They invited people to comment on it then. Why would they re-open the consultation now, if people couldn't be bothered responding then? Did you respond to the consultation?

[John Little]

I wonder what job you do Mr Hunter.

Like most of the nation I was not remotely aware that a consultation was going on. I was not even a member of the Org at that point.

And what you say in no way invalidates what we are saying.

[hunter]

I wonder what job you do Mr Hunter.



Looks like I've got the job of your straw man

[ducati]

I wonder what job you do Mr Hunter.

Like most of the nation I was not remotely aware that a consultation was going on. I was not even a member of the Org at that point.

And what you say in no way invalidates what we are saying.

The plans WERE available, for anyone to inspect, at your local planning office on Alpha Centuri. Really! You people..........[lol]

[John Little]

"Looks like I've got the job of your straw man."

Lol! And there was me thinking it was the other way round.

Seriously however, it is possible for a combination of things to be read wrongly in any organisation. If such a concatenation occurs, then it is easy for a large organisation to misread things, especially where radiation is concerned. Chinese whispers.

Very understandable.

If DSRL were to revisit the question of contamination with reference to the sphere particularly then it might be possible for a revising of their view.

The problem with the Atkins approach was that it insisted on a holistic approach for the whole site. It gave expression to some general truths. Parts of the site were contaminated to dangerous levels and are best left isolated and contained. But treating the site as a whole tarred the sphere with the same brush.

What is true of the waste pits is not true of the sphere.

And the figure for paint and maintenance always did sound ballpark and fished out of the air. You come across that quite a lot in studying history documents - Lord Kitchener was particularly prone to it

If DSRL were to separate the site into its character areas and consider each on its own merits they would end up with something much better than the Atkins report.

It then becomes not a misrepresentation of facts but a minor error in approach, eminently understandable because this sort of thing has never been done before in the UK, which it is possible to retreat from with a smile and announce that the sphere can be saved after all.


Battle lines and bayonet practice are not necessary.

But accuracy is.

[John Little]

And of course you are quite right about the consultation matter. It's my understanding that nobody actually challenged the Atkins report until my small group did.

DSRL took their decision based on their best understanding at the time.

I won't bore you with the analogy of General Haig and his Chief of Intelligence, but an organisation team can only base its decisions on the information it receives from its people.

If, however, another view emerges in the long run, then a good organisation does not, like the Persian empire, regard its decisions as graven in brass but revisits them.

That is good and best practice surely?

[hunter]

Ah, a score draw then. Maybe the pools coupon will be lucky too.

I dont know the ins and outs of the radiation stuff but I dont think you will get far arguing the point. The whole site is polluted with the stuff anyway.

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.

That says to me theyy'll ehcnage their mind if you got a "practical proposal". They want to demolish the thing, so they aint gonna spend time raising the cash to keep it. Maybe they will sell it to you for a £1 and let you get on with keeping it.

[John Little]

Were I an entrepreneur I would take it. But I am not and I am now going out to drive in the snow.

For a body like Historic Scotland the idea of a Heritage centre such as I outline earlier in the thread is eminently possible and feasible. NDA could make it happen as part of the moves towards leaving a viable economy when Dounreay is finished. If they have a mind to.

And if the sphere could be seen in their minds as clear of radioactivity.

You keep repeating stuff which I have addressed....

anyway - bye for now.

[bekisman]

Looks like I've got the job of your straw man

Hey that's weird; 'straw man'* been mentioned on a couple of threads I've posted myself in the past..
I wonder if Hunter has any connection with Dounreay? OK fair enough he's side-stepped John's mention: "I wonder what job you do Mr Hunter." - some people do not like to broadcast what they do, but as an observer he/she does seem rather heated about the subject, he/she's not a journalist?
Hey ho...


*"A straw man argument is an informal fallacy based on misrepresentation of an opponent's position. To "attack a straw man" is to create the illusion of having refuted a proposition by substituting it with a superficially similar yet unequivalent proposition (the "straw man"), and refuting it, without ever having actually refuted the original position.." (so now you know)

[hunter]

Attack the person rather than the argument?
Yeah yeah. I've seen herds like that at work before. Instinctive yes, but pretty ugly to watch.
No I dont work for Dounreay and I dont work for newspapers. Maybe you could get me a job if you work there?
Your straw man blows in the wind. Shame. Pathetic, really.

[bekisman]

Attack the person rather than the argument?
Yeah yeah. I've seen herds like that at work before. Instinctive yes, but pretty ugly to watch.
No I dont work for Dounreay and I dont work for newspapers. Maybe you could get me a job if you work there?
Your straw man blows in the wind. Shame. Pathetic, really.

Nah I don't work there (retired old chap), but if you like I could make enquiries to Colin.. You mention working with 'herds' presume in the Dairy or beef industry?.

You still seem rather sarcastic, using the word 'pathetic', my whole point is I just can't get my head around why you are so ebullient? - let's try and keep it civilised, eh?

[hunter]

Nah I don't work there (retired old chap), but if you like I could make enquiries to Colin.. You mention working with 'herds' presume in the Dairy or beef industry?.

You still seem rather sarcastic, using the word 'pathetic', my whole point is I just can't get my head around why you are so ebullient? - let's try and keep it civilised, eh?

Which just about sums up how pointless this is. Someone starts a discussion about why he thinks something should be kept. Along comes someone with a different view. Panic stations . . . there must be a hidden agenda at work, we can't have people disagreeing with us. Let's undermine them. Pathetic, yes. I walked into fan club by mistake. No room for different views there. Ah, there's the exit. Bye. Now you can get back to tell each other how wonderful you are.

[bekisman]

Which just about sums up how pointless this is. Someone starts a discussion about why he thinks something should be kept. Along comes someone with a different view. Panic stations . . . there must be a hidden agenda at work, we can't have people disagreeing with us. Let's undermine them. Pathetic, yes. I walked into fan club by mistake. No room for different views there. Ah, there's the exit. Bye. Now you can get back to tell each other how wonderful you are.

My oh my, what a retort, you should calm down, this is a forum upon which anyone can and does comment, there's been a number of 'non-members' on this particular thread who have apposing views and that is of course perfectly acceptable, but please. this must not come down to personal insults, I won't labour the point, but I was simply fascinated to why your posts seemed so very animated..
No matter, 'panic stations' over.
Me personally, I have no objection to the dome being held for posterity - after all it was - I understand - 'the world's first reactor to provide power for public use' - that, to me; a simple, average bloke, is alone enough to make it very special..

There, see, not one word of denigration, just getting my point over, like a number of other (non fan-club) have given.. Please don't go Hunter, it's interesting to read others point of view, and I quite often hold views that are not acceptable to many other posters, so what? it's all grist to the mill, discussion and robust interaction..

[crayola]

DSRL is only the contractor responsible for knocking down the site. If you have suggestions - and please GOD not another bloody hotel complete with Fast Breeder Honeymoon Suite - then send them to the Dounreay Stakeholder Group.Ooh it's fabulous that we have a new local expert in you Suzie. Can you please tell us how you know so much about all this and why we should pay close attention to what you say? Are you at last more of a radiation expert than the Dounreay staff that wrote the original report and more expert than the Atkins people? I know that wouldn't be much but it would be better than nothing.

We already know Mr hunter knows nothing about radiation (because he told us so) and for some reason he won't contribute to John Little's development of the discussion. Are you in the same cauldron as Mr hunter?

Could I send you a PM with my idea for a school of witchcraft within the dome? I thought at first that you would not be receptive to pagan ideas but I have since learned how the Dounreay publicity people try to cast spells upon us outsiders. I am one of the leading developers of the new ideas of open high coven but sadly the vibes I get from you are very secretive low coven so perhaps we may not gel. :(

[John Little]

Ah - yes I meant to say something about that. DSRL are not only the contractor charged with demolition of the site. NDA own the site and DSRL are their agent. It was DSRL's endorsement of the Atkins Heritage report that over-rode Historic Scotland's wondering on whether or not to list the Sphere.

It was also DSRL's decision to over-ride the wishes of 21 of 38 stakeholders who wished to keep the Sphere.

So they are not only anything in this.

They have the power and the influence to decide outcomes.

[John Little]

I am happy to announce that ex Eastenders actor Gary Beadle has joined the FB group and supports retention of the Dounreay sphere.


http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gary_Beadle

[sandyr1]

I am happy to announce that ex Eastenders actor Gary Beadle has joined the FB group and supports retention of the Dounreay sphere.


http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gary_Beadle

You asked me once if I was Drunk......I am a wee bitty concerned aboot yee!

[John Little]

And I think Walter Ego was spot on about you. So much so that your pointless trolling is inclining me to put you on my ignore list.

