Growing Up Under The Shadow of the Dounreay Dome

[The Pepsi Challenge]

Guys and Gals...

I'm currently writing a first-person piece on what it was like growing up beside a nuclear power plant. (That'll be Dounreay, then.) You know, how it affected me, its influence on the county (socially and culturally, as well as economically), and its lasting impression. Growing up in Thurso, it seemed every family had someone working there, or, had a friend who did.

The reason for writing this is in response to the latest news that the government is actually asking communities to volunteer to have ALL of Scotland's nuclear waste dumped - yes, almost literally - on their front doorstep. There's a fair chance it'll be dumped in Caithness, because, let's face it, the county is the furthest, most remote place from London. However, as I jot down the bare bones of this feature article, I'd be interested to see (read) how Dounreay affected the lives of others who grew up in the shadow of the Dounreay dome. I hope some of you out there would be willing to share your thoughts... and memories.

Cheers,

TPC

[Ricco]

Guys and Gals...

I'm currently writing a first-person piece on what it was like growing up beside a nuclear power plant. (That'll be Dounreay, then.) You know, how it affected me, its influence on the county (socially and culturally, as well as economically), and its lasting impression. Growing up in Thurso, it seemed every family had someone working there, or, had a friend who did.

The reason for writing this is in response to the latest news that the government is actually asking communities to volunteer to have ALL of Scotland's nuclear waste dumped - yes, almost literally - on their front doorstep. There's a fair chance it'll be dumped in Caithness, because, let's face it, the county is the furthest, most remote place from London. However, as I jot down the bare bones of this feature article, I'd be interested to see (read) how Dounreay affected the lives of others who grew up in the shadow of the Dounreay dome. I hope some of you out there would be willing to share your thoughts... and memories.

Cheers,

TPC

Well, TPC. My dad was fuel rod researcher at Dounreay and he swears that the small amount of Rhontgens (?) he received during his life never did him any harm. Even have a quote he did for a newspaper. I went to an open day there as a mere stripling and sneakily picked up one of the lead shielding blocks to see how heavy it was. Sent the alarms off when the guard was checking us with a geiger meter!

[JAWS]

I understood that the Government were asking all Councils in Britain, not just Scotland, if they had any locations which they considered suitable for the disposal of Nuclear Waste.

The explanation given was that in the past such decisions had been taken by Central Government and that this was no longer considered to be the best way to do things.

This would appear to be rather different to dumping the whole of Scotland's Nuclear Waste in one place either in Caithness or elsewhere for that matter.

Has anybody any idea if Nuclear Waste Disposal has become a Devolved Matter?

[Rheghead]

If the Government is asking for volunteer councils to take the waste then that sounds better than a forced approach. £20 billion is not to be sniffed at and I am sure it will be built as safe as possible.

[theone]

Guys and Gals...

There's a fair chance it'll be dumped in Caithness, because, let's face it, the county is the furthest, most remote place from London.

TPC

I'm more than confident we'll recieve a dump, or if not us Sellafield. The reasons for this will not be based on distance from London though, regardless of what the scaremoungers would want us to believe. The risks posed from properly encased waste become insignificant over distances of a few feet.

If it's dumped here it will be because:

1. Having grown up "in the shadow" of Dounreay the majority of the local people have if not an understanding, at least an acceptance of all things nuclear. Indeed if it doesn't come here I'm confinced it will go somewhere else with an "atomic" history.

2. The local economy will be needing a boost. Although a dump won't even inject a fraction of the money that Dounreay did it will still be seen that "something" is being done by the government to support the economy.

3. Dounreay is a licenced site. I think licencing a new site would be taboo nowadays with the nuclear proliferation debate.

Ideally I'd like to see a new build commercial plant up here but tbh I just don't see it.

[Stewart]

Last I heard there were plans to build the underground dump at Altnabreac.

[gleeber]

Lets talk about it first. I grew up with Dounreay and am pro nuclear. There would need to be large carrot dangled before i would entertain the idea of a nuclear dump in Caithness.
THe UKAEA lost my support when they decided to sell viewfirth. Any thoughts about dumping nuclear rubbish in Caithness will need to be accompanied by an agreement to supplement the economy of caithness for as long as the rubbish is active.

