The Time Navy Lt. Jimmy Carter Was Lowered Into A Partially Melted-Down Nuclear Reactor
The recently deceased 39th president had a hand in the dawn of the nuclear submarine age, including one especially dangerous mission.
The War Zone, Geoff Ziezulewicz, 30 Dec 24
resident Jimmy Carter’s time as a U.S. Navy officer might have been brief, but it served to inform the rest of his days before passing away Sunday at the age of 100. Prior to his political career and Nobel Prize-winning peacemaking efforts, Carter stood at the side of the father of the nuclear Navy during its infancy, and even got lowered into a melted-down nuclear reactor as a junior officer. Decades later, the former president was stunned to learn of the capabilities carried by the secretive spy submarine that bears his name to this day.
Ensign James Earl “Jimmy” Carter graduated from the U.S. Naval Academy in 1946, and applied to join the Navy’s nuclear submarine community a few years later, according to the Navy…………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………….
After Carter joined the Navy’s nuclear efforts, the 28-year-old and his crew were sent to repair the Chalk Water nuclear reactor near Ottawa, Canada, in late 1952. The reactor had suffered a partial meltdown, and a team was needed to shut it down, take it apart and replace it. Carter and the rest of the team took a train up north and soon got to work.
“They built an identical replica of the reactor on an adjacent tennis court to precisely run through the repair procedures, due to the maximum time humans could be exposed to the levels of radiation present in the damaged area,” a Navy history recounts. “Each member of the 22 member team could only be lowered into the reactor for 90-second periods to clean up and repair the site.”
Official accounts don’t clarify whether Carter was in command during the mission, or his precise role. Still, the future president did his part, Canadian journalist Arthur Milnes later recounted.
“He was lowered into the building … with his wrench, and he had to run over to the reactor casing and he had one screw to turn,” Milnes said after interviewing Carter about the incident. “That was all the time he had. And then, boom, back up.”
Carter and the others were regularly tested after the mission was finished to look for long-term health effects.
“They let us [crew members] get probably a thousand times more radiation than they would now.” Carter told CNN in 2008 while reflecting on the incident. “We were fairly well-instructed then on what nuclear power was, but for about six months after that, I had radioactivity in my urine.”
In his autobiography, “A Full Life, Reflections at Ninety,” Carter recounted the distinctive perils of being a submarine officer:
“Although some enlisted men could concentrate almost exclusively on their own fields of responsibility as engine men, electricians, torpedo experts, boatswains, quartermasters, gunners or operators of navigation and fire control equipment, every officer was expected to master all of these disciplines…we knew one mistake could endanger everyone aboard.”…………………………………………………………………………
Carter lived an extraordinary life, by all accounts. His time in the submarine community played a critical role in all that came after, and he remained a Navy man until the end.
You and I leave here today to do our common duty—protecting our Nation’s vital interests by peaceful means if possible, by resolute action if necessary,” Carter told the graduating class of Naval Academy midshipmen in 1978. “We go forth sobered by these responsibilities, but confident of our strength. We go forth knowing that our Nation’s goals—peace, security, liberty for ourselves and for others—will determine our future and that we together can prevail.”
RIP President Jimmy Carter, 1924-2024, https://www.twz.com/sea/the-time-navy-lt-jimmy-carter-was-lowered-into-a-partially-melted-down-nuclear-reactor
U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Releases Report Confirming Radioactive Material Lost in Transit — Shipping Container Arrives Damaged and Empty in New Jersey
WCBM: Dec. 18, 2024,
The U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) has confirmed that radioactive material was lost in transit earlier this month, heightening fears about public safety and sparking theories about mysterious drone activity in New Jersey.
Officer Lew, a prominent political commentator, highlighted the NRC’s event report during a review of regulatory alerts.
“While looking at the Nuclear Regulatory Commission Alerts. I can confirm that there is radioactive material that has gone missing on Dec 2nd, 2024 out of New Jersey. This might be the reason for the drones… just speculation at this point,” he wrote.