I am not a liar if that is what you are implying.

Here's the group;http://www.facebook.com/group.php?gid=141657212543519

Check the list.

[sandyr1]

And I think Walter Ego was spot on about you. So much so that your pointless trolling is inclining me to put you on my ignore list.

I am not a liar if that is what you are implying.

Here's the group;http://www.facebook.com/group.php?gid=141657212543519

Check the list.

For goodness sake....you do have a sma' mind. And a big chip on your shoulder.
I never implied that you were a liar.
Pointless troll. Yes of course put me on your ignore list.
I only comment on things that I ken a wee bitty aboot!

[bekisman]

Ooh it's fabulous that we have a new local expert in you Suzie. Can you please tell us how you know so much about all this and why we should pay close attention to what you say? Are you at last more of a radiation expert than the Dounreay staff that wrote the original report and more expert than the Atkins people? I know that wouldn't be much but it would be better than nothing.

We already know Mr hunter knows nothing about radiation (because he told us so) and for some reason he won't contribute to John Little's development of the discussion. Are you in the same cauldron as Mr hunter?

Could I send you a PM with my idea for a school of witchcraft within the dome? I thought at first that you would not be receptive to pagan ideas but I have since learned how the Dounreay publicity people try to cast spells upon us outsiders. I am one of the leading developers of the new ideas of open high coven but sadly the vibes I get from you are very secretive low coven so perhaps we may not gel. :(

Must admit I was surprised when 'new members' suddenly appeared and seemed pretty vocal on this particular thread - absolutely nothing wrong with that - everyone is welcome..
Me thinks I'll have to put my 'other hat' on regards these people and do a bit of digging; might be interesting.. ;)

[sandyr1]

Dounreay.....I remember it being built/ I remember and have fotos of the 'pot' heading thru Lybster.
I went to work in Wick and remember some of my friend's fathers being 'burned/exposed', as were two people from Lybster.
I did work to the Community, for a number of years, and then yes I left. But on returning and going to Sandside Beach with Radio active warning signs, and a machine digging/ scouring Dunnet Beach as we were walking on it, does not bode well with me.
Thus my thoughts that it should just 'Go'.
Who cares who is supporting it. And 'Facebook'/ The Eastenders. I mean lets get real here. Let the experts decide, not those who think they know.
True I don't live in the North, but having had some dealings with the Nuke industry, and altho' some things are Politically motivated and 'spin' is put on others, 'tis better to be safe.
And we are all entitled to our opinions!

[bekisman]

Dounreay.....I remember it being built/ I remember and have fotos of the 'pot' heading thru Lybster.
I went to work in Wick and remember some of my friend's fathers being 'burned/exposed', as were two people from Lybster.
I did work to the Community, for a number of years, and then yes I left. But on returning and going to Sandside Beach with Radio active warning signs, and a machine digging/ scouring Dunnet Beach as we were walking on it, does not bode well with me.
Thus my thoughts that it should just 'Go'.
Who cares who is supporting it. And 'Facebook'/ The Eastenders. I mean lets get real here. Let the experts decide, not those who think they know.
True I don't live in the North, but having had some dealings with the Nuke industry, and altho' some things are Politically motivated and 'spin' is put on others, 'tis better to be safe.
And we are all entitled to our opinions!

Come on Sandyr1 you must have been to Bruce Power Visitor's Centre? (The Bruce Power Visitors’ Centre is located west of Highway 21 on Bruce Road 20, south of Saugeen Shores. The facility overlooks the Bruce Power nuclear generating stations and is adjacent to Ontario’s first commercial wind farm, Huron Wind.)

"but having had some dealings with the Nuke industry" what was that? do tell!

And your "tis better to be safe" comment, seems at odds with this?:

The province of Ontario dominates Canada's nuclear industry, containing most of the country's nuclear power generating capacity. Ontario has 16 operating reactors providing about 50% of the province’s electricity, plus two reactors undergoing refurbishment.
Quebec and New Brunswick each have one reactor. Overall, nuclear power provides about 15% of Canada’s electricity with the majority of Canada’s energy as hydro-power The industry employs about 21,000 people directly and 10,000 indirectly. Canada’s nuclear energy production peaked in 1994 at 102.4 TWh, declined to 67 TWh by 1998 as reactors were mothballed, and increased to 85.6 TWh in 2005 due to improved reactor performance and refurbishment. Recently there has been renewed interest in nuclear energy, spurred by increasing demand (particularly within Ontario), and the desire to comply with Canada’s Kyoto Agreement obligations. The Government of Ontario proposed plans in 2004 to build several new nuclear reactors in the province..'

So pleased to see also, that the Canadians are taking the Kyoto Agreement seriously too!

But as you say (And I fully agree with) "And we are all entitled to our opinions!" ;)

[sandyr1]

I have nothing against 'New' Nuke power.
We are rather 'green' here with 2 new reactors with a 3,200 MW capability, in the final planning stages.
I live between Pickering with 6 operating reactors, and Darlington with 4 and was involved in Emergency Measures....Suffice to say I have some limited knowledge. But we must take our direction from those who know.
Do you know there are some aspects of NUKE decay that we do not yet know.
Decay can be from a few mins to 250,000years, or longer.
And Dounreay was experimental/ and was a scary situation as were many built and operated during that time/ perhaps the 'new' generation want it kept....But to say that some actor from the East Enders was supporting it....That can only be a subtle joke!

[bekisman]

I have nothing against 'New' Nuke power.
We are rather 'green' here with 2 new reactors with a 3,200 MW capability, in the final planning stages.
I live between Pickering with 6 operating reactors, and Darlington with 4 and was involved in Emergency Measures....Suffice to say I have some limited knowledge. But we must take our direction from those who know.
Do you know there are some aspects of NUKE decay that we do not yet know.
Decay can be from a few mins to 250,000years, or longer.
And Dounreay was experimental/ and was a scary situation as were many built and operated during that time/ perhaps the 'new' generation want it kept....But to say that some actor from the East Enders was supporting it....That can only be a subtle joke!

A US President was an Actor, Arnold Schwarzenegger done quite well - how about you?

[John Little]

You think this cruel? take it for a rule,
No creature smarts so little as a fool.
Let peals of laughter, Trollius! round thee break,
Thou unconcern'd canst hear the mighty crack:
Pit, box, and gall'ry in convulsions hurl'd,
Thou stand'st unshook amidst a bursting world.
Who shames a scribbler? break one cobweb through,
He spins the slight, self-pleasing thread anew;
Destroy his fib or sophistry, in vain,
The creature's at his dirty work again;
Thron'd in the centre of his thin designs;
Proud of a vast extent of flimsy lines!

[sandyr1]

You think this cruel? take it for a rule,
No creature smarts so little as a fool.
Let peals of laughter, Trollius! round thee break,
Thou unconcern'd canst hear the mighty crack:
Pit, box, and gall'ry in convulsions hurl'd,
Thou stand'st unshook amidst a bursting world.
Who shames a scribbler? break one cobweb through,
He spins the slight, self-pleasing thread anew;
Destroy his fib or sophistry, in vain,
The creature's at his dirty work again;
Thron'd in the centre of his thin designs;
Proud of a vast extent of flimsy lines!

An anti feminist and an Englishman!

[John Little]

Let Trollius tremble — "What? that thing of silk,
Trollius, that mere white curd of ass's milk?
Satire or sense, alas! can Trollius feel?
Who breaks a Butterfly upon a Wheel?"
Yet let me flap this Bug with gilded wings,
This painted Child of Dirt that stinks and stings;
Whose Buzz the Witty and the Fair annoys,
Yet Wit ne'er tastes, and Beauty ne'er enjoys,
So well-bred Spaniels civilly delight
In mumbling of the Game they dare not bite.
Eternal Smiles his Emptiness betray,
As shallow streams run dimpling all the way.
Whether in florid Impotence he speaks,
And, as the Prompter breathes, the Puppet squeaks;

[sandyr1]

Let Trollius tremble — "What? that thing of silk,
Trollius, that mere white curd of ass's milk?
Satire or sense, alas! can Trollius feel?
Who breaks a Butterfly upon a Wheel?"
Yet let me flap this Bug with gilded wings,
This painted Child of Dirt that stinks and stings;
Whose Buzz the Witty and the Fair annoys,
Yet Wit ne'er tastes, and Beauty ne'er enjoys,
So well-bred Spaniels civilly delight
In mumbling of the Game they dare not bite.
Eternal Smiles his Emptiness betray,
As shallow streams run dimpling all the way.
Whether in florid Impotence he speaks,
And, as the Prompter breathes, the Puppet squeaks;

How loverly.