[Bill Fernie]

I see that someone has mentioned that councils will be asked. In that context it is as well to remember that there is no Caithness council and Highland council policy is against siting nuclear waste anywhere in the Highlands. If it comes to vote and that was accepted by the government then no waste would come to Caithness.

After the May 2007 elections there will not even be a Caithness area committee as the new local government structure in Scotland will be Ward Forums and all the big decisions will be taken by the main council committees sitting in Inverness. Ward forums will have no voting rights but will be places to discuss matters under the format that the current government is promulgating - "Community Planning"

In the light of that and the fact that Highland Council policy is for no nuclear waste in Highland unless there is major shift it is unlikely that Highland council will vote for a Nuclear Waste facility on its ground even if all 10 of the Caithness councillors were to vote in favour.

Perhaps as Gleeber says there will have to be a huge carrot if not stick to persuade unless there is very willing taker elsewhere.

[theone]

I see that someone has mentioned that councils will be asked. In that context it is as well to remember that there is no Caithness council and Highland council policy is against siting nuclear waste anywhere in the Highlands. If it comes to vote and that was accepted by the government then no waste would come to Caithness.

After the May 2007 elections there will not even be a Caithness area committee as the new local government structure in Scotland will be Ward Forums and all the big decisions will be taken by the main council committees sitting in Inverness. Ward forums will have no voting rights but will be places to discuss matters under the format that the current government is promulgating - "Community Planning"

In the light of that and the fact that Highland Council policy is for no nuclear waste in Highland unless there is major shift it is unlikely that Highland council will vote for a Nuclear Waste facility on its ground even if all 10 of the Caithness councillors were to vote in favour.

Perhaps as Gleeber says there will have to be a huge carrot if not stick to persuade unless there is very willing taker elsewhere.

Or perhaps a little carrot for Caithness and a big one for Inverness.......

[concerned resident]

Just think of yourself as lucky, remember it was the good old British Government who put Dounreay up here, as the Scientists thought it might blow up. You are expendable, the Dounreay workers took the good money, and took there chances, with there lives, and that of there families, the rest of the population probably never realized that they may have been blown up, just to test a project.

[frank ward]

Nuclear waste should be stored at the site it is produced at, encased in concrete blocks and stored on the surface.
That is the safest way to prevent it seeping into the water table and also allow access for monitoring and re-packaging if necessary.

Those who want to transport nuclear waste across the country in order to gain financially by 'storing' it [they mean dumping it down a shaft] are mercenary cretins of the most despicable kind.

[scotsboy]

How is your proposal "safer" than storing these "concrete blocks" well below the water table? Surely if you postulate that they may leak it would be safer to have them below the groundwater aquifer? Why concrete? Is your proposal for all levels of radioactive waste?......??

[peter macdonald]

You know sometimes I get really baffled by what is said on the Org. As Dounreay winds down the county has to get some other ways of sustaining itself ,We have seen farming just starting to recover after a terrible period of low prices BSE etc ...We are seeing tourism being hit by high petrol prices and a strong pound but the industry is still in there fighting ...Fishing is about on its knees but there is hope especially in the shellfish sector
But what do I hear next ??? Lets have a Nuclear dump !!!! Great we will get a few crumbs of the table and we will be happy and proud that Caithness can handle nuclear waste!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! Two things should be realised 1 that people perceive Dounreay as a power station (in this day and age probably wrongly) but that sounds an awful lot better than it being referred to as a dump 2 the economics of Dounreay s rundown means a decreasing role in the counties economic well being Therefore the rest of the counties wishes should become more important as time goes by and Im sure that the economic harm done by the creation of a dump at Dounreay (to replace its "power station") will outweigh any gain Just ask any farmer fisherman etc etc

[peter macdonald]

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/scotland/6092028.stm To view the thoughts of Jack MacConnell

[JAWS]

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/scotland/6092028.stm To view the thoughts of Jack MacConnellThanks for that link, it's answered a few questions, including one on another thread.

Nuclear waste Disposal is not a Devolved Matter so any decision about Caithness is between Westminster and the Highland Council. That is assuming, of course, that what the Government would appear to be suggesting is what they intend to do and not just more "Spin".

