{"id":37,"date":"2020-11-05T09:22:02","date_gmt":"2020-11-05T14:22:02","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/courses.bowdoin.edu\/history-2203-fall-2020-wbuschin\/?page_id=37"},"modified":"2020-12-21T11:29:37","modified_gmt":"2020-12-21T16:29:37","slug":"narrative-of-the-event","status":"publish","type":"page","link":"https:\/\/courses.bowdoin.edu\/history-2203-fall-2020-wbuschin\/narrative-of-the-event\/","title":{"rendered":"What Happened?"},"content":{"rendered":"

In the decades after World War II, the nuclear industry shared the same economic growth and era of good will enjoyed by the United States at large. \u00a0So when energy company Metropolitan Edison announced in 1966 its plans to build two nuclear reactors on Three Mile Island near Middletown, Pennsylvania, the news was met with general excitement for the economic opportunities the plant might bring (Zaretsky 2018, 62).\u00a0 Dauphin County, where the plant would be located, was home to a predominately white, working-class population, and the region was facing economic pressure as deindustrialization trends harmed local steelworkers (Ibid.).\u00a0 Construction on the plant began two years after Met Ed\u2019s announcement, with the second reactor, TMI-2, going online in February 1978.<\/p>\n

Disaster Strikes<\/strong><\/p>\n

One year and one month after first producing electricity for the state of Pennsylvania, TMI-2 had a problem.\u00a0 At 3:58 am on Wednesday, March 28, 1979, moisture from leaky seal in the reactor\u2019s water cooling system caused two water cooling pumps to shut down.\u00a0 The reactor\u2019s steam generators began to overheat without the water necessary to keep them cool, and the plant\u2019s nuclear reactor began to overheat with it.\u00a0 The pressure in the reactor core increased with the temperature, prompting a pressure release valve to automatically open.<\/p>\n

Had the release valve closed when the system pressure returned to a normal level, the effects of the core\u2019s rising temperature might not have been as extreme.\u00a0 The valve, however, became stuck open \u2013 and even worse, the valve\u2019s indicator light failed, erroneously informing the plant operators that the valve had closed.\u00a0 The effects of this malfunction were twofold: cooling water continued to escape from the reactor in the form of steam, and the plant\u2019s staff failed to realize that the reactor was experiencing a loss-of-coolant accident and did not take the appropriate measures to prevent it.<\/p>\n

Instead, the plant workers turned off the cooling system in an attempt uncover the reactor core, assuming the core had maintained an appropriate temperature.\u00a0 As a result, water continued to escape the system, with some radioactive steam finding a way out of the plant through its air conditioning system.\u00a0 The pressure and water level in the reactor continued to decrease, and the core overheated, resulting in the reactor\u2019s partial meltdown.\u00a0 The federal Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) was notified of the accident at 7:00 am, three hours after it began.\u00a0 Two hours after that, Americans around the country tuned into their morning news and beheld a frightening reality.\u00a0 The nuclear power plant at Three Mile Island was failing.<\/p>\n

(description in this section drawn from: NRC Backgrounder; NYT 1979; Scharre 2016, 26-27)<\/p>\n

Aftermath<\/strong><\/p>\n

In the hours and days following the accident at TMI-2, chaos ruled.\u00a0 Met Ed, eager to project optimism about the crisis, released few details from the early hours of the disaster to either the NRC or to the public.\u00a0 Instead, outside experts were left to speculate about the true scope of the accident, and their conflicting predictions did little to inspire public confidence.\u00a0 Federal officials and news media alike frantically sought information about the crisis, but little was forthcoming as local officials and the public were left uncertain of how to respond.<\/p>\n

Unwilling to do nothing and be proven wrong later, Pennsylvania governor Dick Thornburgh took tentative steps to protect the Middletown community.\u00a0 The governor issued a stay-at-home order for the ten mile radius surrounding the plant, while simultaneously advising pregnant women and children four years old and younger to evacuate in a five mile radius.\u00a0 Confused by the governor\u2019s advice and fearful of the worst, many area residents began to flee on their own initiative, distrustful of the information they were receiving from Met Ed.<\/p>\n

\"\"
Area residents begin to evacuate the TMI area (Zaretsky, 83).<\/figcaption><\/figure>\n

On Friday, two days after the accident, public alarm reached a peak after a report surfaced that a hydrogen bubble in the failed reactor might burst, causing a nuclear meltdown of drastic proportions.\u00a0 Just as soon as the panic struck, however, it receded, with Met Ed scientists confirming a false alarm that Sunday.\u00a0 The bubble was gone the next day.<\/p>\n