[John Little]

Comments on a postcard to ICOMOS please;


"The towers of the Barbican, the sphere sheltering the Dounreay nuclear power reactor, and D10 - the 1930s Boots packed wet goods factory, at Beeston in Nottinghamshire - are included in an eclectic list of the treasures of Britain's heritage of 20th century buildings, published today.
The list has been compiled by Icomos-UK, the British branch of the United Nations organisation which lists and monitors world heritage sites.

Most of the buildings on today's list are unlikely to reach that exalted status, joining the Taj Mahal and the Great Pyramids. However Icomos is flagging up the buildings as worthy of respect and cherishing - knowing that 20th century buildings are often more vulnerable to demolition than Victorian or Georgian structures.

The compilers said several buildings which would have been on the list have already gone, such as the Brynmawr rubber factory, in Gwent, demolished last year despite a passionate fight by local conservationists and a grade II* listing.

The list spans near universally popular buildings, like the De La Warr pavilion in Bexhill, East Sussex, and others which many would cheerfully see flattened such as the Byker estate in Newcastle upon Tyne.

The list was compiled with advice from the 20th Century Society, the Association of Industrial Archaeology, and the English, Scottish and Welsh heritage quangos. The compilers see the growth of social housing, including Letchworth, the first "garden city", Cumbernauld New Town in the 1960s and the Byker in the 1970s as among the most important innovations of the century. In contrast only two private houses have made the list, Marsh Court, in Hampshire, by Edwin Lutyens, and Hill House, Glasgow, by Charles Rennie Mackintosh.

Designer gems from yesteryear
Barbican, City of London: 1962-82, designed by Chamberline Powell and Bon, with engineers Ove Arup

Boots packed wet goods factory, Beeston, Notts: 1930-32, by engineer Owen Williams, listed Grade I

Cathedral Church of St Michael, Coventry, west Midlands: 1956-62, designed by Sir Basil Spence

Cruachan and the Hollow Mountain, Argyll: hydro-electric power station, 1965

Cumbernauld New Town, north Lanarkshire: phase 1, 1963-8 designed by Geoffrey Copcutt

De La Warr Pavilion, Bexhill, East Sussex: 1935, designed by Erich Mendelsohn and Serge Chermayeff

Forth Road Bridge, engineers Mott, Hay and Anderson; 1958 suspension bridge; world heritage site

Dounreay DFR Sphere, Highland: 1955-9, by Richard S Brocklesby, for the UK Atomic Energy Authority

The works of Charles Rennie Mackintosh, Glasgow, Scotland: 1897-1909

Impington village college, Cambs: 1938-9, Walter Gropius and E Maxwell Fry

Willis Faber and Dumas, now Willis Corroon building, Ipswich: 1972-5, glass curtain walled office block by Foster Associates

Leicester University engineering building: 1960-63, James Stirling and James Gowan

Letchworth Garden City, Herts: 1903 on, by Parker and Unwin

Liverpool Anglican cathedral: 1902-79, Giles Gilbert Scott, and nearby Roman Catholic Metropolitan Cathedral of Christ the King, 1962-7, Frederick Gibberd

Liverpool Pier Head: docks and harbour board office, 1907, by Arnold Thornely, and nearby Royal Liver and Cunard building

Lovell Telescope, Jodrell Bank, Cheshire: 1952-7, engineer Charles Husband

Byker estate, Newcastle upon Tyne: 1970-81, Ralph Erskine, with structural engineer White Young and Partners

Penallta colliery engine hall and fan House, Wales: 1905-9, 100 metres long and 23 wide, built at the height of the south Wales coal trade"


http://www.guardian.co.uk/uk/2002/jun/17/arts.regeneration

[John Little]

The Atkins Heritage report has it that the sphere's design came from the planning office in the Ministry of works in England and that it was adapted by the Scottish companies who built it.

Yet the architect seems to have been Scottish too;
http://www.scottisharchitects.org.uk/architect_full.php?id=401394

or why would he be in the Dictionary of Scottish Architects?


"Name: Richard Shearwood Brocklesby
Designation: Architect
Born:
Died:
Bio Notes: Richard Shearwood Brocklesby was Chief Architect with the Engineering Group of the UK Atomic Energy Authority.
Buildings and Designs

This architect was involved with the following buildings or structures from the date specified (click on an item to view details):
Date started Building name Town, district or village Island City or county Country Notes
1955 Dounreay Experimental Research Establishment Thurso Caithness Scotland "

Of course I will try to check that, but this makes the Sphere entirely Scottish in its conception, not just its adaptation, its engineering and construction. also if so.

[John Little]

Listing the Titans
They may not be conventionally beautiful, but huge feats of construction are often awe-inspiring
The Daily Telegraph
November 27, 2006
By Clive Aslet
NUCLEAR Power Stations may not be conventionally beautiful, but they conform to the aesthetic theorist (and Tory apologist) Edmund Burke's concept of the sublime: the visitor experiences a frisson of pleasurable trepidation from the sheer, overwhelming scale of them.
In this way they are the counterparts of the pyramids, Hadrian's Wall, Dover Castle, Bazalgette's sewers and the Thames Barrier: titanic feats of construction whose achievement continues to awe the beholder.
It might have been better for some conservationists - particularly in view of their coastal settings - if they had never been built, but the fact is that they were.
Buildings are protected on grounds of ''special architectural or historic interest''.
Clearly there is no doubt that the early nuclear power stations qualify under the second of those two criteria.
Opened exactly 50 years ago, Calder Hall, on the seaward verge of the Lake District National Park, was the first nuclear power station in the world to produce commercial electricity. Building had begun in 1953, six years after Prime Minister Clement Attlee had ordered the construction of a plant at Windscale, next door, to produce plutonium for Britain's atomic bomb. At the opening ceremony, the Queen commented that ''the new power, which has proved itself to be such a terrifying weapon of destruction, is harnessed for the first time for the common good of our community'''.
Always eager to embrace new architectural forms, the German Modernist Sir Nikolaus Pevsner observed, in the Cumberland and Westmoreland volume of his Buildings of England series, that the ''noble shape of cooling towers can never fail to impress''. There were two pairs of cooling towers at Calder Hall, as well as three reactor buildings - even Pevsner calls them ''blocky''.
To this ensemble is joined the buildings at Windscale, and the golf ball of the Advanced Gas-cooled Reactor, built in 1963, which is now the most visually distinctive part of the site.
There was nothing specially innovative about the cooling towers, but the interior is a complete period piece, with cranes and generators in pink, yellow and light blue - the pastel colours favoured by the 1951 Festival of Britain. It is easy to imagine a James Bond villain, such as Goldfinger, striding through the control room.
Even today, Dounreay power station in Caithness is an extraordinary sight, squatting on the northernmost shoreline of Britain - the enormous, eau-de-nil sphere of its reactor rising above straw bales in the neighbouring fields.
The architect, Richard S Brocklesby, created a geometric intervention in the landscape, as startling as the contemporary Mk1 Jodrell Bank telescope in Cheshire. Protection for Calder Hall and Dounreay comes at a time when Sir Giles Gilbert Scott's coal-fired Bankside Power Station is enjoying new life as one of London's most popular cultural attractions, Tate Modern.
As part of the drive to popularise nuclear energy, both Sellafield and Dounreay have visitor centres.
If, as a result of scheduling, they are opened further to the public, they will stand in the tradition Ironbridge Gorge, various coal and slate mines in Wales, the Lion Salt Works in Cheshire, the Railway Museum in York and the canal network as ex-industrial tourist sites - a memory of the time when British nuclear scientists led the world.

http://cliveaslet.com/other/41-listing-the-titans.php

[John Little]

Scotland has only 5 World Heritage sites. I am not the only person who finds it ironic that DSRL are to be permitted to tear down a building that ICOMoS has recommended to UNESCO for such status.

And that is not my own subjective judgement.

To throw away something whose architectural merit is internationally recognised by a body supported by the UN is quite a decision. To produce a report which plays down its architectural merit is....... empirical, to say the least.

Is it because it is in Caithness? And it doesn't matter? Or hardly anyone will care?

It is a decision worthy of Attila the Hun.

[John Little]

It's an irony really.

I have been barking entirely up the wrong tree.

So many letters and emails, and in the end the matter of the Dounreay Sphere is absolutely nothing to do with DSRL or Atkins Heritage who are mere agents. It does not even lie in the gift of Historic Scotland or the Royal Commission on Ancient and Historic Monuments (Scotland) And the Dounreay Stakeholders are not in it either.

Nor does the decision lie with the Scottish Government.

And it has nothing to do with Scotland.

