London Letter: Fuel for thought

C. Loughlin
Sunday 11 September 1994 23:02 BST
Comments

Your support helps us to tell the story

From reproductive rights to climate change to Big Tech, The Independent is on the ground when the story is developing. Whether it's investigating the financials of Elon Musk's pro-Trump PAC or producing our latest documentary, 'The A Word', which shines a light on the American women fighting for reproductive rights, we know how important it is to parse out the facts from the messaging.

At such a critical moment in US history, we need reporters on the ground. Your donation allows us to keep sending journalists to speak to both sides of the story.

The Independent is trusted by Americans across the entire political spectrum. And unlike many other quality news outlets, we choose not to lock Americans out of our reporting and analysis with paywalls. We believe quality journalism should be available to everyone, paid for by those who can afford it.

Your support makes all the difference.

It is disappointing that a newspaper with a title such as yours should publish a blatant anti-nuclear article as that penned by Mary Flanagan (Opinion, 31 August).

Your readers should know that the transport of spent fuel (not nuclear waste) is treated by British Rail in just the same way as any other hazardous cargo. It has been carried out for more than 30 years, covering almost 16 million flask miles, without a single incident that has resulted in a release of radioactivity to the environment. This comes from careful planning and complying with the most stringent of regulations set by international scientific bodies.

Mary Flanagan is wrong to assume that the radiation received by people living and working close to railway tracks has not been computed. There are independent checks on dose uptake to workers and the public for all modes of transport. This is carried out by the National Radiological Protection Board on behalf of the Department of Transport and shows conclusively that dose uptake is insignificant. These reports are available to the public.

Finally, and perhaps most important, no-one would come to any harm if the protection provided by the flask was somehow breached, which would be extremely unlikely because they are vessels weighing up to 100 tonnes lined with 14 inches of lead and steel shielding. In such a case the most conceivable scenario would involve a release of mildly contaminated water which would be cleaned up using detergents and water.

C Loughlin Director, BNFL Transport Division

Join our commenting forum

Join thought-provoking conversations, follow other Independent readers and see their replies

Comments

Thank you for registering

Please refresh the page or navigate to another page on the site to be automatically logged inPlease refresh your browser to be logged in