In July 1956, a plane crashed in Suffolk, nearly detonating an atomic bomb. In January 1987, an RAF truck carrying hydrogen bombs skidded off a road in Wiltshire. Other near-misses remain top secret. Who is really at risk from Britain’s nuclear weapons?
[…]
Thirty years later, the cold war is a distant memory, the Soviet Union is gone, Reagan and Thatcher are gone – and a British Trident submarine is still continuously at sea, day and night, waiting for the order to fire its D5 missiles and dozens of nuclear warheads. Over the next few years, Britain will have to decide whether to replace its four ageing Trident submarines. David Cameron wants to build four new subs, at a cost of about £25bn, so that one will always be at sea, safe from attack and prepared to launch. The Labour party seems to endorse that policy: its shadow defence secretary, Jim Murphy, recently expressed support for “a continuous at sea deterrent”. Though the Liberal Democrats have criticised Cameron’s position, their preference hardly seems radical: building one, or perhaps two, fewer submarines in order to save money. The three main parties are broadly agreed on the need for nuclear weapons. The strongest opposition to Trident comes from politicians in Scotland, where the submarines are based. Alex Salmond, head of the SNP, has promised that if Scotland gains independence next year, its new constitution will include a ban on all nuclear weapons. This could be disastrous for the UK’s nuclear deterrent: building a new submarine base and weapon storage facilities in England would take many years and cost tens of billions.
[…]
In 1946, the US conducted its first postwar tests of the atomic bomb. One of these tests sought to discover the effect of a nuclear blast on a fleet of warships. The results were discouraging. Of the 88 ships moored near the point of detonation, in the Bikini atoll, only five sank. The Evaluation Of The Atomic Bomb As A Military Weapon, a top-secret report sent to Harry Truman, concluded that “ships at sea” and “bodies of troops” were poor targets. “The bomb is pre-eminently a weapon for use against human life and activities in large urban and industrial areas,” the report argued. Such weapons were useful, most of all, for killing and terrorising civilians. According to the report, some of the best targets were “cities of especial sentimental significance”.
America’s first nuclear war plan, adopted in 1948 and codenamed Halfmoon, called for 50 atomic bombs to be dropped on the Soviet Union. The number was subsequently increased to 133, aimed at 70 cities. Leningrad was to be hit by seven bombs, Moscow by eight. There seemed no alternative to the threat of mass slaughter. This US strategy was called “the nation-killing concept”.
At congressional hearings in October 1949, the US had its most publicised, high-level debate about the ethics of such nuclear targeting. A group of admirals strongly condemned the war plan the US air force intended to use against the Soviets. “I don’t believe in mass killings of noncombatants,” Admiral Arthur W Radford testified, while Rear Admiral Ralph A Ofstie, who had toured the burnt-out cities of Japan, described the atomic blitz as “random mass slaughter of men, women and children”, and said the whole idea was “ruthless and barbaric”, contrary to American values.
[…]
The safety problems with American nuclear weapons were kept secret until the conclusion of the cold war. A study later sponsored by the US Congress gave a “safety grade” to each type of nuclear weapon in the nation’s arsenal. The grades were based on the potential risk of accidental detonation or plutonium scattering. Three weapons received an A. Seven received a B. Two received a C-plus. Four a C. Two a C-minus. And 12 received a D, the lowest grade.
[…]
Two of the accidents occurred at RAF Lakenheath. On 27 July 1956, an American B-47 bomber was practising touch-and-go landings. The plane veered off the runway and slammed into a storage igloo containing Mark 6 atomic bombs. An American officer who witnessed the accident described what happened next in a classified telegram: “The B-47 tore apart the igloo and knocked about 3 Mark Sixes. A/C [aircraft] then exploded showering burning fuel overall. Crew perished. Most of A/C wreckage pivoted on igloo and came to rest with A/C nose just beyond igloo bank which kept main fuel fire outside smashed igloo. Preliminary exam by bomb disposal officers says a miracle that one Mark Six with exposed detonators sheared didn’t go. Firefighters extinguished fire around Mark Sixes fast.”
The nuclear cores of the weapons were stored in a different igloo. If the B-47 had hit that igloo instead, a large cloud of plutonium could have floated across the Suffolk countryside. Plutonium dust can be lethal when inhaled. Once dispersed, it is extremely difficult to clean up, and it remains dangerous for about 24,000 years.