In fact the final decision over the fate of the Dounreay Sphere, one of the most remarkable pieces of Scottish architecture of the twentieth century, lies in the hands of the Nuclear Decommissioning Agency, a body appointed by the UK government and with its offices in England.

It does not have an office in Scotland.

[ducati]

It's an irony really.

I have been barking entirely up the wrong tree.

So many letters and emails, and in the end the matter of the Dounreay Sphere is absolutely nothing to do with DSRL or Atkins Heritage who are mere agents. It does not even lie in the gift of Historic Scotland or the Royal Commission on Ancient and Historic Monuments (Scotland) And the Dounreay Stakeholders are not in it either.

Nor does the decision lie with the Scottish Government.

And it has nothing to do with Scotland.

In fact the final decision over the fate of the Dounreay Sphere, one of the most remarkable pieces of Scottish architecture of the twentieth century, lies in the hands of the Nuclear Decommissioning Agency, a body appointed by the UK government and with its offices in England.

It does not have an office in Scotland.

There is an office at the old Navy base with NDA on the door.

[sandyr1]

I told you before JL that it was the English and the Yanks that sent it there.... No one else wanted it...too dangerous!
Just look at the Radioactivity.....how much have the people been told....the bare minimum!
Honestly....am not treasonous.....te he.....

[John Little]

There is an office at the old Navy base with NDA on the door.

For their use when they are up there? Or fully staffed?

If it's staffed then my information is wrong.

Maybe it meant 'No Dogs allowed'.........

[John Little]

And the end of the trail does not lie with the Chairman and Chief Executive of NDA, both of whom have received billets doux this evening, but with the Secretary of State who is responsible for the NDA and turns out to be one Dr Vincent Cable.

I have sent him a note professing unswerving devotion but I refrained from deploring his quick step.....

[John Little]

Once, when buying a house we sought a mortgage but the building society inspected the property and was unhappy with two pollarded trees in the front garden. We pointed out that the trees were of a type with a shallow root system and posed no danger to the front wall of the property, nor was there any risk of heave. The agents of the society would not listen and we had to have the trees removed before they cleared the mortgage. They saw a risk where there was none.

The NDA have a strategy for the decommissioning of nuclear sites which sets a set of standards which are to be achieved and they have the force of criminal law on the Site Licensing Companies. These standards hinge on the interpretation of risk.

It seems possible that the demolition of the sphere is, ultimately, about assessment of risk, and what is seen as risk depends entirely on where the benchmarks are set.

Were I an SLC I would feel inclined towards a very literal interpretation of what the NDA wished to achieve and not just because of the force of law. I would wish to make sure that my company kept the contract to do the job.

Which means that there is a possibility that the Sphere is to be demolished not because it is a risk, but because it is perceived as one.

Yet that perception hangs on a nuance. Eliminating the Sphere eliminates perceived risk and thus any possible penalties.

Which means that the reason for demolition may be just Fear. And Fear generates draconian measures which are sometimes not necessary.

Just musing.


http://www.nda.gov.uk/documents/upload/NDA_Final_Strategy_published_7_April_2006.pdf

[John Little]

"Political football becomes hot potato
Thursday, 13 January 2011 20:30
The study which condemned the Dounreay dome to the scrapheap (as we reported in March 2010) has been called into question by a group of scientists and historians who have produced a comprehensive response, which suggests it could in fact be easily saved.

The group have set up a website http://www.dounreaydome.org.uk/ as a campaigning focus to save the iconic structure as a monument to a technological achievement that some feel surpassed putting a man on the moon.



The original study by consultants WS Atkins suggests in essence that the dome is rotten with radioactive contamination, could never be made safe for the public, and would cost £500,000 every ten years just to paint, and stop rusting.

Thus it should be done away with, in tune with a particularly bleak Nuclear Decommisioning Authority view that the assumption should be made that no structure on its estate should be preserved for the National Heritage. Earlier visions of erecting a fibreglass replica or some other memorial have now faded away in the face of apparent public indifference. The study was hailed as 'a trail blazing piece of work which had never been done for a nuclear site before'

'Dounreay Heritage Strategy- a response' by Michael Cowie, John Little, Phill Rawlins, and Valerie Campbell takes a distinctly contrary view, questioning the findings and the independence of the report from DSRL and NDA, who perhaps would prefer not to have to stump up to preserve the dome.

In their response they suggest that in actual fact the Dome could be decontaminated to a recognised safe standard quite easily by removing surface contamination, and that in any case the main contamination is short half-life tritium, which has already decayed significantly through several half-lives, and is already much safer.

On the subject of painting, they have received quotations which suggest a durable three-coat epoxy could be employed on the dome which would cost £177,000 every fifteen years.

They state categorically, "Even the most superficial reading of the Atkins Heritage report reveals it to be such a flawed document that it is not fit for purpose in deciding the fate of the Dounreay Sphere... access to the Sphere is possible and safe."

If you want to Save the Dounreay Dome, you can sign the petition here."

http://www.allaboutorkney.com/news/307-political-football-becomes-hot-potato

[Moira]

I like hot potatoes!

All best grist to your mill John Little, Phill et al. I don't have the time or the patience to give the project its due but you have my support.:)

[sandyr1]

I like hot potatoes!

All best grist to your mill John Little, Phill et al. I don't have the time or the patience to give the project its due but you have my support.:)

And 'Moira'....I disagree. I feel we should accept the advice of the 'Experts'. Get rid of the 'Thing'!
Do you remember...I think it was called 'Quatermass and the Pit'!????? in the late 50's. Dounreay always reminded me of that Series.
We didn't know then and we still don't know now, what was/is in there......

[theone]

I feel we should accept the advice of the 'Experts'. ......

I do agree agree with that in principle. That's why I disagree so much with the wholesale removal of quangos, removing decisions from the experts and giving them to politicians.

HOWEVER

I think you have to chose "the experts" carefully and understand their motivations.

The "experts" at the NDA/DSRL want to demolish it, but have a financial concern, whereas the "experts" at ICOMoS/UNESCO want it kept.

Which expert advice should we accept?

[sandyr1]

I do agree agree with that in principle. That's why I disagree so much with the wholesale removal of quangos, removing decisions from the experts and giving them to politicians.

HOWEVER

I think you have to chose "the experts" carefully and understand their motivations.

The "experts" at the NDA/DSRL want to demolish it, but have a financial concern, whereas the "experts" at ICOMoS/UNESCO want it kept.

Which expert advice should we accept?

I haven't read all the reports, thus I just don't know.....BUT.....there have been repeated 'spills/ dumpings/ mistakes/ and the list goes on, not only with Dounreay but other places around the World. So perhaps it should go, or be isolated...Mind you I have been reading and find that there may be a shorter decontamination period than was thought, due to lack of funds. I also see they are supposed to be saving Millions by shipping 'stuff' South.
I just do not see the 'visitors, traveling North of Inverness to see that 'Thing'! I think someone stated that there was a Nuke Visitors Centre somewhere in the Lake District but they have all the population down there....We have what....25,000 people in the whole North of Scotland..And the b''''''''''''' maps still show Scotland cut off at Inverness. Burns my..................................to see that.

[sandyr1]

I like hot potatoes!

All best grist to your mill John Little, Phill et al. I don't have the time or the patience to give the project its due but you have my support.:)

Yes also like Hot Pots.....Houstons when I was at the School and Peachies on a Sat night! Oh and the bakery....was it the Cliff bakery on the way home to Lybster, when I was tring to sober up! Likely before your time/////compliment!

[golach]

they have all the population down there....We have what....25,000 people in the whole North of Scotland..And the b''''''''''''' maps still show Scotland cut off at Inverness. Burns my..................................to see that.

Sandy its closer to 370,000 in the Highland Region

[theone]

I haven't read all the reports, thus I just don't know.....BUT.....there have been repeated 'spills/ dumpings/ mistakes/ and the list goes on, not only with Dounreay but other places around the World. So perhaps it should go, or be isolated...Mind you I have been reading and find that there may be a shorter decontamination period than was thought, due to lack of funds. I also see they are supposed to be saving Millions by shipping 'stuff' South.
I just do not see the 'visitors, traveling North of Inverness to see that 'Thing'! I think someone stated that there was a Nuke Visitors Centre somewhere in the Lake District but they have all the population down there....We have what....25,000 people in the whole North of Scotland..And the b''''''''''''' maps still show Scotland cut off at Inverness. Burns my..................................to see that.

Whether it will attract the tourist or not is a different matter, but a worthy point.

You've pointed out that those responsible for Dounreay have made "repeated spills/dumpings/ mistakes".