The missing material, identified as a Ge-68 pin source manufactured by Eckert & Ziegler, was reported lost by its licensee on December 3, 2024. Shipped for disposal, the container arrived at its destination severely damaged and empty.
According to the NRC’s report, the radioactive source, while classified as “Less than IAEA Category 3,” still poses potential risks if mishandled or exposed for prolonged periods.
According to the report:………………………………………….more https://wcbm.com/national-headline/u-s-nuclear-regulatory-commission-releases-report-confirming-radioactive-material-lost-in-transit-shipping-container-arrives-damaged-and-empty-in-new-jersey/?fbclid=IwY2xjawHUIsVleHRuA2FlbQIxMQABHaC7ofrCr2kLP94TcSi7EYfOtaubssy-0TKBwUEdQvNgm4uJEV2_JCc9yQ_aem_BLSGE-89x-qjcSu3l2UQqw
Nuclear submarine shipyard fire at Barrow-in-Furness leaves two in hospital
Josh Halliday Hannah Al-Othman and Jasper Jolly Guardian, 31 Oct 24
Two people have been taken to hospital after a “significant” fire broke out at BAE Systems’ nuclear submarine shipyard in Cumbria.
Residents said they saw huge flames and smoke billowing from the complex in Barrow-in-Furness, where the UK’s new multi-billion-pound Dreadnought submarines are being built.
Cumbria police said there was no nuclear risk but two people were taken to hospital for suspected smoke inhalation. Police said: “At this time there are no other casualties and everyone else has been evacuated from the Devonshire Dock Hall and are accounted for.”
BAE said the two people taken to hospital were workers at the site and they have since been discharged. About 200 people were working on a night shift at the time the fire broke out.
…………………………………………………………….. Four nuclear submarines from the Dreadnought class are being built there as part of a £31bn programme, which is due to replace the Vanguard submarines in the early 2030s. The last of the Royal Navy’s seven new nuclear-powered submarines, part of the Astute class, is also being built at the site.
It is understood that the boat in the hall is HMS Agincourt, whose completion had already been delayed to 2026. The previous Astute class, HMS Agamemnon, was launched last month. It remains unclear whether any submarines were damaged by the fire.
The MoD has been contacted for comment. Cumbria fire and rescue service said an investigation into the cause of the fire was under way.
Police on Wednesday advised residents to keep doors and windows closed, having earlier instructed people to stay indoors. Motorists in the area have also been told to close their windows, air vents and sunroofs and turn off fans and air-conditioning units.
It is understood that the warning was because of the risk of particles, such as those from metals, being released in the air from the heavy industry site, where sophisticated extraction techniques are normally in place.
BAE Systems reportedly told non-essential staff working at Devonshire Dock Hall to work from home on Wednesday, while the BBC reported that staff turning up for their shifts were confused as to which parts of the 25,000 sq metre site was accessible.
Shares in BAE Systems fell as much as 2% in morning trading after news of the fire, making it one of the biggest fallers on the FTSE 100 index of blue-chip companies.
A BAE Systems spokesperson said: “The area around the Devonshire Dock Hall has been evacuated and everyone has been accounted for. Two colleagues were taken to hospital having suffered suspected smoke inhalation and have both since been released.”
It is understood that the company will launch an investigation into the cause of the fire. The rest of the site remains open and operating normally.
Additional reporting by Dan Sabbagh
https://www.theguardian.com/business/2024/oct/30/nuclear-submarine-shipyard-fire-at-barrow-in-furness-leaves-two-in-hospital
Nuclear Missile Submarines Collided (Armed with Hundreds of Nuclear Weapons)
The two submarines were nuclear-powered. Thus, these boats could have become like Chernobyl under the waves.
the need for stealth is naval engagements should be well understood but it must also be stressed that, in the nuclear age, such secrecy could lead to truly devastating consequences unless some form of modus vivendi is crafted between Washington and Beijing to deescalate certain crises.
In February 2009, the British HMS Vanguard and French Le Triomphant, both nuclear-powered ballistic missile submarines, collided in the Atlantic Ocean during routine patrols. The incident raised serious concerns about naval safety protocols and the lack of communication between allied nations operating stealth vessels in close proximity.
