Experts say that the three Gorges Dam have a certain ability to resist nuclear attack | | nuclear weapons _ the three Gorges Dam news
Original title: experts: Three Gorges Dam has a certain ability to fight against nuclear attack
Super project once under attack could cause serious disasters in China sound, in the Court of public opinion are common. Recently, the Deputy Secretary General of China Society for hydropower engineering Zhang Boting written explanation, said the dam has a certain ability to fight against nuclear attack, does not have much of the threat of flooding in the lower reaches.
According to Professor Zhang Boting introduction, he writes this is the part of the recent controversy around the Inland nuclear power. On March 2, researcher at the development center of the State Council Wang Yinan wrote ten challenge to restart inland nuclear power, saying relevant institutions of inland nuclear power safety demonstration, does not take into account "the neutron bomb (tactical nuclear weapons)," risk of attack.
On March 4, several experts of the nuclear society responded that nuclear issues to consider is not the construction workers, but a question of national security, only by "strengthening national defense", and refers to the three Gorges dam also has a similar problem.
Professor Zhang Boting this unhappiness. Zhang Boting pointed out in the article, in fact, have been taken into account in the design of three Gorges Dam and the risk of attack, using a concrete gravity dam, even after being blasted gaps never caused dam breaks.
Article said that if the three Gorges dam is not this type of dam, probably no one knowledgeable experts endorsed the construction of the three gorges project.
Professor Zhang Boting original:
Dam why not fear nuclear attack?
Recently, community highly concerned about China's inland nuclear power safety issues. On March 2, 2016, researcher at the development center of the State Council Wang Yinan in the China economic weekly published the article carefully to build nuclear power plants in the Yangtze basin, further discussion and concern of the community of inland nuclear power safety. Previously, on October 12, 2015 she published entitled advocated in the media "inland nuclear power reset" expert, Wang Yinan please answer ten questions in signed articles. Objectively these ten questions, certainly need professionals to answer about nuclear power. If you cannot give a satisfactory answer, public opinion is hard to agree with the Inland nuclear power plant construction.
As we all know, since Japan's Fukushima Daiichi nuclear accidents around the world about the safety of nuclear power have more to worry about, almost all over the world have slowed down or even stopped the construction of a nuclear power. Why at this time to speed up nuclear power development in China, much-needed nuclear professionals, do a corresponding science and advocacy. Ten questions put forward, in fact, is precisely the best opportunities of science in the nuclear field. However, the US nuclear power industry stakeholders, was not given full attention until March 2, Wang Yinan researcher asked again, "ten questions" and caused great concern from the society, nuclear energy Association Web site people come out on the "view."
On March 4, 2016 nuclear society (Zhao Chengkun, Zhou Ruming, Mao Yawei, Weng Minghui) released Wang Yinan researchers questioned about our views about the Inland nuclear power safety (hereinafter:), for the first time publicly answered the King, ten of the researchers.
When it comes to the safety of nuclear power plants with nuclear weapons to attack the problem of "neutron bomb (tactical nuclear weapons) analysis", the explanation of content are:
"Failed to consider the tactical nuclear weapon attacks, not just unique to the nuclear power plant issue, an important political and economic infrastructure of many countries are likely to be targeted, for example, the three Gorges Dam before building many also raised the issue of the dam can withstand nuclear attack. In fact, this discussion is out of scope of the field of nuclear safety and nuclear security, and into the category of national security. ……”
Interpreting the view, seems to be to tell the public that nuclear power plants with nuclear weapons to attack the security issue, not part of the engineering design considerations, and belong to the category of national security. The solution should be "which requires us to continue to strengthen the national defense, create a strong deterrent, the Suppression of enemy move, otherwise, not only nuclear power, many important political and economic construction of projects can't be talked about. ”
In the article, since the article, specifically cited the three gorges project as an example, to show national security issues should not belong to the engineering design of the given content. Author of working as a water professionals feel that it is necessary to make a clarification. First of all, we must make it clear that: the author's views on should belong to the concept of national security is not only extremely wrong. And it cited examples of the three gorges project, is completely out of misunderstanding of the three gorges project is not consistent with the actual situation of China's three gorges project.