Surely that's more argument for the case that their "expert" opinion is more open to question and that therefore we should infact accept ICOMos/UNESCO's view as the best one?

[sandyr1]

Sandy its closer to 370,000 in the Highland Region

You are correct Mr. G...approx 25,000 for Caithness I meant.

And Theone..... I just don't know.....I know the Nuke Industry/ I dealt with them/ I don't like way they are run!
Yes I like them for clean power.....but is it clean? Depends who you talk to/ listen to/ believe?
So if in doubt, throw it out!!! know that is an awful attitude.....but I have seen the inner workings...not that I know anything about the techie stuff.....just my thoughts.

[theone]

And Theone..... I just don't know.....I know the Nuke Industry/ I dealt with them/ I don't like way they are run!
Yes I like them for clean power.....but is it clean? Depends who you talk to/ listen to/ believe?
So if in doubt, throw it out!!! know that is an awful attitude.....but I have seen the inner workings...not that I know anything about the techie stuff.....just my thoughts.

And that's fair enough, each to their own, my opinion differs.

But I think this is where some of the debate over whether the dome should be kept or not is clouded.

It's shouldn't be about politics. It shouldn't be about being pro or anti nuclear, it should be whether or not there is justification for keeping it.

We could argue that the pyramids should be knocked down because the were created by slaves.

For Caithness, Dounreay has arguably had a bigger effect on the county than anything else in its recent history. Good or bad - that's probably up to personal opinion - but a big effect nonetheless. The Dome is an icon, recognised the world over and, as pointed out elsewhere in this thread, unique and architecturally significant.

It is for these reasons that I can see a valid argument for the dome being preserved, not my personal viewpoint on the politics or the industry.

[Moira]

And 'Moira'....I disagree. I feel we should accept the advice of the 'Experts'. Get rid of the 'Thing'!
Do you remember...I think it was called 'Quatermass and the Pit'!????? in the late 50's. Dounreay always reminded me of that Series.
We didn't know then and we still don't know now, what was/is in there......

You have a right to disagree. i'm confident of the Dome's future, however.

[John Little]

Letter and emails sent concerning the Dounreay Sphere. Not all have replied. Many have.

Lord (Chris) Smith
Tony Fountain (Chief executive NDA)
Jamie Stone MSP
Lord MacLennan
Sir Tam Dalyell
Stephen Henwood )Chairman NDA)
Deborah Mays (Historic Scotland)
Fiona Hyslop MSP (Culture sec)
Dr Vince Cable MP (Business sec)
Ruth Parsons (Historic Scotland)
Miriam MacDonald RCAHMs
Alex Salmond MP and First Minister
Ian Gray MSP
Annabel Goldie MSP
Simon Middlemas DSRL
James Gunn DSRL
David Cameron MP and PM
Nick Clegg MP
Ed Miliband MP
Donald Trump
Sir Richard Branson
Clive Aslet (Editor, Country Life)
ICOMoS
UNESCO
Alexander Hayward (National Museum of Scotland)
Michael Moore MP (Sec of state for Scotland)
Lord MacKay of Clashfern - Lord Advocate
Architectural Heritage of Scotland Society
George Gunn, author and dramatist
Sir Kenneth Calman, Chairman National Trust for Scotland
John Thurso MP
Scottish Historic Buildings Trust
All UK daily newspapers
BBC, ITN, Sky
Anne McKevitt
Jack Cunningham MP
Tony Blair MP
Gordon Brown MP
Kate Williams (artist)
Lord Mandelson
Lord Steel
Alistair Darling
Brian Wilson (Chairman of AMEC)
Hadrian Ellory van Dekker (Science museum curator)
S Crombie (Creative Scotland)
James Hunt MP (UK culture sec.)
Prof. C Rapley Director Science Museum
Jack McConnell MSP
Charles Kennedy MP
Motherwell Bridge Engineering Company
Professor Greenhaigh Heriot –Watt university.
Dounreay Stakeholders
Linsay Farmer – Atkins Global.
Prince Charles!

[oldmarine]

Windfarms are supposed to be where there is wind. A gale here is 25 mph!
And Yes, there is some thought where to put them. Smart I would say!

Tourism is down due to the US and Arab Countries being in trouble.
People flew in from around the World for the fishing and hunting.
We are OK so far,but in my City 7 years ago we were making approx 1 million vehicles for General Motors. Now approx 150,000...Hurts.

sandyr1: You mention your City 7 years ago and General Motors. Would that be Detroit? My wife lived in Rochester, Michigan until I married her and moved her to Fort Wayne, Indiana. Just curious.

[sandyr1]

sandyr1: You mention your City 7 years ago and General Motors. Would that be Detroit? My wife lived in Rochester, Michigan until I married her and moved her to Fort Wayne, Indiana. Just curious.

Hi there,
No...It is Oshawa, Ontario. Just North of Rochester, New York. Approx 40 miles across Lake Ontario, half which is the US and the North half in Canada.
Actually general Motors has made a come back in recent months, and it seems they are up to about 300,000 vehicles now, but a far cry from what GM used to be.

[Moira]

As a matter of interest, has anyone here attended a Dounreay Stakeholders Meeting?

I've heard these meetings advertised on our local radio, I've not attended so have no idea who the Stakeholders are, nor their objectives.

I did a quick search online which told me very little.

[oldmarine]

Hi there,
No...It is Oshawa, Ontario. Just North of Rochester, New York. Approx 40 miles across Lake Ontario, half which is the US and the North half in Canada.
Actually general Motors has made a come back in recent months, and it seems they are up to about 300,000 vehicles now, but a far cry from what GM used to be.
Yes, GM has made a come back, but many of their retired employees have lost a large portion of their retirement investment. A friend of mine retired from GM has lost a large amount of money due to what happened to GM. Thank you for your reply.

[John Little]

As a matter of interest, has anyone here attended a Dounreay Stakeholders Meeting?

I've heard these meetings advertised on our local radio, I've not attended so have no idea who the Stakeholders are, nor their objectives.

I did a quick search online which told me very little.


I cannot answer your question Moira but I have the impression that this particular stakeholder group is not taken much notice of. They should be - if you read the NDA's literature but their views have been completely over-ridden in the matter of the Sphere. Were I a Stakeholder I might think that my time was being completely wasted and watch telly instead.

[John Little]

This appeared from a poster on another forum. I thought it very good and perceptive and very clear sighted so with the permission of the author I paste it here;


"You are fighting a mindset which has evolved over the last 60 years.

First off, regarding risk on an ALARP principle, removing a risk however small and if practical would be the better scenario. That is the 'belt and braces' way of doing things in the nuclear industry.

Secondly, quotes in the real nuclear industry world are hideously over estimated, which what I think we are seeing here rather than your hypothetical quote but probably more realistic quote. Supplier nuclear bandwagon mentality is commonplace.

Thirdly, nuclear industry typically use suppliers and creditors etc that are known and trusted and built up over over many years, changing that list is hard even if they are undercut. Why 'risk' going to the new kid on the block when they've always been done that way for years without complaint? Yes it is a bureaucratic mindset but they see it as working so why change?"

[sandyr1]

[QUOTE=Phill;782878]Recently there was a thread on the .org about the Atkins Heritage report which came to the conclusion the DFR Dome had to be scrapped as it couldn't be decontaminated and was going to cost too much.

M. Phil....Where can I read the Atkins Report...Original?? tks

[John Little]

[QUOTE=Phill;782878]Recently there was a thread on the .org about the Atkins Heritage report which came to the conclusion the DFR Dome had to be scrapped as it couldn't be decontaminated and was going to cost too much.

M. Phil....Where can I read the Atkins Report...Original?? tks

Phill is one of the busiest and hardest working people that I know, so you may have to wait some time for a reply. This is the website he set up, and you may find the Atkins report and our response on it.

http://www.dounreaydome.org.uk/

[Moira]

I cannot answer your question Moira but I have the impression that this particular stakeholder group is not taken much notice of. They should be - if you read the NDA's literature but their views have been completely over-ridden in the matter of the Sphere. Were I a Stakeholder I might think that my time was being completely wasted and watch telly instead.

Thanks for that John. It's what I had anticipated.

The Radio adverts for the meetings seem to encourage the general public to attend but I could quite imagine them not having the confidence to speak out at the meetings. That's a pity. [disgust]

[crayola]

M. Phil....Where can I read the Atkins Report...Original?? tksIf this had been posted by anyone else then I would have been gobsmacked at its sheer naivety and its incomparable hypocrisy. But in this case I'm not the least bit surprised. Thank you for confirming my very worst suspicions. :roll:

I think I know who is to blame for all this dome destruction nonsense but in the last week I have become firmly attached to the dark side and I'm not going to tell anyone here.

