IEEE
You are not logged in, please sign in to edit > Log in / create account  

Advocate Review

From GHN

Jump to: navigation, search

The advocate's comments are well taken. The historical significance section as written is too broad and I agree needs to be more focused on the technological and social significance of the proposed milestone. While the social and to some extent the economic aspects involved with respect to the construction of the facility are addressed, no mention is made of the consequential contamination that occurred. The Wiki summary of the Hanford facility is in general, I think, more to the point. It also has a good summary of the technological innovations that were made to get the plant on line.

Since the sole purpose of the B.reactor was the manufacture of plutonium, how it might relate to subsequent reactors designed for power generation is not clear, although a subsequent N.reactor at the site was built for power generation. To what extent its design is an extension of the B.reactor would be of interest. B.reactor’s significance, in terms of the milestone, is solely that it was the first industrial nuclear plant built. Within that context, i.e., of getting a plant on-line, mentioning that the first instance of neutron (in this case Xenon) poisoning occurred with the startup of the B.reactor is all that is needed; however, if credit for recognizing its occurrence is to be included, then as cited in your reference, all three who were involved should be credited.

Mort Hans Regions 1-6 Coordinator

W2ots06:23, 21 September 2011