Olympics nuclear waste trains are potential terrorist target, warns London MEP
Jean Lambert MEP:"These trains carry all the vital ingredients for a ‘dirty bomb’"
Last weekend Jean Lambert, London’s Green MEP, supported renewed calls from campaigners to end the running of trains transporting nuclear waste through Hackney.
Trains carrying radioactive nuclear fuel rods run at least once a week alongside passenger services on the North London Line – right through the 2012 Olympic Park site – en route to the Sellafield reprocessing plant in Cumbria.
“These trains carry all the vital ingredients for a ‘dirty bomb’ and the very real threat of a terrorist attack will be amplified in the-run up to the Games,” said Jean Lambert MEP, speaking at a demonstration on Saturday in which protesters marched from Victoria Park to Stratford and around the perimeter of the Olympic Park.
“Nuclear sites and the transport for nuclear fuel and spent fuel have long been seen as potential targets for terrorist attack. If you were planning a so-called ‘spectacular’, the Olympic Games are an obvious target, as we have seen in past on at least two occasions, she said.
Mrs Lambert also highlighted the fact that the nuclear industry relies on this transportation network because of the problem of dealing with its toxic by-products, and told her audience the only real green solution to climate change is renewable energy.
The Nuclear Trains Action Group (NTAG) has long been campaigning against the transport of this toxic waste through densely populated areas such as Hackney.
According to NTAG, these trains present a substantial hazard – partly because they are continuously giving out radiation, but also because if the containers were broken, the radiation spilt out could* cause thousands of deaths in the surrounding area. It argues that makes them a prime target for terrorist attack, a risk heightened further by the line’s proximity to the Olympic site.
In May 2010, Green London Assembly member Darren Johnson raised the issue at Mayor’s Question Time, asking whether the Mayor, Boris Johnson, could provide reassurances to Londoners on the route of the nuclear waste trains through the Olympics site during the Games.
The Mayor of London replied: “The transportation of spent nuclear fuel through London by rail is undertaken by Direct Rail Services, a company owned by the Nuclear Decommissioning Agency. This is regulated and monitored by the Government and therefore falls outside of my jurisdiction.
“I am therefore unable to confirm if nuclear waste will be transported through London during the 2012 Games. However, I have no concerns regarding the transportation of nuclear waste, and have full faith that the government agencies responsible undertake this in a safe manner which poses no risk to Londoners or visitors during the Games.”
*Note: This story was updated 14:35 Monday 19 July 2010. The word would was amended to could in the sentence: According to NTAG, these trains present a substantial hazard – partly because they are continuously giving out radiation, but also because if the containers were broken, the radiation spilt out could* cause thousands of deaths in the surrounding area.
Seriously? The greens are totally wrong on this.
Nuclear waste has very low activity (because it lasts for millions of years and there are only so many atoms in there) and is transported in massive lead lined transports that could easily withstand a bomb blast; it is designed to hold in much worse. If there was a spill no-one would notice.
Also, nuclear power is technically a renewable energy source (God knows why.)
It is a shame to see elected politicians who are so uneducated that they raise irrelevances like this instead of the real issues affecting Londoners, like the scandalous air quality and other environmental effects of allowing motor vehicles free rein basically everywhere in the city with the biggest public transport network in the country.
I think it is irresponsible to claim that if the radiation spilt out it would cause thousands of deaths. This is extremely unlikely, the radiation would no doubt cause a high level of contamination to an area, but the statement of causing thousands of deaths is unjustified scare-mongering.
The containers themselves are heavily regulated and rigorously tested to ensure that even in the worst set of circumstances, they will not break open. I would recommend Hackney residents to remember this test broadcast on the BBC in 1984, showing a locomotive being driven into a waste container: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZY446h4pZdc
I think Londoners should also be aware that this waste is partly their responsibility. London uses a vast quantity of electricity, which has amongst other sources been safely supplied by the nuclear industry for many decades.
This is another good reason why we have to say no the the government’s plans for a new generation of nuclear power stations. Nuclear energy is not the answer: it ain’t cheap, it ain’t green and it ain’t safe – whatever the nuclear industry (and the people it pays to surf the net and write pro-nuclear comments in the guise of ‘normal people’) tell you. Even on an economic level it wouldn’t work. The new reactors wouldn’t be ready in time to bridge the energy gap so it would be a case of too little, too late.
Joe and Emily are misinformed.
The flasks contain a very high-level radioactive mixture of uranium and plutonium (why else are they transported in massive lead-lined containers, known as flasks, because the rods have to be kept under water?) it is true that the high-level radioactivity decays over thousands of years, but this does not stop it being extremely highly-radioactive to begin with. It is also of course true that there are a “limited” number of atoms in there, but the number runs to billions and billions!
The flasks are not designed to withstand worse-case scenarios. They are subjected to a drop test onto concrete of 9 metres though they travel over viaducts higher than this. They are also subjected to a fire test where they have to survive 800 degrees centigrade for half an hour; whereas oil fires in tunnels can reach 2000 degrees centigrade and burn for days.
The test with a locomotive run into a flask at 100 mph carried out in 1984 was a publicity stunt with no scientific validity since the flask was not secured and thus was able to move in the direction of the impact, thus not reduplicating the situation where a flask runs into a obstruction which is not able to move in the direction of impact – eg. a bridge abutment or other roadside building.
I’m not clear how Joe is so confident that a terrorist could not get hold of or produce a weapon that could pierce such a flask. Look how terrorists manage to destroy heavy armour in Iraq and Afghanistan.
The source for the claim that if a flask was breached thousands of people would die down wind in a buit up area such as London are nuclear scientists such as Dr. John Large.
Nuclear energy – a renewable energy source?
The uranium to fuel the power stations has to mined, refined, transported and its waste products disposed of. All of which has a large carbon footprint, let alone what it does to the environment. (see the Australian Conversation Foundation website for information on the damage uranium mining causes). Sorry, I can’t be convinced that nuclear energy is renewable or carbon neutral.
As we’ve seen, an actual terrorist attack doesn’t need to be carried out, the threat of one is enough to bring an institution like Heathrow to a halt. Imagine that on the Olypmic site.