Bill, I suspect I was the one who made the original comment about Local Councils and the above link would seem to confirm that.
I suspect that your comment about the carrot and/or the stick could be a strong possibility. The trick of keeping a discussion nice and vague suggesting some wonderful opportunity is on the cards and that your area is very high on the list for it whilst just happening to let slip that that there is a little problem which somebody needs to help solve still works wonders.
Of course, nothing is said directly and the subjects are kept quite separate so there is no direct evidence of undue pressure. Just a nod and a wink which leaves the ball in your court should you wish to make an offer to solve the little problem they want to go away.
"Carrot? Stick? Who, me? No idea what you are talking about, they came up with the suggestion, I had nothing to do with it!"

[frank ward]

Scotsboy, there is nothing more certain that ANY container WILL leak, given that radioactive waste is harmful for thousands of years.

That's why it should never be sunk deep into the earth, where it will be forgotten, but certain to poison the water and eventually find its way into fish then humans.

Stored on the surface all grades of waste can be monitored and, if necessary, re-sealed.
And the waste should remain on site, not carted around the country until some yokels accept it in exchange for a new piano at the community centre.

[peter macdonald]

Its not so much what you do with it on site Its getting it to the dump site in the first place How do you fancy that stuff coming up here by road over Berriedale?? ,the A9 in winter ????? Or should it arrive in Dounreay by boat ?? on passage during conditions as was last week?? through the Pentland Firth or the Minch or west of the Hebrides?? rail well look what happened last week OK so that leaves air transport and Ill just leave that as something not to be contemplated EVER!!
In other words if it came from Dounreay in the first place store it there .If not keep it where it is !!!!

[Rheghead]

Its not so much what you do with it on site Its getting it to the dump site in the first place How do you fancy that stuff coming up here by road over Berriedale?? ,the A9 in winter ????? Or should it arrive in Dounreay by boat ?? on passage during conditions as was last week?? through the Pentland Firth or the Minch or west of the Hebrides?? rail well look what happened last week OK so that leaves air transport and Ill just leave that as something not to be contemplated EVER!!
In other words if it came from Dounreay in the first place store it there .If not keep it where it is !!!!

Have you never stopped to think that should any of those circumstances arise then there would not be a safety case made for the journey to take place? Therefore all that what you wrote was mostly scaremongering because the transport of radioactive materials is very carefully controlled.

[peter macdonald]

Yes all these things are factored in to Nuclear transport but accidents happen often with dire consequnces despite best intentions Would a train carrying waste have been stopped in Inverness last week on the information given by the weather forecasters I dont think so!!! It could quite possibly still have been stuck between Portgower and Bilbster !!! Im not scaremongering but the case for a nuclear dump in Caithness is seriously flawed both in economic and practical terms

[Rheghead]

Yes all these things are factored in to Nuclear transport but accidents happen often with dire consequnces despite best intentions Would a train carrying waste have been stopped in Inverness last week on the information given by the weather forecasters I dont think so!!! It could quite possibly still have been stuck between Portgower and Bilbster !!! Im not scaremongering but the case for a nuclear dump in Caithness is seriously flawed both in economic and practical terms

Well I think the train would have stopped at a safe place should the journey have started.

Anyhow, you say 'accidents often happen with dire circumstances', was there an accident recently with nuclear materials? I have seen a video of a 'planned accident' involving those flasks and there is nothing to be worried about. But that is for highly active waste for reprocessing, lower level waste, quite rightly, would not have as strict controls. low level waste if spilled out all over will just need a general clean up. No lasting hazard involved. There are more dangerous agents of doom being transported daily up and down the Highlands like chemicals and carcinogens which don't get a bat of an eyelid. Why the big hullabulloo over a wagon filled with plastic gloves etc?

[rockchick]

Here's some facts about a site for a nuclear depository:

1. Most European countries either have a deep geological facility planned or in place. Holland is the exception due to the small size of their waste problem - they have chosen to store it on the surface for 100 years and look at the problem again.

2. The waste problem isn't going to go away - we HAVE to deal with it. It has to go somewhere.

3. CORWM, following the example of other european countries that have successfully facilitated a deep geological repository (including Switzerland, Finland and Sweden), have advocated that possible sites should show willingness to participate. Yes, this may take the form of a nice juicy carrot, but why shouldn't the site be compensated?

