Customer Reviews, including Product Star Ratings help customers to learn more about the product and decide whether it is the right product for them.
To calculate the overall star rating and percentage breakdown by star, we don’t use a simple average. Instead, our system considers things like how recent a review is and if the reviewer bought the item on Amazon. It also analyzed reviews to verify trustworthiness.
First, understand this: this report is in no way concerned with the 1957 fire at the Windscale nuclear complex in northwest England. This is a report dated 26 January 1978 authored by the Honorable Mr. Justice Parker submitted to the Secretary of State for the Environment (UK) addressing an application from British Nuclear Fuels Limited (BNFL) to build a Thermal Oxide Reprocessing Plant (THORP) at Windscale. The report gives a brief overview of the then-current British civil nuclear industry to include Magnox and Advanced Gas Cooled Reactors (AGR, the only types in the UK at the time,) then explains the concepts and practicalities of reprocessing spent nuclear fuel. Along the way Parker is careful to thoroughly address all of the proposed applicant features and the expected objections from anti-nuclear groups. While some of these groups historically are very well prepared and send technically competent people to these hearings, they frequently lose credibility by adherence to theories that are unsupportable by any facts (look for the seaweed and potatoes analysis here which Parker dealt with brilliantly.) Many of the objectors rely on political analysis for their contentions (It's a given when one of the main objectors is a Professor of Political Science at the University of Chicago,) while others grasp at any straws imaginable, with Windscale Appeal (WA) being an especially onerous organization to deal with in this instance. WA, among other things, objected to the arduous long hours of the inquiry, they desired to put off the inquiry so they could raise more funds to support their cause, and objected on numerous and ludicrous grounds including surveillance of nuclear power workers as a horrifying breach of civil liberties. (In many industries workers are subjected to extra scrutiny; if you don't want that then apply elsewhere. It's pretty simple.) They also claimed it would be "easy" for terrorists to construct a nuclear weapon if they obtained plutonium. It’s not. My point here isn't to harp on frequent, pointless objections (or those that are extremely tenuous) as anyone who knows the nuclear industry grasps that these are common delaying tactics that are the price of doing business; my point is that Parker gave the objectors every possible opportunity to justify their positions. Parker is extremely fair-minded throughout the investigation and goes to great pains to hear, investigate, and consider even the most baseless contentions, and the report is quite comprehensive, even providing background into unilateral policies of the Carter administration which ultimately only handicapped the US nuclear industry.
In the end Justice Parker reaches very rational and well-reasoned conclusions and the concise presentation of these conclusions on pp. 84-86 are highly worthwhile reading even more than 30 years later. The report does come with a large-format foldout map in the back flap that helps readers envision the Windscale and Calder Works in Sellafield. This is a historical document with much of value to those interested in commercial nuclear power. It is well written and clearly presented. It does tend (like most documents of this sort) to get bogged down in minutia on occasion, normally because of highly improbable objections. I was especially pleased to read Parker's analysis of the film "Caging the Dragon" made by Dr. C. Wakstein which was shown on behalf of WA. It deals with alleged safety lapses at Windscale and in reference to the 1957 fire there shows huge flames shooting from the top of a tower and a man with severe radiation burns. Neither of these shots (the flaming stack was repeated throughout the film) had anything to do with the Windscale fire and Parker calls a spade a spade and labels the film as deceptive. Unfortunately these propaganda pieces that play very loose with the facts are part and parcel of anti-nuclear activist's presentations and are to be expected; that Parker specifically calls Wakstein out on it is less common and is to be applauded.