The National Interest, by Brandon J. Weichert, October 20, 2024
What You Need to Know: In February 2009, the British HMS Vanguard and French Le Triomphant, both nuclear-powered ballistic missile submarines, collided in the Atlantic Ocean during routine patrols. The incident raised serious concerns about naval safety protocols and the lack of communication between allied nations operating stealth vessels in close proximity.
-Whistleblower William McNeilly later alleged that equipment failures and crew errors aboard the Vanguard contributed to the collision and that a cover-up ensued. This event underscored the potential catastrophic consequences of submarine collisions, especially between nuclear-armed vessels.
-The article also draws parallels to recent incidents involving U.S. and Chinese submarines, emphasizing the need for improved communication to prevent escalations that could lead to environmental disasters or even war.
The Collision
The collision happened in the early hours of 3 February 2009. The two subs were conducting routine patrols. At some point, in the mid-Atlantic, the two nuclear-powered submarines crossed paths and crashed into each other.
This catastrophe was the result of a combination of factors, but the most damning one of all comes from a Royal Navy submariner, William McNeilly, who decided to become a whistleblower. According to this whistleblower, the accident was likely the result of the British submarine which had been subject to “massive equipment failures, crew errors, and lax standards” onboard the HMS Vanguard.
Indeed, the official account provided to the public by the British government (and backed up by the French government), according to McNeilly, was far less caustic than the event actually had been. In fact, according to the whistleblower testimony, the British nuclear submarine was mere moments away from exploding (which would have ignited the ship’s nuclear reactor, causing all kinds of problems for the world).
The whistleblower account details how the FNS Le Triomphant had bashed out a “massive chunk” from the HMS Vanguard after which the French sub “grazed down the side of” the Vanguard. From there, “compressed air bottle groups had been dislodged by the collision and ‘were hanging off and banging against the pressure hull.’ The submarine had to return to base slowly because ‘if one of the [High Pressure Air] bottle groups exploded it would’ve created a chain reaction and sent the submarine plummeting to the bottom.’”
A “massive cover-up of the incident” soon followed.
According to McNeilly the Vanguard had become the poster child in the failing British Royal Navy (an issue about which this author has documented repeatedly in these pages) of mismanagement, lax discipline, and poor seamanship.
Before its collision with the Le Triomphant, there was another cover-up involving the Vanguard pertaining to a “deep depth incident” in which the HMS Vanguard “dived far beyond a normal safe depth. A combination of high-water pressure and the submarine’s low speed made it difficult for the submarine’s hydroplanes [to] generate enough lift to raise the submarine, and ballast water could not be pumped out fast enough to allow the submarine to rise.”
In essence, well before the 2009 collision, the Vanguard was almost lost due to poor seamanship. Yet, the Royal Navy, rather than address the problems, chose to cover it up and continue operating as though everything were normal.
Thankfully, the incident led to a review of submarine operations and safety protocols by both the British and French navies. It further highlighted the need for improved communication and coordination between allied nations operating in the same waters.
Although, the presence of a “massive cover-up” being enacted immediately upon the Vanguard’s return to port is unacceptable and begs the question as to whether the Royal Navy and French Navy really learned the right lessons or if they just figured out how to downplay things better.
The Subs Involved
Britain’s HMS Vanguard was the lead boat in the Vanguard-class ballistic missile submarine. ………………………………………………………………………….
On the other end of the collision was France’s Le Triomphant, the lead boat of the French navy’s Triomphant-class ballistic missile submarine. ………………………………………
The Triomphant carried 15 M45 ballistic missiles and had four torpedo tubes for F17 torpedoes.
This incident on the High Seas between two allied nations that simply were not aware that each other had submarines operating in the same Area of Responsibility (AOR) could have been far worse than it was. The two submarines, as you have read, were nuclear-powered. Thus, these boats could have become like Chernobyl under the waves.
Thankfully, that fate was avoided. But this incident was a clear wake-up call………………………
Implications for Sino-American Interactions Beneath the Sea
Just recently, in fact, the USS Connecticut is believed to have crashed into an undersea mountain (seamount) in the crowded South China Sea while it was possibly conducting a covert surveillance mission of China’s secretive naval base at Hainan Island.
