England's Atomic Age. Securing Its Architectural and Technological Legacy

77 England’s Atomic Age. Securing its Architectural and Technological Legacy Wayne D. Cocroft Introduction Wales where a pilot uranium isotope separation plant was constructed.3 The building has been listed by Cadw. This paper presents a brief overview of places in England For many reasons, including cost, the threat from aerial that have been associated with atomic research, including the bombing and concerns that vital resources would be drawn early nuclear weapons programme, and especially those plac- away from more pressing tasks British knowledge and sci- es that have been afforded statutory protection. It describes entists were transferred to the US atomic bomb project – the the infrastructure of the civil nuclear power industry and how Manhattan Project. But, after the passing of the McMahon this legacy is being remediated to release land for new us- Act in 1946 the UK was denied access to US atomic work es. It concludes with a discussion of how Historic England‘s and embarked on its own nuclear weapons programme. Dur- strategy for the documentation of post-war coal and oil-fired ing this period the weapons and civil research programmes power stations that might be applied to the nuclear sector. often worked closely together drawing on a relatively small pool of scientific experts. Early history The development of the British atomic bomb From the late 19th century scientists in the United King- dom were part of an international community of pioneers The early research facilities allocated to the project were working to understand the structure of the atom. Important modest and included a small section of the Royal Arsenal, centres included the physics building at the University of Woolwich, and a redundant 19th century fortification, Fort Manchester, built in1900, where Ernest Rutherford, a New Halstead, Kent. At the latter site a number of specially de- Zealander, worked with colleagues, such as Niels Bohr. The signed buildings survive and represent some of the earliest Cavendish Laboratory at Cambridge, built in 1878, was an- structures associated with a nuclear weapons programme other important hub, firstly under J J Thomsom who discov- (Fig. 1). On the Thames marshes the project was allocated ered the electron in 1897; in 1919 Rutherford moved from an enclave within a larger military firing range. Here too Manchester to become its director. It was under his leader- a series of unprepossessing test structures were built, in- ship in 1932 that John Cockcroft and Ernest Walton split the cluding the building in which the United Kingdom’s first atom. Both laboratories are protected as listed buildings; atomic bombs were assembled in summer of 1952 before the primary reason for their selection was their architectural they were shipped to the Monte Bello Islands, Australia, for interest, although the historical significance of the research testing (Fig. 2). carried out in the buildings is acknowledged. In common with many other post-war British high tech During the 1930s the numbers of this already cosmopol- projects, through its association with defence there was close itan group was swelled by émigré European scientists flee- government involvement in the development of the nuclear ing Nazi oppression. They included Rudolf Peierls and Otto industry. There was obvious national pride in technological Frisch, who while working at the University of Birmingham, achievement; science and high politics also came together wrote a paper ‘On the construction of a super bomb’, alert- as successive British prime ministers sought to re-establish ing the British government to the possibility of a uranium the special nuclear relationship with the United States. If bomb.1 The idea apparently originated from a conversation this goal was to be achieved the efforts of British scientists between Frisch and his aunt Lisa Meitner, formerly of the and industry was crucial. At the heart of these efforts lay Kaiser Wilhelm Institute for Chemistry, Berlin.2 the research establishments, which in turn created new and A government committee was quickly established to ex- alien landscapes. In preparation for the 1956 Buffalo Trials, amine the feasibility of constructing such a weapon. It re- in which the United Kingdom would detonate her first air ported back in July 1941, and in September Churchill au- dropped atomic bomb, a requirement was identified for fa- thorised work to proceed. Most of the research was carried cilities to simulate the conditions a bomb might experience out on the government’s behalf by ICI, university depart- during flight. New laboratories were built on the east coast ments, and in a poison gas factory at Rhydymwyn in North at Orford Ness, Suffolk (Fig. 3). This site is now scheduled 78 England’s Atomic Age. Securing its Architectural and Technological Legacy Fig. 1: Fort Halstead, Kent, the purpose-built building in which the components for Britain’s first atomic bomb – Blue Danube – were assembled (2008). The