78-14-B8

- Main Page \ Reagan Radio Commentaries \ 1978

<< Previous Broadcast

Next Broadcast >>

Soviet Nuclear Power

Transcript According to Thomas O'Toole, writing in the Washington Post, the Soviet approach to safety is quite different than our own. All 71 nuclear plants in the United States have containment domes. The purpose of the domes is to isolate any dangerous radioactivity. Almost all of the 151 nuclear stations operation in 20 countries around the world have such domes. But until this year, none of the 29 Soviet nuclear installations had this protection. O'Toole described a visit to a small nuclear reactor in Moscow's Kurchatov Institute. The only thing that separated the journalists from the reactor's uranium was 15 feet of water. The workers in Soviet plants don't wear protective garb familiar to American nuclear power plants nor do they wear dosimeters to measure accidental exposure . Visitors in the Soviet Union are routinely brought into the roans which have the reactors. The worst possible accident for which the Soviets equip their nuclear plants is a single break in the large pipe carrying cooling water to the reactor. U.S. plants are built with complete emergency cooling systems to handle single or multiple breaks. Nuclear plants in the United States are usually miles from large population centers. The new plants the Soviets are building will be located near major cities--within on and one half miles of the boundaries--and they will not have containment domes ... The Russian goal is to replace 30 percent of the organic fuel the country now uses for space heating with nuclear fuel. Another major difference in the Soviet and American nuclear scene is that in the U.S.S.R. you won't find anyone protesting the use of nuclear power. Dissent isn't tolerated. Period. To the extent the trade union movement exists in the Soviet Union, it exists not to advance the interests of the working man and woman, but to advance the goals of the five-year plan, or in this case the Soviet intention to go nuclear. And, another thing you won't find in the Soviet Union is literature which opposes the construction of nuclear facilities. It simply doesn't exist in the popular press. Although there has been some success in getting the Soviets to incorporate environmental safeguards in the facilities, the concern doesn't dominate Soviet planning. The Soviet Union lost bidding battles to two non-Communist firms recently, because the Communist countries did not think the Soviet nuclear design was safe. And, as for their safety record, who knows? The Soviets boast that they have the equivalent of 2000 years of nuclear operating experience without a single major failure. But, since statistics and supporting material are all the property of the government, no one really knows what the Soviet experiments with nuclear power show. While the Soviets move ahead at full speed in the field, nuclear power is the center of controversy at bane. Various estimates have been given concerning the cost of the harrassing delays in the construction of nuclear facilities in this country. In the celebrated Seabrook case, one study by the Heritage Foundation reported that delays in licensing added $419 million to the cost of the plant. The Soviets are clearly planning to outstrip us in the nuclear arena. Since nuclear power has considerable military significance, Soviet dominance in this area could add to their lead in many areas of both conventional and strategic weaponry. Those who protest what must be--at least judging by Soviet standards-- a meticulous regard for nuclear safety and environmental concerns by American companies are the unwitting victims of Soviet designs.		Details Batch Number 78-14-B8 Production Date 10/10/1978 Book/Page Online PDF Audio Youtube? No
		Added Notes