If terrorists success in exploding a nuclear power plant...?

OK, wait a minute... Anyone actually understand how a nuclear power plant works? The worse thing that a terrorist could do is gain entrance to a power plant's control room, and shut down the cooling water loop, or vent it directly to the nearest natural water source. That causes the nuclear core to heat up, which, if done in conjunction of removing the control rods, can cause an uncontrolled reaction in the nuclear core, or spread radioactive water through the river or lake.

The core heats up, then melts (hence the expression "melt down"). Then, in US powerplants, the core melts into a specially built containment room below the reactor, where it is contained.

A US powerplant will not explode like Chernobyl. Completely different design (and if any of you want to argue the finer points about graphite reactors and water cooled reactors, I'd be more than happy to oblige). US plants are designed to melt into a containment room, not explode.

Not to say it's impossible, just improbable. So, for the sake of argument, let's say that some does manage to do all of the right things and make a nuclear core explode. First, the explosion is chemical, not nuclear. Big difference. A firecracker is a chemical explosion caused by heat (much like our reactor explosion). A nuclear explosion is caused by fissionable material refined to a high degree reaching a critical mass & then causing a massive chain reaction. To clarify, the Chernobyl disaster was a chemical explosion of nuclear materials, where the heat was the causation of the explosion in the graphite reactor. The chemical explosion spread radioactive materials over a wide spread area, much like a gigantic dirty bomb. This is a point that is misunderstood. The nuclear reaction caused the heat to go up to a point where the reactor had a chemical explosion, not where a massive nuclear chain reaction occured.

A nuclear reaction can only happen if the materials used within the reactor are refined to about 95% purity. Nuclear reactors only use nuclear fuel that has been refined to about 5% purity. So, a nuclear explosion (e.g. nuclear massive chain reaction) cannot happen at a nuclear power plant.

So, back to the example, the nuclear core at a US power plant is exploded. The US reactors are designed with massive containment shields to prevent the radioactive materials from leaving the plant. These are the large concrete steam stacks that you see. How strong are these? 3 to 10 feet thick concrete triple steel reinforced walls. Your average high rise concrete floor is 8 or 9 inches thick. A bridge deck may be a foot to two feet thick. The containment vessel is 5 times that amount.

Worst case, the terrorists circumvent the cooling loops and manage to directly vent the cooling water from the primary cooling loop to the nearest water source (e.g. a lake or river). Since this water has been in direct contact with the reactor, it is highly radioactive. It would cause widespread death & damage as well as contamination.

And you better bet the NNSA has a big old book to deal with this situation.

If they explode a nuclear power plant the fallout would be tremendous. Think cheyrnoble, mutations and cancers would rise and vegetation would be unable to grow for a certain distance around the plant. While a civil target like the WTC, or whatever would be a symbolical blow, a plant would be a extreme blow due to the ridiculous amount of fatalities and problems that will exist for years afterwards. Terrorists are more about creating attention rather then actual killing, so I dont think any are ready to something that extreme. So I think they mostly will continue to target landmarks and easy to reach targets like planes, trains, and buses.

A nuclear power won't explode if it is bombed, crashed into, etc. Nuclear weapons are very precisely triggered devices, ramming a plane into a reactor won't cause Hiroshima in America. What will happen though is that the reactor material will be released into the air, creating a radioactive "death cloud" not unlike Chernobyl. Something like that would be impossible to contain until it dispersed naturally. It's effects would be felt for centuries.

No. A nuke plant cannot be made to explode. 3 mile island was the worst possible case for a US/Canadian nuke plant. Virtually impossible to penetrate their security and a waste of time for terrorist. Worry about stolen nuclear bombs that's the next major terrorist catastrophe. Maybe trainloads of chemicals or refinery sabotage. Terrorist won't mess with nuke, too hard to make them dangerous.

Its a real fear for me, because I live about 110 or so miles east of the Davis-Besse Nuclear Plant in Oak Harbor, Ohio and about 20 miles west of the Perry Nuclear Plant in Perry Ohio.

Well, I'd say its very hard to blow up a power plant. They have very high security, and plants in the US are normally covered in a TON of cement and steal so in the case of a meltdown there won't be much damage. All US nuke plants are this way, esp after Chernobyl and the long island incident. Also, if they blew it up, I don't think it would be as much damage, because power plants are not normally in heavily populated areas.

yes it will cause more harm. the chemicals in the plant will explode greater than a nuclear bomb causing a veil of death that can extend in a 200 mile circumfernce. they have a plan to prevent it by serious screening of personnel, and who enters and exits the plants premises.

It is very likely that President Bush will attack America a second time and blame it on Iran.

Yes. Nuclear meltdown is bad (look at Chyrnoble(can't spll it well sorry)). They prolly do, but then we'd prolly nuke them back...

They won't, we're eradicating them in the Mid-East to lessen that threat. So thank your troops.