So there. :Razz

[sandyr1]

If this had been posted by anyone else then I would have been gobsmacked at its sheer naivety and its incomparable hypocrisy. But in this case I'm not the least bit surprised. Thank you for confirming my very worst suspicions. :roll:

I think I know who is to blame for all this dome destruction nonsense but in the last week I have become firmly attached to the dark side and I'm not going to tell anyone here.

So there. :Razz

Pray tell me what you mean.....Am trying to decipher your thoughts....tough tho'.

[John Little]

Pray tell me what you mean.....Am trying to decipher your thoughts....tough tho'.

Allow me.

She means that you have been holding forth at great length on the subject of the Dome for these past several weeks. You have been putting very strong opinions forward. At one point the thread had sunk to the bottom of the second page yet you resurrected it to troll.

Yet all this time, as your post underlines, highlights and blazes out in neon lights, you had not bothered to read the Atkins Report.

You have not read our response either.

That's why I can't take anything you say seriously.


As to the second part of what C says, I can guess but will leave it to your own interpretation.

[sandyr1]

Quite a team! Credibility wise of course!

[John Little]

Additional to post 188;

The Twentieth Century Society
The Society for Industrial Archaeology.
Damian Green MP

[John Little]

Additional;

Mr C Huhne, Secretary of State for Energy and Climate Change.

[John Little]

The question is - would anyone like to be member number 350?


http://www.facebook.com/group.php?gid=141657212543519

[John Little]

By the special advisors to the Association of Industrial Archaeologists- who advise ICOMoS in identifying sites for World Heritage recommendation to UNESCO.

Interesting.

"2. Values of industrial heritage

I. The industrial heritage is the evidence of activities which had and continue to have profound historical consequences. The motives for protecting the industrial heritage are based on the universal value of this evidence, rather than on the singularity of unique sites.

II. The industrial heritage is of social value as part of the record of the lives of ordinary men and women, and as such it provides an important sense of identity. It is of technological and scientific value in the history of manufacturing, engineering, construction, and it may have considerable aesthetic value for the quality of its architecture, design or planning.

III. These values are intrinsic to the site itself, its fabric, components, machinery and setting, in the industrial landscape, in written documentation, and also in the intangible records of industry contained in human memories and customs.

IV. Rarity, in terms of the survival of particular processes, site typologies or landscapes, adds particular value and should be carefully assessed. Early or pioneering examples are of especial value.

http://www.mnactec.cat/ticcih/industrial_heritage.htm

[Phill]

It would be a good idea to bring you up to date with where the matter of the Dounreay Sphere appears to have come to rest for the moment. The Atkins report is clearly a dead letter as regards the Sphere, and the information contained in it was never going to apply except to one set of circumstances- namely that it might be necessary to demolish the Sphere.

The Atkins Report gave the impression that it might be necessary to demolish the Sphere because of radiation and contamination and difficulties of access.

But there again, it might not prove necessary- there is too much uncertainty, according to DSRL about what the situation will be at the end of decommissioning to say whether or not it will have to be demolished or not. These circumstances might never arise.

So why announce the demolition of the Sphere if it might not have to be demolished?

Our interpretation is that DSRL did not wish to have the Sphere listed or state that they would preserve it because they would have to proceed with a decommissioning process which would be circumscribed by all kinds of caveats relating to preservation. However, if their ‘Current Plan’ included a statement of intent to demolish then they would not have to be so careful with it and could do whatever they found convenient or necessary. They can, if they wish, carve the Sphere into slices – and may indeed do so. One example of a scenario which occurs to us is that they may remove the top of the sphere to hoist out the reactor vessel. If the Sphere were scheduled for demolition then this would mean that they would not have to replace the top or be careful about its removal. This also keeps costs down; DSRL are a business. And this makes business sense.

There is also the matter of safety and a building that is not listed or protected would allow them license to do whatever they felt necessary to keep their workforce safe.

But it is clear and obvious now that, not withstanding claims of radiation, contamination and difficult access, there is still the possibility of its preservation. NDA and DSRL have both stated that there is plenty of time for an organization to come forward with a plan for its development and retention provided that such a plan did not interfere with the decommissioning process or add to the cost.
We have letters to that effect from DSRL, the Nuclear Decommissioning Authority (NDA) and the Dounreay Stakeholders’ Group. It appears that NDA and DSRL would not have a particular objection to retaining the Sphere if a viable plan for its retention is put forward. NDA in particular state that they have an open mind as to its future.


At some point in the future, what is left of a decontaminated sphere will stand ready to be demolished. At that point something could be done with it by a body that had the will, the funds and the vision to exploit the tourist potential of the Sphere and the other history on the site.


The great problem now is that the man in the street has been told that the Sphere is to be demolished. But as long as the public remains persuaded by the Atkins Report that the Sphere is contaminated etc, then no group in their right mind would be interested in a radioactive, contaminated building to which access would be impossible. Even if it isn't.

Truth, it seems, is what you can get the public to believe.

Yet if the matter were clarified to the Press then it might well be that a group would put forward a plan for the Sphere’s preservation, There are several such groups in Scotland who could and should re-examine their briefs and statutory obligations.

This is not a gasometer whose fate we are discussing but a remarkable piece of C20th Industrial architecture.


It can- actually – be saved.


Mike Cowie, John Little, Val Cambell, Lyndall Leet, Phill Rawlins.
Save Dounreay's Dome Group.

[Moira]

It would be a good idea to bring you up to date with where the matter of the Dounreay Sphere appears to have come to rest for the moment. <snip>

But it is clear and obvious now that, not withstanding claims of radiation, contamination and difficult access, there is still the possibility of its preservation. <snip>

We have letters to that effect from DSRL, the Nuclear Decommissioning Authority (NDA) and the Dounreay Stakeholders’ Group. etc.....

Yet if the matter were clarified to the press......

Mike Cowie, John Little, Val Cambell, Lyndall Leet, Phill Rawlins.
Save Dounreay's Dome Group.

Thanks for the update Phill. I have to question the reasons behind the apparent reluctance of DSRL, NDA and DSG to issue a joint statement to the press in order to "clarify the matter" as you have said.

The news item on Page 6 of today's Press & Journal can only add to the public's confusion IMO. "Reactor dome paint job is cancelled". Here's the online link to the item:-
http://www.pressandjournal.co.uk/Article.aspx/2145196

Perhaps they're hoping the Save Dounreay's Dome Group will fade away..... like the paint..... and the public interest....[disgust]

[Phill]

It does beg the question just what is the actual thought process behind all this!

The dome needs painting or it doesn't to protect the substrate for the next 15 - 20 years, if so paint it at the best cost option. What they now seem to suggest is that the dome didn't need painting previously "There is no issue over the integrity of the dome structure by not doing the painting" so have they been pishing taxpayers money up the wall for years?

[oldchemist]

There must be a safety case which assesses and justifies the risk of not painting the sphere - let's have it in the public domain for all to see.

[John Little]

December 2010. The public are told that DSRL are going to spend £1 million on painting the sphere because it is necessary to keep it safe from corrosion during the decommissioning.

February 2011 the £1,000,000 paint job is cancelled and we are told that the money is going to be used to reduce hazards during the decommissioning process.

And Phill sourced a perfectly respectable quotation from a reputable company to paint the sphere with a 15 year guarantee for £136,000 plus VAT.

So it will now be left to rust?


Summer 2010 an £88,000 report throws up all sorts of obfuscation and national media blare out that the Sphere will be demolished.

Now we are told that there is plenty of time for a group or body to come forward with a scheme for its development post decommissioning.

Let us be clear on this. If the Dounreay Sphere is demolished, then it is not because it has to be.

It's because those who control its fate actually wish to do so.

If it were in England we would not even be having this discussion.

[sandyr1]

If it were in England we would not even be having this discussion.[/QUOTE]

Why do you say this?

[John Little]

Why because I knew that someone would pick up on it.

The main reason why this building is putatively to be demolished is because it is not near any large centres of population. If it were near any large conurbation that would ensure a supply of visitors, then it would be the centre of an exhibition.

But because it's on the far north coast of Scotland, the powers that be do their projections, figure that they can't turn it into a fee paying attraction that will pay its own way, and decide they do not wish to keep it.

Yet they close down the options to let someone else do it.

So ultimately it's money and geographical location which will demolish the Sphere.

But NOT radiation, contamination, access, or paint.