It was a major source of embarrassment for the US Navy because, the incident not only revealed what the Connecticut was up to but it also put a dent in the Navy’s limited Seawolf-class fleet.
the need for stealth is naval engagements should be well understood but it must also be stressed that, in the nuclear age, such secrecy could lead to truly devastating consequences unless some form of modus vivendi is crafted between Washington and Beijing to deescalate certain crises.
This was done throughout the Cold War……………………………..
A Sino-American collision, which is likely to occur given the tension and interactions thus far between the two powers, could either lead to an environmental catastrophe. Or worse, it could lead to a world war. https://nationalinterest.org/blog/buzz/2-nuclear-missile-submarines-collided-armed-hundreds-nuclear-weapons-211587
Ukraine kills nuclear plant’s pro-Russian security chief with car bomb
Politico, October 4, 2024, By Seb Starcevic
The security chief at a Russia-controlled nuclear power plant in southern Ukraine was killed in a car bombing Friday, according to Russian and Ukrainian authorities.
Andriy Korotkyy, head of security at the Zaporizhzhia nuclear power plant, died after his car exploded on Friday morning in the Russian-occupied Ukrainian city of Enerhodar.
“A homemade explosive device was planted under the vehicle of the head of the security,” Russia’s Investigative Committee said in a statement on Telegram.
“When the man got into the car, it detonated. The victim died in the hospital from his injuries,” the committee said, adding that it was opening a murder investigation.
Ukraine’s Military Intelligence Directorate, also known as GUR, seemingly took responsibility for the blast that killed Korotkyy, calling him a “war criminal” and posting a video of a white SUV exploding on Telegram………………………………………………………………….
Moscow took control of the Zaporizhzhia nuclear power plant, the largest such facility in Europe, shortly after it invaded Ukraine in early 2022. It is located about 50 kilometers southwest of the city of Zaporizhzhia, home to more than 700,000 people.
There is widespread concern about the safety of the plant, with shelling and drone strikes nearby prompting the United Nations’ nuclear watchdog in August to issue a warning about a nuclear disaster.
Korotkyy is not the first Russian-allied official to die in a car bombing by Ukrainian intelligence. Mikhail Filiponenko, a pro-Russian lawmaker and ex-militiaman in occupied eastern Ukraine, was killed in a similar attack last November, with the GUR promising to punish other high-profile collaborators. https://www.politico.eu/article/ukraine-russia-andriy-korotkyy-car-bomb-nuclear-plant-zaporizhzhia/
China’s Newest Nuclear Submarine Sank, Setting Back Its Military Modernization
Pierside accident came as Beijing attempts to expand its navy
WSJ, By Michael R. Gordon, Sept. 26, 2024
WASHINGTON—China’s newest nuclear-powered attack submarine sank in the spring, a major setback for one of the country’s priority weapons programs, U.S. officials said.
The episode, which Chinese authorities scrambled to cover up and hasn’t previously been disclosed, occurred at a shipyard near Wuhan in late May or early June.
It comes as China has been pushing to expand its navy, including its fleet of nuclear-powered submarines.
The Pentagon has cast China as its principal long-term “pacing challenge,” and U.S. officials say that Beijing has been using political and military pressure to try to coerce Taiwan, a separately governed island that Beijing claims as part of its territory.
China says its goal in building a world-class military is to deter aggression and safeguard its overseas interests. A spokesman for the Chinese embassy didn’t immediately respond to a request for comment…………………………………………………………….. more https://www.wsj.com/world/china/chinas-newest-nuclear-submarine-sank-setting-back-its-military-modernization-785b4d37?st=pMigx5&reflink=desktopwebshare_permalink
Chinese nuclear-powered attack submarine sank earlier this year, says senior US defence official
ABC News, 27 Sept 24
In short:
China’s newest nuclear-powered attack submarine sank earlier this year, according to a senior US defence official.
