Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Path: utzoo!watmath!clyde!burl!ulysses!mhuxr!mhuxn!ihnp4!ihlpf!stewart
From: stewart@ihlpf.UUCP (R. J. Stewart)
Newsgroups: net.sci
Subject: Chernobyl not so primitive?
Message-ID: <481@ihlpf.UUCP>
Date: Wed, 21-May-86 14:27:19 EDT
Article-I.D.: ihlpf.481
Posted: Wed May 21 14:27:19 1986
Date-Received: Sat, 24-May-86 21:06:49 EDT
Distribution: net
Organization: AT&T Bell Laboratories
Lines: 26

This is from a news article in the Chicago Tribune of 5-20-86:

   MOSCOW - ...<story about how the Soviets don't think their reactors
   are unsafe and plan to continue building them near cities>...

   Meanwhile, American nuclear experts told the New York Times that the
   Chernobyl plant had more safety features and was closer to American
   reactor designs than Western experts had assumed in the days soon
   after the accident.

   Although is probably would not have met U.S. safety standards, the
   experts say, the Chernobyl plan incorporated enough of the advanced
   safety features used in American reactors to raise questions among
   some experts about the effectiveness of nuclear plant designs in the
   U.S.

   The Times story said it had become clear that a large structure of
   heavy steel and concrete surrounded the No. 4 reactor at Chernobyl,
   and that at least some of this containment structure was designed to
   withstand pressures similar to those in many American reactors.

Does anyone know more about these experts and the safety features
they're talking about?  Could it happen here, after all?

Bob Stewart
ihnp4!ihlpf!stewart