[sandyr1]

I think quite a few of us have already come to that conclusion and even put pen to paper to that effect....Org.
We recently had a 'toll road' planned for quite a stretch of highway North of us, but the Gov't decided that the projected 'cash cow' that they had thought it would be, didn't really come up to scratch, so they have cancelled part of it. Remember it is 'our' money the Gov't plays with.
Finances obviously play a huge roll in what occurs, both in Gov't and Private Works. My fear is that due to this 'downturn', plans that had been made some years ago may not come to fruition.
Budgets etc., are projected on the lay of the land when they are made. Long terms plans are only a guage. Things can change dramatically and I am sure they will...
We are being told that Canada is going to come out of this downturn, with the least debt and the best possible recovery, but we are also Billions in Debt/. It will take 20/30 years to pay off what we have accumulated..
Take Dounreay...it is a non producing relic.
Actually you may have it longer that you want......they 'mothballed' a huge coal fired/natural gas facility 30 years ago and it is still standing....barbed wire and 2 Security Guards!

[John Little]

"Take Dounreay...it is a non producing relic."

It is relics that attract more visitors every weekend than anything else in the regions further south.

On the Dounreay site are unexcavated neolithic remains, two battlefields- one from the middle ages, and one from the Civil War. It also has a 16th century castle, a unique metal building which has been recommended for world heritage status, the site of a first in nuclear history. The largest spherical building in the world. All within the space of 150 acres.

In Caithness there is a long history of herring fishing (there is a harbour right near to Dounreay) and Caithness stone provided roofing and slabbing to the world for decades.

Such a site, further to the south would be a prime tourist attraction. It is a prime site for a Highland Heritage centre with re-enactors and crofting exhibitions.

However the population of Caithness is 40,000.

Summer tourism 'they' figure is not enough. But I do not think that anyone has done a business appreciation of that. Largely because everybody thinks it is 'rotten with radioactivity'.

But it's not. As NDA and DSRL and DSG all say - it can be saved.

Ah well I suppose Caithness does not need such a large potential tourist magnet or the jobs it has the potential to provide.

Let it go. Ain't worth it. It would need investment and capital outlay - in Caithness too. Only 40,000 voters there.

Plenty else to drag Mr and Mrs MacTavish and the kids north in the summer.

Easy to ignore.

[John Little]

Actually - that's 40,000 people, so I actually do not know how many voters that is. Not many really.

http://www.voterpower.org.uk/caithness-sutherland-easter-ross

Oh dear oh dear.

Question of priorities in the end.

[bekisman]

There is an interest by tourists, even with the run of the mill old exhibition, almost 8,000 people [in 2003] passed through the doors [of the Dounreay Exhibition ] since it opened in May.


http://www.caithness.org/fpb/november2003/dounreayvisitorcentre.htm (http://www.caithness.org/fpb/november2003/dounreayvisitorcentre.htm)


Survey work undertaken for Highlands & Islands Enterprise in 2002-2003 indicated that c.18% of visitors to the Highlands stay in Caithness and Sutherland . Applying this figure to the VisitScotland figures for the Highlands gives a tourism population in Caithness and Sutherland of c. 441,000 people per annum. This broadly corresponds with the 2005 Caithness Horizons Business Plan which provided a figure of 420,000 for the number of tourists staying each year within the facility’s catchment area (which is essentially the same as Dounreay’s).

http://www.dounreay.com/UserFiles/File/Heritage%20Strategy%20consultation%20/APPENDICES%20-%20Final%20Draft_Dec_2009.pdf (http://www.dounreay.com/UserFiles/File/Heritage%20Strategy%20consultation%20/APPENDICES%20-%20Final%20Draft_Dec_2009.pdf)

Pretty sure if they had a solid structure like a dome + exhibits inside, would be well attended - same as it was, way back in the early 90's - I know 'cos I did the tour; film badge and all..

[sandyr1]

I didn't think Caithness had more that 30k.....but anyway the people who pay the bills with our money have to be careful and rightly so....
What will be will be.....singing!

[John Little]

Aye - must be careful wi the siller.

Caithness ain't worth it - is it?

[John Little]

You would not need a film badge after decommissioning Bekisman. Even now you can enter the Sphere without danger.

The levels of radiation on the charge floor pose no threat to health with levels of contamination at very low levels

The Tritium has decayed to almost nought - there's more of it in your drinking water than in the steel of the sphere.

You'd be in more danger sleeping in a hotel room in Aberdeen.

[sandyr1]

Aye - must be careful wi the siller.

Caithness ain't worth it - is it?

I think you have a misconceived idea of what I think, with the above comments.
I mentioned already all the monies spent on Failures. The two I know about are..The Brora Mill and the Heating Plant in Wick and there are more.
There is a severe depression in the World, along with unknown Middle East crises which could put the cost of running a car, to get there, out of reach of many people. It is so easy to say something with no knowledge.

[John Little]

"It is so easy to say something with no knowledge."

So true - so true....

[Moira]

It does beg the question just what is the actual thought process behind all this! <snip>


Would your Group be prepared to put this question to them? I'd re-phrase the p'ing though.

I note from the press report that "half of the money (£1m) would have been spent in the next two years, with the rest spent...... in 10 years' time." Also "it (the dome) was traditionally repainted every 10 years". According to Colin Punler, spokesman for DSRL, the decommissioning of the reactor "would take another 20 years to complete"

What then, or indeed anytime between now and then? Perhaps another press report to say that their collective "guess-timates" were flawed, the Dome is no longer fit for purpose and an acceleration of the decommissioning process is necessary. Goodbye Dome.

I realise I'm being cynical in my thought process and have little knowledge of the Nuclear industry but it brings sharply to mind an old Caithness saying. "There's something no' richt wrong here".

[John Little]

"There's something no' richt wrong here"

Aye - you are right Moira.

One of the funny things to me is the very noticeable silence of the Groat on this thing.

I wonder why that might be?

[John Little]

Hmmmm...

http://www.dounreaystakeholdergroup.org/files/downloads/download1699.pdf

[Moira]

The advert for the Dounreay Stakeholders Group has been broadcast over local radio for the past week. No details announced for the next meeting, but apparently the date and time will be announced in the local press.

[John Little]

Perhaps one of the stakeholders could ask why, when NDA and DSRL both say that there may be circumstances where the Sphere may be saved, that they do not bother to clarify this with the public? They seem keen to release every other bit of trivia to the press - but not this.

They say that there is plenty of time for a body to come forward with proposals to develop the Sphere yet do not wish people to know that- or so it appears.

[John Little]

http://www.mnactec.cat/ticcih/industrial_heritage.htm

[orkneycadian]

At the rate these buildings are exploding in Japan, maybe we should get shot of the one at Dounreay, just in case.....

[John Little]

Just in case.... what?

[orkneycadian]

Alternatively, they are getting a bit short of reactor buildings in Japan at the moment. Might we worth a pound or 2 to export it over there?

[John Little]

And the winner of the award for most original Org comedian is...

[ducati]

http://forum.caithness.org/showthread.php?139421-Dounreay-Dome-Paint-Job-Scrapped

Damn, that's my bid booted then :mad:

[John Little]

Patience Duke - we have made some headway and a post follows in the next day or so.

[John Little]

An update on the Sphere

As we have said previously, both NDA and DSRL have stated that there is plenty of time for a body to come forward with a scheme for redeveloping the Dounreay Sphere in a way that does not add to the cost or interfere with decommissioning.

Logically the body to do this was and is Historic Scotland who have oversight of, and duty of care towards Scotland’s Industrial Heritage buildings. So we wrote to them and asked what their position was in the light of this clarification that the Sphere may not necessarily have to be demolished. They have now replied.

………………………………………………………………………………………….

As they have already stated publicly, in the foreword to the heritage strategy, they recognise the importance of the site, its place in engineering and its broader history, this information is happily released. The significance of the achievement in the Sphere is acknowledged.

They are mindful that while the NDA mandate remains in place for the work of decommissioning the Sphere, what will remain will not be the engineering achievement which they laud, rather an empty shell in a re-defined context.

They add the reassurance that they will continue to remain involved with the Dounreay Heritage Advisory Panel and will, as is fitting to their remit, keep an open-mind to changing circumstances.

……………………………………………………………………………………..


That is to say that Historic Scotland are keeping an open mind as to the future of the Sphere in the context of what becomes possible with the passage of time. We do not agree that the Sphere would be an ‘empty shell’ however; we view it as remarkable and unique architecture in itself.

Recognition that there are circumstances under which the sphere might be retained is a considerable advance on the original position that it would definitely be demolished.

Given the dangerous nature of decommissioning, this group must be content that Historic Scotland is keeping an open mind. Further agitation for retention at this point would be futile until the radioactive parts of the reactor are removed.