Soon after, experts would confirm that the compromised nuclear reactor did not pose a serious danger to the local Pennsylvanians.\u00a0 Workers at the plant began taking steps toward a \u201ccold shutdown,\u201d laboring over the coming months and years to clean up the nuclear mess at TMI-2.\u00a0 No deaths were recorded, and residents slowly resumed their normal activities. \u00a0While physically unharmed, the region remained scarred from the hysteria and misinformation that defined the initial aftermath of the disaster.<\/p>\n

(aside from the portion directly referenced, all description in this section from NYT 1979)<\/p>\n

Regional Effects<\/strong><\/p>\n

\"\"
A Red Cross volunteer receives a full-body scan for radiation (Zaretsky, 74).<\/figcaption><\/figure>\n

As multiple scientists would confirm in the years after the disaster, the health effects of TMI-2\u2019s meltdown were minimal at worst.\u00a0 Several independent studies indicated that the radiation exposure borne by those who lived near the reactor was less than that of a chest x-ray, and no adverse health effects were discovered (NRC Backgrounder).\u00a0 Scholarship in years since these studies have cast some doubt on their objectivity, with one more contemporary researcher alleging bias in the scientists who studied the disaster radiation (Environmental Health Perspectives 1997, 22). \u00a0Significant adverse effects from radiation poisoning, however, have never been documented.<\/p>\n

While the radiation exposure the crisis wrought proved inconsequential, the accident was not harmless.\u00a0 The lives of the mostly rural working class community around TMI were subjected to extraordinary upheaval in the days after the disaster, with psychiatrists finding severe demoralization and mental health problems in local residents (Nelkin 1981, 135).\u00a0 While TMI\u2019s nuclear scare may have been a more distant problem for government agencies and Met Ed, its effects were directly experienced by the economically disadvantaged locals, who were forced into difficult decisions between working and fleeing, sustenance and safety.<\/p>\n

Remembering TMI<\/strong><\/p>\n

The TMI-2 reactor remained permanently shut down after 1979.\u00a0 The reactor\u2019s waste was shipped offsite and disposed of; cleanup at the location ended in 1993 (NRC Backgrounder).\u00a0 TMI-1 continued to operate as a nuclear reactor until it was shut down on September 20, 2019 (NYT 2019).\u00a0 The name Three Mile Island, however, will always carry with it the weight of the chaotic accident at the plant in 1979.\u00a0 The incident is remembered for its dramatic effect on cultural sentiment around nuclear energy, as well as the impetus it provided for increased government regulation of the industry.<\/p>\n

\"\"
A historical marker commemorating the TMI Accident (1).<\/figcaption><\/figure>\n

With the lessons of Three Mile Island more than 40 years old, 98 nuclear power plants continue to operate in the United States, providing roughly 20% of the nation\u2019s electricity output (NYT 2019).\u00a0 Nuclear power remains vivid in the national conversation both for its dangers \u2013 as evidenced by a 2011 disaster at a Fukushima plant \u2013 and for the immense promise it carries as a source of clean energy as the world continues to warm.<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"

In the decades after World War II, the nuclear industry shared the same economic growth and era of good will enjoyed by the United States at large. \u00a0So when energy company Metropolitan Edison announced in 1966 its plans to build two nuclear reactors on Three Mile Island near Middletown, Pennsylvania, the news was met with … Continue reading “What Happened?”<\/span><\/a><\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":2,"featured_media":0,"parent":0,"menu_order":0,"comment_status":"closed","ping_status":"closed","template":"","meta":{"footnotes":""},"class_list":["post-37","page","type-page","status-publish","hentry"],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/courses.bowdoin.edu\/history-2203-fall-2020-wbuschin\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/pages\/37","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/courses.bowdoin.edu\/history-2203-fall-2020-wbuschin\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/pages"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/courses.bowdoin.edu\/history-2203-fall-2020-wbuschin\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/page"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/courses.bowdoin.edu\/history-2203-fall-2020-wbuschin\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/2"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/courses.bowdoin.edu\/history-2203-fall-2020-wbuschin\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=37"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/courses.bowdoin.edu\/history-2203-fall-2020-wbuschin\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/pages\/37\/revisions"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/courses.bowdoin.edu\/history-2203-fall-2020-wbuschin\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=37"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}