Featured Topics / 特集
-
A nuclear power plant in Byron, Illinois. Taken by photographer Joseph Pobereskin (http://pobereskin.com). カレンダー
-
Latest Posts / 最新記事
- Revealed: how a San Francisco navy lab became a hub for human radiation experiments via The Guardian 2024/11/26
- Australia declines to join UK and US-led nuclear energy development pact via ABC News 2024/11/20
- Australia mistakenly included on list of countries joining US-UK civil nuclear deal, British government says via The Guardian 2024/11/20
- 被ばく研究の灯は消さない 国や自治体が「風化待ち」の中、独協医科大分室が移転してまで続ける活動の意義via東京新聞 2024/10/05
- Chernobyl-area land deemed safe for new agriculture via Nuclear Newswire 2024/09/26
Discussion / 最新の議論
- Leonsz on Combating corrosion in the world’s aging nuclear reactors via c&en
- Mark Ultra on Special Report: Help wanted in Fukushima: Low pay, high risks and gangsters via Reuters
- Grom Montenegro on Duke Energy’s shell game via Beyond Nuclear International
- Jim Rice on Trinity: “The most significant hazard of the entire Manhattan Project” via Bulletin of Atomic Scientists
- Barbarra BBonney on COVID-19 spreading among workers on Fukushima plant, related projects via The Mainichi
Archives / 月別アーカイブ
- November 2024 (3)
- October 2024 (1)
- September 2024 (5)
- July 2024 (4)
- June 2024 (3)
- March 2024 (1)
- February 2024 (6)
- January 2024 (4)
- November 2023 (8)
- October 2023 (1)
- September 2023 (7)
- August 2023 (5)
- July 2023 (10)
- June 2023 (12)
- May 2023 (15)
- April 2023 (17)
- March 2023 (20)
- February 2023 (19)
- January 2023 (31)
- December 2022 (11)
- November 2022 (12)
- October 2022 (7)
- September 2022 (6)
- August 2022 (22)
- July 2022 (29)
- June 2022 (15)
- May 2022 (46)
- April 2022 (36)
- March 2022 (47)
- February 2022 (24)
- January 2022 (57)
- December 2021 (27)
- November 2021 (32)
- October 2021 (48)
- September 2021 (56)
- August 2021 (53)
- July 2021 (60)
- June 2021 (55)
- May 2021 (48)
- April 2021 (64)
- March 2021 (93)
- February 2021 (69)
- January 2021 (91)
- December 2020 (104)
- November 2020 (126)
- October 2020 (122)
- September 2020 (66)
- August 2020 (63)
- July 2020 (56)
- June 2020 (70)
- May 2020 (54)
- April 2020 (85)
- March 2020 (88)
- February 2020 (97)
- January 2020 (130)
- December 2019 (75)
- November 2019 (106)
- October 2019 (138)
- September 2019 (102)
- August 2019 (99)
- July 2019 (76)
- June 2019 (52)
- May 2019 (92)
- April 2019 (121)
- March 2019 (174)
- February 2019 (146)
- January 2019 (149)
- December 2018 (38)
- November 2018 (51)
- October 2018 (89)
- September 2018 (118)
- August 2018 (194)
- July 2018 (22)
- June 2018 (96)
- May 2018 (240)
- April 2018 (185)
- March 2018 (106)
- February 2018 (165)
- January 2018 (241)
- December 2017 (113)
- November 2017 (198)
- October 2017 (198)
- September 2017 (226)
- August 2017 (219)
- July 2017 (258)
- June 2017 (240)
- May 2017 (195)
- April 2017 (176)
- March 2017 (115)
- February 2017 (195)
- January 2017 (180)
- December 2016 (116)
- November 2016 (115)
- October 2016 (177)
- September 2016 (178)
- August 2016 (158)
- July 2016 (201)
- June 2016 (73)
- May 2016 (195)
- April 2016 (183)
- March 2016 (201)
- February 2016 (154)
- January 2016 (161)
- December 2015 (141)
- November 2015 (153)
- October 2015 (212)
- September 2015 (163)
- August 2015 (189)
- July 2015 (178)
- June 2015 (150)
- May 2015 (175)
- April 2015 (155)
- March 2015 (153)
- February 2015 (132)
- January 2015 (158)
- December 2014 (109)
- November 2014 (192)
- October 2014 (206)
- September 2014 (206)
- August 2014 (208)
- July 2014 (178)
- June 2014 (155)
- May 2014 (209)
- April 2014 (242)
- March 2014 (190)
- February 2014 (170)
- January 2014 (227)
- December 2013 (137)
- November 2013 (164)
- October 2013 (200)
- September 2013 (255)
- August 2013 (198)
- July 2013 (208)
- June 2013 (231)
- May 2013 (174)
- April 2013 (156)
- March 2013 (199)
- February 2013 (191)
- January 2013 (173)
- December 2012 (92)
- November 2012 (198)
- October 2012 (229)
- September 2012 (207)
- August 2012 (255)
- July 2012 (347)
- June 2012 (230)
- May 2012 (168)
- April 2012 (116)
- March 2012 (150)
- February 2012 (198)
- January 2012 (292)
- December 2011 (251)
- November 2011 (252)
- October 2011 (364)
- September 2011 (288)
- August 2011 (513)
- July 2011 (592)
- June 2011 (253)
- May 2011 (251)
- April 2011 (571)
- March 2011 (494)
- February 2011 (1)
- December 2010 (1)
Top Topics / TOPトピック
- anti-nuclear
- Atomic Age
- Capitalism
- East Japan Earthquake + Fukushima
- energy policy
- EU
- France
- Hanford
- health
- Hiroshima/Nagasaki
- Inequality
- labor
- Nuclear power
- nuclear waste
- Nuclear Weapons
- Radiation exposure
- Russia/Ukraine/Chernobyl
- Safety
- TEPCO
- U.S.
- UK
- エネルギー政策
- メディア
- ロシア/ウクライナ/チェルノブイリ
- 健康
- 公正・共生
- 兵器
- 再稼働
- 労働における公正・平等
- 原子力規制委員会
- 原発推進
- 反原発運動
- 大飯原発
- 安全
- 広島・長崎
- 廃炉
- 東京電力
- 東日本大震災・福島原発
- 汚染水
- 米国
- 脱原発
- 被ばく
- 資本主義
- 除染
- 食の安全
Choose Language / 言語