Well, in the three Gorges reservoir during the argument, after nuclear attack did have a dam safety debate. However, this debate is not to "attack by nuclear weapons should be within the scope of national security, and not to the dam safety problems designed to test" as a conclusion. But in the design of the three Gorges Dam has been resolved, even if attacked by nuclear weapons, nor have a greater problem of secondary disasters. Of course, about the controversy, has not aroused much attention at that time. In my opinion, this is due to the design of the three gorges has from the outset into the fight against nuclear attack. (According to the investigation: a pre-construction, design Department has conducted in-depth studies in response to this important issue, trial and error, and draw conclusions. ）
The three gorges project is the main way to solve this problem, select the appropriate type of dam. If not choose concrete gravity dam of the three gorges, but choose other dam types, it did exist once subjected to nuclear attacks, the dam will have a greater problem of secondary disasters. Because, whether it's dam, concrete arch dam or cfrd, once after being attacked, under the enormous impact of water will form a dam within a few minutes, resulting in a great deal of secondary disasters. However, the choice of concrete gravity dam of the three Gorges Dam, after the attack is completely different. Because of the stability of concrete gravity dam, it depends on each individual section of its own gravity and friction between the riverbed, to balance the upstream water pressure. For this type of dam, even after being blasted a large hole that gashed leaks, and never caused dam breaks.
In short, our three Gorges dam is not taken into account the risk of attack by nuclear weapons, but by rational design, with a certain ability to fight against nuclear attack. After the three Gorges dam was hit by nuclear weapons, is nothing more than the equivalent on the dam have opened a bug not touted as the "gate", does not have much of the threat of flooding in the lower reaches. Objectively speaking, if the dam is not this type of dam, probably no one knowledgeable experts endorsed the construction of the three gorges project. Because the premise of our engineering and construction, do you want to be able to guarantee, under any circumstances will not have disastrous consequences for society. Therefore, we hope that the views of the author do not misread the safety of the three Gorges Dam, mislead public opinion, should not take this as a reason to reduce the safety risks of nuclear power engineering.