A series of satellite images from Planet Labs from June appear to show cranes at the Wuchang shipyard, where the submarine would have been docked.
What’s next?
China’s submarine force is expected to grow to 65 by 2025 and 80 by 2035, the US Department of Defense has said.
A senior US defence official has said that China’s newest nuclear-powered attack submarine sank earlier this year, marking a potential embarrassment for Beijing as it seeks to expand its military capabilities.
China already has the largest navy in the world, with over 370 ships, and it has embarked on production of a new generation of nuclear-armed submarines.
The US defence official, speaking on condition of anonymity on Thursday, local time, said China’s new first-in-class nuclear-powered attack submarine sank alongside a pier sometime between May and June.
A Chinese embassy spokesperson in Washington said they had no information to provide.
“In addition to the obvious questions about training standards and equipment quality, the incident raises deeper questions about the PLA’s internal accountability and oversight of China’s defence industry — which has long been plagued by corruption,” the official said, using an acronym for the People’s Liberation Army.
“It’s not surprising that the PLA Navy would try to conceal the sinking,” the official added………………………………………………. more https://www.abc.net.au/news/2024-09-27/one-of-china-submarine-sank-says-us-defence-official/104406362
Fluid leak forces rail shipment to return to the San Onofre nuclear power plant
Federal regulator says the leak had “low safety significance” but Southern California Edison officials admit it should not have happened.
By Rob Nikolewski | rob.nikolewski@sduniontribune.com | The San Diego Union-Tribune, August 21, 2024
A pair of dismantled pressurizers that departed the San Onofre Nuclear Generating Station by rail had to be returned to the now-shuttered power plant after it was discovered that one of the giant pieces of equipment had leaked fluid during the trip.
Surveys conducted by the plant’s operator, Southern California Edison, said “no detectable radioactivity” above otherwise normal background levels was detected and there was “no threat to public health and safety, or the environment.” But an official with the utility admitted to the Union-Tribune, “that should not happen.”
An inspection from the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission found two violations but the federal regulator’s report described the “safety significance” of the infractions as “low.”
The NRC’s inspection report made no mention of issuing any fines.
But Edwin Lyman, director of nuclear safety at the Union of Concerned Scientists, suspects the NRC’s report does not reflect “the severity of (Edison and its contractor’s) screw-up.”
“They had one job to do, which was to transport this pressurizer without any (free) liquid in a container that couldn’t leak,” Lyman said. “And they missed on both counts.”
……………………………What happened?
The San Onofore Nuclear Generating Station, known as SONGS for short, is in the midst of a massive $4.7 billion decommissioning and dismantlement project that is scheduled to wrap up by the end of 2028.
During the course of the demolition, about 1.1 billion pounds of material is expected to be removed, with most of it going by rail. More than 1,000 rail shipments originating from a spur built at SONGS have left the site since dismantlement efforts began some four years ago.
In late June, two large pressurizers were loaded onto special rail cars, on their way to a disposal site in Clive, Utah.
When a nuclear power plant is in operation, pressurizers control reactor coolant systems that use demineralized pure water to remove heat from the reactor core and allow steam to power turbine generators.
The SONGS Unit 2 and Unit 3 pressurizers are big — 37 feet tall and weighing about 100 tons each, with capacity to regulate 16,500 gallons of liquid.
After they were taken out, the pressurizers were labeled as Class A waste, which is the lowest level of radioactive waste as classified by the NRC.
At a stop at a railyard in San Bernardino, a worker noticed a water leakage on the top of the flatbed railcar hauling the Unit 2 pressurizer. SCE officials said the water did not drip onto the ground.
No leaks were found in the Unit 3 pressurizer but both were sent back to SONGS to find out what happened.
Although each pressurizer was supposed to be completely drained, it was soon discovered that 190 gallons of water was found at the bottom of the Unit 2 pressurizer.
“Workers incorrectly believed” all the water had been drained out of the pressurizer before it was loaded onto the rail car, Pontes said.
What now?
An ongoing investigation is trying to determine what went wrong. Until then, the pressurizers from both units will not be rescheduled for shipment back to Utah.