4. Local economy will be assisted by both the construction of the infrastructure, and running it after its built.

5. Environmental hazards would be minimized due to the triple encasement these facilities utilize for ILW (High level waste, which generates heat, is normally stored on the surface until its radioactivity decays to such a point that it can be stored as ILW). The waste is vitrified, or made into glass, which is encased in metal shielding, which is then packed into a container surrounded by bentonite. This stops the waste from leaking out, and stops any water from getting in.

6. The waste is stored at a facility at least half a kilometer below the surface. Groundwater at this level does not recharge back to the surface, at least in Caithness it doesn't. Bedding planes at Altnabreac and Dounreay slope towards the ocean, so any radioactive contamination that did get out would end up a few miles out into the ocean. We're at more risk from cosmic radiation.

Altnabreac is considered a better choice than Dounreay as it is in the middle of a big hunk of granite. As granite is formed from essentially one big blob of magma deep within the ground (and yes, I'm oversimplifying!) it tends to be homogenous, without stress fractures or bedding planes that would allow water/radioactivity to pass through.

7. I think the worry about the tourist trade is overemphasized. Once the facility is in place, there won't be anything other than a couple of buildings on the surface to remind people that it's there. No one will think of it after awhile. The one in Switzerland they are planning to return the surface to greenfield once the repository is filled and sealed.

Thing is, there is already nuclear waste being stored on the surface here and at other nuclear sites, all properly contained, but I for one would feel safer knowing it was deep underground, far away from any terrorists that wanted to get their hands on it.

[rich]

I think we need to clear the ground a bit.
So let's call in the experts because without them this discussion will be unanchored in realty.
First expert - the physicist. How dangerous is nuclear waste? It seems like an obvious question but it needs answering.
Second expert - the epidemiologist. What evidence is there -if any - that there are higher rates of cancer around nuclear reactors?
Third expert - the geologist. Where might it be safe to store nuclear waste and what time scale are we looking at? In another few thousand years, Caithness could have sunk into the ocean!
Fourth expert - the economist. What model have we in place that can predict our future energy needs and if we do have one that is reliable what is the role of nuclear power in it?
Fifth expert - the ecologist. How does nuclear power compare with fossil fuels in terms of destroying the environment?

[rockchick]

I think we need to clear the ground a bit.
So let's call in the experts because without them this discussion will be unanchored in realty.
First expert - the physicist. How dangerous is nuclear waste? It seems like an obvious question but it needs answering.
Second expert - the epidemiologist. What evidence is there -if any - that there are higher rates of cancer around nuclear reactors?
Third expert - the geologist. Where might it be safe to store nuclear waste and what time scale are we looking at? In another few thousand years, Caithness could have sunk into the ocean!
Fourth expert - the economist. What model have we in place that can predict our future energy needs and if we do have one that is reliable what is the role of nuclear power in it?
Fifth expert - the ecologist. How does nuclear power compare with fossil fuels in terms of destroying the environment?

How dangerous is nuclear waste? If properly disposed of, it isn't. A deep depository, 0.5 - 1.5 km deep underground, would provide all the shielding we could need. You are more at risk from terrorists attempting to access it. What evidence is there to support this? One, there was a natural nuclear reactor in some uranium veins in Gabon. Doesn't seem to have had a negative effect. Two - nuclear testing of bombs is done deep underground, in France, the US and now North Korea, which would create much more radioactive waste than some glass-filled containers. So no, the waste itself isn't the issue.

Cancer clusters? Even if they were there, and I haven't a scoobie whether they are or not, by the very nature of random statistics the presence of a cancer cluster alone does not prove anything. It's not impossible to roll a six on a die 20 times in a row...unlikely maybe, but by itself it doesn't prove that the die is weighted or loaded. Chernobyl, the scene of the greatest peacetime nuclear incident, is now teeming with wildlife and no three-eyed deer in sight! The radioactive fall-out doesn't have the long-reaching effects that it was expected to.

