Vaughn Simon wrote:
"cavelamb himself" wrote in message
...
After part of the roof blew off, the inrush of oxygen, combined
with the extremely high temperature of the reactor fuel and graphite
moderator, sparked a graphite fire. This fire greatly contributed to the
spread of radioactive material and the contamination of outlying areas.

Raising the specter of Chernobyl in any discussion of nuclear energy in the
western world is to raise a "straw man" argument. The design and operation of
the Chernobyl-type plants represents nothing short of a crime against humanity.
Nothing of the sort would have been allowed anywhere in the western world.
There is no point in raising the issue of Chernobyl unless your goal is to
obfuscate.

We learned about the dangers of graphite moderated shortly after WW-II when the
UK had a smaller version of the Chernobyl accident. (Google "Windscale
accident" for an education) There is a reason why you don't normally see
commercial power producing graphite moderated reactors.

It's not quite as bad as all that...

We operated 5 high power, uncontained
graphite moderated production reactors
at Hanford for years, along with N-reactor,
a combined production/power reactor of
the same type. I toured N-reactor while
it was operating in 1969. JFK thought
it was important enough to attend it's
groundbreaking.

N-reactor was shutdown in 1987 and has
since been dismantled.

My point being that these plant ran for
probably 100 plant/years without a serious
incident. Not the safest possible design,
but, with competent workers, not a "crime
against humanity" either.