A Good Day to Die Hard

You can't go wrong with a classic action plot line, although I have to say that Die Hard Five (hilariously named "A Good Day to Die Hard") pushes the limits slightly.

The final seen sees Bruce Willis and his son (who conveniently is undercover for the CIA) destroy a house containing a large amount of uranium weapons: the same technology used in commercial nuclear reactors. What caught my eye in this scene was the iPad app that Brucey was using which told him the radiation levels in the house: informing him they were in a perilous situation. I wanted to see if there was much science behind this or whether Hollywood was just having a laugh. 

During the Japan Earthquake and Tsuanami in 2011, radio and TV were recorded as being the most useful media for distributing information. However mobile devices which can connect to wifi are becoming increasingly significant, alongside this is a the development of apps for emergency situations. 

Earthquake Warning App - using data from the Japan Meteorological Agency, users get an early warning about an earthquake. This only gives a few minutes warning but allows people to go into emergency procedures such as turning off gas supplies and getting to a safer location. 

Defibrillator App - this app shows the users proximity to automated defibrillators which can be used by anyone to restart someone's heart. This is one example of many useful apps which relate to emergency services and healthcare in the area. 

Safe Area Checker - this app was created after the disaster at the Fukushima power plant so that users can check their proximity to the area which is deemed unsafe to enter. This app has been incredibly popular. 

I couldn't find any 'die hard' style radiation apps yet but there are certainly some really helpful products being created. The ones focused on getting information or support to people during or after the event seem great, providing they are kept up to date. I'm a little more sceptical about ones that aim to 'predict' events or show augmented realities of what different hazards would do. To me this seems unnecessary scaremongering and I'm not sure what 'evidence' some of the apps are based on. 

Information sourced from Emergency Journalism website 

Nuclear Power in the UK

In 1934, Nuclear fission was achieved by scientist Enrico Fermi. After the World War Two the UK government began to heavily invest in research into the commercial potential of nuclear power. At this time, it was one of the leading companies in nuclear research for energy and weaponry potential.

1956 and the world's first commercial nuclear reactor, Calder Hall 1, was opened by Queen Elizabeth in Sellafield (The Guardian 2013). A fire in one of the reactors two years later destroyed part of the plant although no one was harmed in the incident. There were concerns over impacts of radioactive leakage from the plant, exacerbated by lack of communication from the company. Details about the event were not released for thirty years.

Over the next few decades many more nuclear reactors were built including Chapelcross, Hinkley Point and Dungeness. The government gave full support to nuclear power, despite the growth of many opposition groups. A successful campaign from opposition groups did stop the dumping of nuclear waste into the Atlantic. With hindsight it seems incredible that unregulated dumping of material was allowed to go on for thirty years! (Greenpeace Nuclear Waste Campaigns)

Nuclear power continued to grow as an industry in the UK, despite increasing environmental regulation and opposition groups. At its peak in the mid 1990s, it contributed around 25% of the UK's energy needs.

In 2000 the nuclear industry was brought under fire over a scandal relating to faked safety records. Over the next five years many reactors were shut down:

• 2000 - Hinkley Point A1 and A2 shut down
• 2002 - Bradwell 1 and 2 shut down
• 2003 - Calder Hall 1, 2, 3 and 4 shut down
• 2005 - Chapelcross 1, 2, 3 and 4 shut down
• 2006 - Dungeness A1 and A2, Sizewell A1 and A2 shut down

The UK government are caught between industry and anti nuclear groups. They continue to support the industry and the highlight the benefits for the economy and consumers. At the same time, very serious issues are raised over safety and the general public's opinion of nuclear power goes down. Now the government don't just need to worry about campaign groups but also general voters. This is occasionally tangled up with Nuclear weapons such as Trident, making it even more challenging for the government to get the support of the general public.

Most recent developments include the 2010 government funding package for Sheffield Forgemasters who make nuclear reactors and in 2013 a 40 year subsidy was agreed with energy companies who agree to building new nuclear power stations. In October of this year the new power plant, Hinkley Point C, got the go ahead from government. All of this suggests that government is still fully behind nuclear power. Dare I suggest that fracking is providing a nice distraction and allowing nuclear power to be the 'lesser of two evils'.

Nuclear Power in the UK. Source (BBC News) based on data from the Department of
Energy and Climate Change