4 ms·
One could argue that it's safer to transport the materials without the added attention from armored escorts, but they're probably just avoiding the added costs.
by drrotmos 13y ago
One could argue that it's safer to transport the materials without the added attention from armored escorts, but they're probably just avoiding the added costs.
They may actually be right to, though. The costs of an armored transport is higher than a regular truck transport by an order of magnitude. The costs of calling in the cavalry that one in a million time that the truck is hijacked is probably far lower than securing each transport.
That doesn't mean they shouldn't be using lojacks and panic buttons for the drivers though.
- DaveWalk 13y ago> it's safer to transport the materials without the added attention from armored escorts A colleague of mine who once worked at a nuclear power plant said this is precisely the reason. Also, as mentioned below, this material, while decidedly dangerous, is considerably less so than, say, spent nuclear fuel, which is actually moved in giant police escorts. (Interestingly, they told me that some states actually refuse to have spent fuel trucked through their land, so often it has to be rerouted many hundred more miles between plant and destination.)