Responsible editor: Wang Hao
Article keywords:Three Gorges Dam, nuclear weapons
I want feedback
Save a Web page
Observer network
专家称三峡大坝具备一定抗核武攻击能力|三峡大坝|核武_新闻资讯
原标题：专家：三峡大坝具备了一定的抗击核武器攻击的能力
关于中国超级工程一旦遭受攻击可能造成严重灾害的声音，在舆论场上屡见不鲜。近日，中国水力发电工程学会副秘书长张博庭撰文释疑，表示三峡大坝具备了一定的抗击核武器攻击的能力，并不会对下游产生太大的洪水威胁。
据张博庭教授介绍，他写作此文的由头是近日围绕内陆核电的争议。3月2日，国务院发展中心王亦楠研究员撰文，对重启内陆核电提出十项质疑，称有关机构的内陆核电安全论证，未考虑“中子弹（战术核武器）”袭击的风险。
3月4日，核能协会的数位专家回应说，核武器攻击不是工程建设人员要考虑的问题，而是国家安全问题，只能靠“不断加强国防建设”解决，并提到三峡大坝也有类似问题。
这引起了张博庭教授的不满。张博庭在文中指出，其实三峡大坝在设计上已经考虑了和攻击风险，采用了混凝土重力坝，即使被炸开缺口，也绝不会造成垮坝。
文章说，如果三峡大坝不是采用这种坝型，恐怕没有一个懂行的水利专家会赞同三峡工程的建设。
以下为张博庭教授原文：
三峡大坝为何不惧核武器的攻击？
最近一段时间，社会各界高度关注我国内陆核电的安全性问题。2016年3月2日，国务院发展中心的王亦楠研究员在《中国经济周刊》上发表了《长江流域建核电站要慎重》的文章，进一步引发了社会各界对内陆核电安全性的讨论和关切。此前，在2015年10月12日她就在媒体上发表了题为《力主“内陆核电重启”的专家，王亦楠请你回答十个问题》的署名文章。客观地说这十个问题，确实是需要有关核电的专业人士认真回答的。如果不能给出圆满的答复，社会舆论是很难赞同开展内陆核电建设的。
我们都知道，自从日本的福岛核事故发生后，全球各国确实对核电的安全性有较大的担心，世界各国几乎都放慢甚至停止了核电的建设。中国为什么要在这时候加速核电的开发，非常需要核电的专业人士，搞好相应的科普和宣传。十问的提出，其实恰恰是我国核电界开展科普宣传的最好契机。然而，遗憾的是我们核电界的相关人士，却没有给与充分的重视，直到3月2日王亦楠研究员再次追问“十问”，并引发了社会的高度关注，核能协会的网站上才有人出来谈了一点“看法”。
2016年3月4日核能协会的（赵成昆，周如明，毛亚蔚，翁明辉）发表了《就王亦楠研究员有关内陆核电安全的质疑谈谈我们的看法》（下称：看法）一文，首次公开地回答王研究员的十问。
在谈到核电站受到核武器攻击时的安全问题“关于中子弹（战术核武器）的分析”时，《看法》一文的相关解释内容是：
“考不考虑战术核武器的攻击，不仅仅是核电厂所特有的问题，许多国家的重要政治和经济设施都可能成为攻击目标，例如，三峡大坝建设前许多人也提出了大坝能不能经受核武器攻击的问题。实际上，这个问题的讨论已脱离核安全和核安保领域的范畴，而进入到国家安全的范畴。……”
《看法》的解释，似乎是要告诉公众，核电站受到核武器攻击后的安全问题，不属于工程设计人员的考虑范围，而属于国家安全范畴。其解决的方式应该是“这要求我们不断加强国防建设，形成强大的威慑力，制止敌人的轻举妄动，否则，不仅仅是核电，许多重要的政治和经济项目的建设都无从谈起。”
既然《看法》一文在文章中，特地举出了三峡工程作为例子，来说明国家安全问题不应属于工程设计所考虑的内容。笔者作为一名水电的专业人士，觉得非常有必要作出澄清。首先，我们必须明确指出：《看法》的作者关于应属于国家安全的概念不仅是非常错误的。而且，其所列举的三峡工程的例子，也是完全出于对三峡工程的误解，并不符合我国三峡工程的实际情况。
不错，在三峡的论证期间，确实有过大坝受到核武器攻击后的安全性的争论。然而，这一争论并不是以“受到核武器的攻击应该属于国家安全的范畴，而不属于大坝安全设计要考的问题”作为结论的。而是我们的三峡大坝的设计确实已经解决了，即使受到了核武器的攻击，也不会产生更大的次生灾害的问题。当然，关于这方面的争论，当时并没有引起社会各界的过多关注。笔者认为，这是由于三峡的设计从一开始就已经把抗击核武器的攻击考虑进去了。（据查：三峡开工前，设计部门曾针对这一重要问题进行过深入研究，反复试验，并得出了结论。）
三峡工程解决这一问题的主要办法是，选择了合适的坝型。如果三峡不是选择混凝土重力坝，而是选择其它坝型，它确实存在着一旦遭受核武器攻击后，将产生较大的溃坝次生灾害的问题。因为，无论是土坝、混凝土拱坝或者是混凝土面板坝，一旦被攻击后，在巨大水流的冲击下，都会在几分钟之内形成溃坝，从而造成巨大的次生灾害。但是，三峡选择的混凝土重力坝坝型，遭受攻击后则完全不同。因为混凝土重力坝的稳定性，是靠每一个独立的坝段自身的重力与河床之间的摩擦力，来平衡上游水压力的。对于这种坝型，即使被炸开一个大口子也就是那一个大口子漏水，而绝不会造成垮坝。
总之，我们的三峡大坝并不是没有考虑受核武器攻击的风险，而是通过采用合理的设计，具备了一定的抗击核武器攻击的能力。三峡大坝即使被核武器击中后，也无非就是相当于在大坝上打开了一个关不上口的“大闸门”，并不会对下游产生太大的洪水威胁。客观地说，如果三峡大坝不是采用这种坝型，恐怕没有一个懂行的水利专家会赞同三峡工程的建设。因为，我们的工程设计和建设的前提，确实要能够保障，在任何情况下都不会给社会造成灾难性的后果。因此，我们希望《看法》的作者不要错误解读三峡大坝的安全性，误导舆论，更不应以此作为降低核电工程安全风险的理由。
责任编辑：王浩成
文章关键词： 三峡大坝 核武
我要反馈
保存网页
观察者网