building is listed. Fig. 2: Atomic Weapons Research Establishment, Foulness, Essex, building X6 in which the live high explosive elements of Britain’s first atomic bomb were assembled (2007). The building is scheduled. England’s Atomic Age. Securing its Architectural and Technological Legacy 79 Fig. 3: Ordfordness, Suffolk, in the distance is an early 1960s test laboratory, or pagoda, used for the physical testing of nuclear weapons and their components (2007). and in the care of the National Trust. Although not the direct line of research, due to the need to bring the reactors quickly subject of this paper, a number of sites associated with the into service air-cooling was chosen. Construction began in storage, maintenance, and deployment of nuclear weapons September 1947 and just over three years later in October have also been protected in England. 1950 Pile 1 went critical. These piles were exclusively for plutonium production and by August 1952 sufficient plutonium was available for Britain’s first nuclear test in October The civil nuclear programme of that year. In addition to its warlike potential, the British government At a time when the country was virtually bankrupt from its and scientists were keen to exploit this new technology to wartime expenditure, the decision of January 1947 to pro- create new wealth and as a source of power. In October ceed with a British atomic bomb project required a large 1945, it was announced that Britain was to build an atomic industrial base of novel factories. To speed up construction research and experimental establishment. The site chosen the new facilities were built on sites already owned by the was at a former airfield at Harwell, Oxfordshire. The main government, including airfields and munitions factories, purpose of the establishment was to study and develop reac- which offered basic infrastructure as well as accommoda- tor technology. In its heyday Harwell boasted 14 research tion for work force. In the north west of England a uranium reactors, and later an additional research centre was built at enrichment plant was built at Capenhurst, Cheshire, and a Winfrith, Dorset. At Culham, Oxfordshire, a new centre was fuel production facility at Springfields, Lancashire. In Au- established devoted to cold fusion technology, and today is gust 1947, the Ministry of Supply announced that the coun- home to JET, the Joint European Torus. try’s plutonium factory was to be built on the site of a former Although, gas cooling had been rejected for the first pluto- TNT factory at Sellafield, Cumbria (Fig. 4).4 nium production piles, for power generation it offered many Initially, the assumption was that the plutonium plant advantages. Pressurised gas is more efficient in removing would follow the design of wartime United States’ Hanford heat, especially if combined with finned fuel cans. It was this piles, which were graphite moderated and water-cooled. design that was chosen for the next generation of plutonium However, there were safety concerns about this design, and production reactors, which would also produce electricity as although gas cooled technology appeared to be a promising a by-product. 80 England’s Atomic Age. Securing its Architectural and Technological Legacy Fig. 4: Sellafield, Cumbria, in the late 1940s the site of a disused wartime TNT was taken over for the Windscale Piles built for the production of plutonium (1954). In 1957, they were to achieve notoriety as the scene of Britain’s worst nuclear accident. Dounreay Torness Hunterston Edinburgh Chapelcross Hartlepool Sellaeld Windscale Belfast Calder Hall Drigg Heysham Springelds Wylfa Risley Capenhurst Trawsfynydd Sizewell Orfordness Berkeley Culham Bradwell Cardi London Oldbury Harwell Foulness Burgheld Aldermaston Hinkley Point Key Winfrith Dungeness Atomic Weapons Establishment Fuel production and reprocessing Magnox reactors Advanced Gas Cooled reactor Pressurised W ater reactor 0 50 100 150 200 kilometres Fig. 5: Map showing the Low level waste store (Drigg only) United Kingdom Atomic Energy Authority 0 30 60 90 120 miles principal nuclear sites in the United Kingdom. England’s Atomic Age. Securing its Architectural and Technological Legacy 81 The first station of this design was built adjacent to the clear revolution will add a splash of brightness and cheerful- Windscale piles at Calder Hall, Cumbria, and was opened by ness to the industrial scene’.5 At night artificial light shone the Queen in October 1956, and was the world’s first large through their often glass clad exteriors creating beacons of nuclear power plant connected to a national electricity grid. a new technological age, often in parts of the country where However, along with Chapelcross, Dumfriesshire, it was al- domestic electricity was still a novelty. so part of the weapons programme and ran on a plutonium There is no one overall architectural style that characteris- production cycle until 1964, and for a short time during the es the British nuclear stations. Technically, each of the Mag- 1970s.

Load more