A transformer at Ringhals 3 catches fire.
You'll note how my headline is significantly less incriminating than AFP's. A transformer isn't directly related to the operation of the reactor, the actual nuclear bit. It is a standard piece of equipment at any power station, regardless of the heat source. Obviously, if such a component does malfunction, production must shut down. It is, in reality, nothing related to nuclear power itself.
Why do I bring this up?
Was I suggesting that AFP were attempting to falsely smear nuclear power by relating it the malfunction of a non-nuclear component, simply because they had the audacity to inform the reader about the heat source for the power station?
Well actually, I wouldn't put it past AFP overall, but I don't think there isn't any evidence to suggest malicious intent here. They were quick to mention that the transformer was located seperately from the reactor.
The point is that while this article is innocent, there are those out there who would try to turn this into anti-nuclear propoganda (not to mention any names beginning Greenpeace), a sort of guilt by association ploy.
In response to this thought, I whipped this one up.
Anyway, no one was hurt in this accident and hopefully the transformer will be fixed and reactor brought back up before the operator loses too much money.
0 Comments