DSRL are uncertain about what the condition of the Sphere will be after decommissioning.
This is also the case with NDA but they are keeping an open mind about it.

The fact is that the Dounreay Sphere is going through a process which, when it ends, will not necessarily entail its destruction. The bodies who are concerned with its future have something of a flexible view towards its future.

We are happy with this situation for the moment; any other view would probably be unreasonable.

The decision not to paint the Sphere, in view of the uncertainty surrounding its future, is one we regret. We hope that DSRL will at least patch the paint where needed. However the steel of the Sphere was coated with zinc before it was assembled in order to resist rust and it may fare better than some folk think.

……………………………………………………………………………………….


There is one more task for this group to perform at the moment and that is to clarify this matter to the general public. Most people think that the Sphere is going to be demolished.

It ain’t necessarily so – so why not tell people?

[gleeber]

Very well done to everyone who caused this change of direction to happen.

[John Little]

I should point out that DSRL's view is that their position has not changed since last September. I interpret that to mean that they have always had an open mind as to the future of the Sphere after decommissioning.

It is this that needs clarifying.

[ClachanHope]

The Atkins Heritage Report is such a compendium of misinformation and innuendo that demolishing the sphere on the grounds that it was infested with vampires would be more believable. [disgust]


Did those Vampires come from Portgower.??

[Moira]

Thanks for the update John, much appreciated.

[John Little]

It appears that the Heritage Lottery fund is not as short of cash as I thought...

http://www.bdonline.co.uk/news/lottery-fund-awards-for-fobert-harrap-and-purcell-miller-tritton/5015727.article

Recession or not - geography is all.

[John Little]

It is an intrinsic good to be accurate. Since I have been working on a false assumption it would be well to set the record straight. I had been thinking that Richard S Brocklesby, the architect of the Dounreay Sphere, was Scottish. The reason is this;

http://www.scottisharchitects.org.uk/architect_full.php?id=401394

It seems that the 'Dictionary of Scottish Architects' is no such thing. More properly it is a dictionary of architects who have built notable structures in Scotland. It's a misnomer I find rather irritating and misleading.

Richard Shearwood Brocklesby was born in Croydon, South London, the son of John Brocklesby, famous as a member of the 'Arts and Crafts' school of architects.

He was English

But the fabrication, engineering and construction of the Sphere were purely Scottish - that is certain.

[orkneycadian]

Is he still alive? Would be a good architect to help with the plans for dismantling it.

[John Little]

I shall pass your suggestion on to his family- I do not know if he is still alive. He may be.

[John Little]

http://www.ticcih.org/

[John Little]

The International Committee for the Conservation of the Industrial Heritage has a quarterly bulletin which I placed a link to in the post above. Since I have now permission to use it, here is the full text of the article in it;

"Opinion

Last year a report by Atkins Heritage on the Dounreay nuclear site provided judgments which form the basis for a decision that the Dounreay Sphere will ultimately be demolished. The report has been accepted by Dounreay Site Restoration Limited,(DSRL) the Nuclear Decommissioning Authority (NDA) and Historic Scotland (HS). It has been presented as a definitive approach to assessing nuclear sites and accepted by an uncritical media as the final word on the matter. However, critical analysis of the Atkins Report reveals it to be an imperfect instrument in pronouncing sentence of death on an iconic and historic structure.

The Sphere, designed by architect Richard S Brocklesby, was erected between 1955 and 1959. Made of steel, which on average, is one inch thick, it is a blast-proof vessel strong enough to contain a chemical explosion in its reactor. The design was empirical because no spheroid of this size had ever been built anywhere in the world. Reinforced concrete foundations were laid into solid rock for a cylindrical anchor block, onto which were clamped steel plates, which were then welded. Each weld was tested electronically and each zinc-coated plate was rolled individually. The result was a remarkable feat of design, construction and engineering; a perfectly spherical building with a diameter of 135 feet, containing 1500 tons of steel, over two miles of welds, and with a surface area of 1.5 acres; the largest spherical building in Europe, and possibly the world. As architecture it is a startling, geometric and alien intervention into the landscape, a universal statement of man’s aspirations, and a masterpiece of its designer’s art. Inside is a cathedral-like space as large as the dome of St Paul’s a paradigm of 20th century industrial innovation.

Its merit has long been recognized internationally. ICOMoS, supported by the Twentieth Century Society and the Association for Industrial Archaeology has recommended it to UNESCO as one of 18 sites in Britain worthy of consideration for World Heritage status.

In 1962 it fulfilled its first purpose as its experimental reactor went critical, becoming the first fast breeder in the world to supply electricity to a national grid. It continued to do so until 1977.

The Atkins Report, deprecatory with faint praise, makes claims that the Sphere cannot be retained on the basis of statements that are at least subjective, and sometimes inaccurate.

‘…the risk of receiving a radiation dose may never go away.’

Scientist Michael Cowie, former radiation protection advisor in the Sphere says; ‘This is simply not true’.

The NDA itself states that it is only lightly contaminated.

Atkins claims that the nuclear achievement within the Sphere ‘…is an example of a rare nuclear technology that is now largely but not wholly extinct.’ Yet Japan’s 2007 decision to develop fast breeder technology in partnership with France, and similar decisions taken by Korea, India and China indicate otherwise. Subjective and unreferenced judgments are presented as unquestionable fact as the Sphere is judged on its ability to confer ‘significant benefits’ and found wanting. All that would be left after decommissioning would be a” ‘shell’….its core values removed”, a statement which few architects would make about this building.

Claims of contamination, radiation, and difficulty of access as reasons for demolition fade away in DSRL’s admission that ‘ while the condition of the Sphere upon completion of decommissioning isn’t known there is plenty of time for any organization to come forward with a proposal for its redevelopment that doesn’t compromise the decommissioning of the site as a whole, nor add to the total cost’.

In other words, flexibility is needed so that DSRL may do as they wish in order to proceed with decontamination. Historic Scotland cannot over-ride safety priorities, so cannot list the sphere. A statement of determination to demolish the sphere allows the demolition company to proceed freely, which a statement of intention to preserve would not.

At the end of the process, the Sphere, safely decontaminated, will stand for a period then be destroyed. It fills all criteria for listing and preservation, but its geographical position, a set of subjective reasons for demolition, and paucity of cash will dictate its end.

Yet it could be saved; it stands in the middle of a 150 acre site where there are Neolithic remains, a castle, the site of two battles, and a world war two airfield as well as a need for tourist attractions in an area rapidly becoming economically depressed.

Ultimately it may fall by what may seem a lack of imagination to some, or mere utilitarianism to others.

[ducati]

I was in the locale the other day, the dome is looking very rust streaked, I might have to revise my bid.

Also what's left of the runway (used as a carpark) would make a great drag strip. Dounreay Pod anyone?

[John Little]

I was in the locale the other day, the dome is looking very rust streaked, I might have to revise my bid.

Also what's left of the runway (used as a carpark) would make a great drag strip. Dounreay Pod anyone?

That, at least, is imaginative.

[John Little]

Action: DSG/SRSG(2011)M003/A002: All site restoration sub group members to provide comment on the Scottish Governments consultation on Dounreay’s Radioactive waste substitution.
• Dounreay Heritage Strategy: DSG had received a report written by a number of people who are opposed to the demolition of DFR.
-1-
"Endorsed on 20th April 2011
Simon Middlemas stated that the site had also received a copy of the report and had written to the authors inviting them to visit Dounreay Stuart Chalmers confirmed that the NDA and UK Government had also received copies and that responses were being prepared.
Simon Middlemas noted that the DFR sphere was not programmed to be demolished for at least 15 years and if someone came up with a robust business case for retention of the dome then it could be considered further down the road. However, at this point the site had to make a decision to allow the lifetime plan to be fully populated and that decision was for demolition."

http://www.dounreaystakeholdergroup.org/files/downloads/download1783.pdf


And so let the matter, for the moment, rest.

[Moira]

<snip>

And so let the matter, for the moment, rest.

Yes, maybe we should do that but, in the meantime, I'll be keeping all my muscles flexed.

[John Little]

Well yes indeed Moira - that would be a good stance to take.

The point is that it has been established that the Dounreay Sphere, in principle, can be saved.

All that stuff published last year about radiation, difficulty of access and contamination is nothing more than fog obscuring the fact that it is possible to retain that building.

Whether it should be retained or not is another debate.

But the way is clear and apparent. If some group of local business people, National Trust for Scotland, HIE, Historic Scotland or anybody else wishes to save it, then by coming up with a 'robust business plan' then they may do so and will be listened to at some point in the future.

Nobody can do anything at the moment because, by law, DSRL have to decommission the sphere.

But that the possibility is open is enough for now.