The third question has already been answered by CORWM; a deep geological repository sited somewhere in Britain. How long does it require to be safe? That question was debated at a seminar at the Geological Society in January 2006, and the answer given at the time was surprisingly low - 500 years. Keeping in mind that the longer radioactive wastes are stored, the less hazardous they become, it was determined that, based on todays storage needs, a 500 year lifespan would be fit for purpose.

The economist and environmentalist questions aren't really relevant to the storage of the waste that we already have - they pertain more to the creation and storage of future waste, which is a different issue.

[The Pepsi Challenge]

Ah well, looks like my subject has gone off-topic a bit. Some interesting points all the same. Looks like I won't be pleasing everybody when the piece comes out on Wednesday, though. Cheers!

[DrSzin]

It's not impossible to roll a six on a die 20 times in a row...unlikely maybe, but by itself it doesn't prove that the die is weighted or loaded. Aye, it's unlikely all right - about 20 times less likely than winning the jackpot on the National Lottery two weeks on the trot! (Assuming I've done my sums correctly, that is.) I would bet just about everything I own on such a result being biased. :cool:

But your general point is well-taken. Have you read any of the recent statistical analyses of putative cancer clusters around UK nuclear installations? I read the 2005 COMARE report (http://www.comare.org.uk/press_releases/comare_pr10.htm) when it first came out and there's essentially no statistically-significant evidence for anything anywhere. I read the whole report to look for holes in their analysis but nothing jumped out at me. As you suggest, you can never(?) prove that any given cancer was not caused by proximity to a nuclear installation, but the numbers involved in the report are thankfully very low.

TPC - apologies for going even further off-topic. Let me try to remedy this a little...

Would I have become a physicist if I hadn't grown up "in the shadow of the dome"? I don't honestly know, but it must have had some influence. It turns out that I didn't much like nuclear physics so I went off and did something else. However, the Dounreay influence was surely there somewhere.

[canuck]

The Pepsi Challenge, I don't know if you got what you needed for your article, but for me this thread has been a fantastic read. Thank you everyone who has posted.

[Rheghead]

I think we need to clear the ground a bit.
So let's call in the experts because without them this discussion will be unanchored in realty.

Caithness has probably the greatest concentration of the relevant experts anywhere in the country, to assume we haven't is an insult to their intelligence. Just because those experts don't go round proclaming so does not mean they aren't.

What worries me is the current dumbing down of expertise in radiation protection in certain areas of the county that could compromise radiation safety just for the sake of saving a buck or two.

[Tubthumper]

Ah well, looks like my subject has gone off-topic a bit. Some interesting points all the same. Looks like I won't be pleasing everybody when the piece comes out on Wednesday, though. Cheers!
TPC, don't give up on this thread, you might be wise to speak to some of your old school buddies who not only grew up under the shadow of the dome but have since been trained and earned their living by actually working there. And I'll bet they don't have too many complaints about (a) being melted by radiation and (b) the wages they earn (ed).
Sorry for barging in, newbie in the forum, hi everybody etc etc

[rich]

Well I certainly grew up in the shadow and what I remember most is the influx of outsiders and the rapidity with which they were absorbed.

[scotsboy]

If I get a chance Pespi I'll write something, but I think the choice of the title is bad - living under the shadow gives the impression of doom and gloom, and as we all know it was anything but.........however I have yet to see any journalist or social commentator manage to get that across.

[The Pepsi Challenge]

The piece should be out either tomorrow or Thursday. I can pretty much guarantee 99% of people won't agree with what's said, but, at the end of the day, it's a first-person piece - not a comprehensive analysis covering a wide spectrum of sub-subjects about living so close to Dounreay. In other words, you might want to take it with a pinch of salt. Some great debate, though, nonetheless. I really am talking about Dounreay they way I saw (still see) it. Cheers, y'all...

[canuck]

The piece should be out either tomorrow or Thursday. I can pretty much guarantee 99% of people won't agree with what's said, but, at the end of the day, it's a first-person piece - not a comprehensive analysis covering a wide spectrum of sub-subjects about living so close to Dounreay. In other words, you might want to take it with a pinch of salt. Some great debate, though, nonetheless. I really am talking about Dounreay they way I saw (still see) it. Cheers, y'all...

Will we get to see the finished product? Or a link to where it is published?