The NRC noted two violations — one for failing to ensure the pressurizer was “properly closed and sealed to prevent release of radioactive content” and the second for not properly packaging it for shipment.
Pontes said the NRC findings are being reviewed by SCE, the dismantlement’s general contractor (called SONGS Decommissioning Solutions) and workers at the facility. “We remain committed, in our oversight role, to ensuring safety and adherence to all regulatory material packaging requirements,” he said.
But Lyman questioned whether the NRC’s actions amounted to a “slap on the wrist.”
“When they process these violations through their system and it spits out ‘low-safety significance,’ I don’t feel it conveys the gravity of the two violations, when compounded, led to a release of this liquid,” Lyman said. “It could have been worse, presumably.”
Other incidents
First opened in 1968, SONGS has not produced electricity since 2012 after a leak in a steam generator tube led to its closing.
In August 2018, a 50-ton canister filled with radioactive spent fuel was being transferred to a dry storage facility on the north end of SONGS. While being lowered into a cavity, the canister was accidentally left suspended almost 20 feet from the floor.
Eventually, the canister was safely lowered but the NRC later fined Edison $116,000 and chided the company for failing “to establish a rigorous process to ensure adequate procedures, training and oversight guidance.”
In April 2022, demolition work was briefly halted after a worker fell about five feet while trying to install a ventilation hose into the floor vault opening, injuring his shoulder.
Once the dismantlement project wraps up, all that is expected to remain at SONGS will be two dry storage facilities; a security building with personnel to look over the waste; a seawall 28 feet high, as measured at average low tide at San Onofre Beach; a walkway connecting two beaches north and south of the plant, and a switchyard with power lines.
The switchyard’s substation without transformers stays put because it houses electricity infrastructure that provides a key interconnection for the power grid in the region. https://www.sandiegouniontribune.com/2024/08/21/fluid-leak-forces-rail-shipment-to-return-to-the-san-onofre-nuclear-power-plant/?fbclid=IwY2xjawE3ZUdleHRuA2FlbQIxMQABHapLLh1xKud7eOWCb9iO4yGGQxJgVZFSJhbgWcw92LLlNek-XIz_bl-r_g_aem_TD76JCKRAQE_2TARdViWEw
Japan: Radioactive water leaks reported at crippled Fukushima power plant
Economic Times 14 Aug 24
About 25 tons of radioactive water have leaked within the crippled Fukushima Daiichi Nuclear Power Plant, the plant’s operator has reported, a week after the latest round of ocean discharge started.
Tokyo: About 25 tons of radioactive water have leaked within the crippled Fukushima Daiichi Nuclear Power Plant, the plant’s operator has reported, a week after the latest round of ocean discharge started.
The nuclear-contaminated water, which leaked from a surge tank connected to the Unit 2 reactor building, was meant to be contained in a tank receiving overflow from the spent nuclear fuel pool, reports Xinhua news agency, quoting Tokyo Electric Power Company (TEPCO).
Accumulating on the first basement level of the reactor building, the leaked water led to a rise in the level of contaminated water already present in the area, TEPCO introduced on Tuesday, confirming that the contaminated water had not escaped outside the reactor building.
The leak was first identified last Friday when a decrease in the water level of the surge tank was detected, according to TEPCO, which, upon further investigation, discovered water flowing into a drain in a room on the third floor of the reactor building…………………………. https://energy.economictimes.indiatimes.com/amp/news/japan-radioactive-water-leaks-reported-at-crippled-fukushima-power-plant/112522815?fbclid=IwY2xjawErZw1leHRuA2FlbQIxMQABHSWwmPKOPQUA1lBz87XbNFrQ3wk0wpyhN7qtxdfQuEx-DbXmtfHad_QMGg_aem_4DBCWO0jAgCiBqQbTvKONA
Fire sparks Georgia nuclear plant alert, but officials say no safety threat as reactors unaffected
Georgia’s largest nuclear plant declared an emergency alert Tuesday
after an electrical transformer caught fire. The fire, described as small
by Georgia Power Co. spokesperson John Kraft, broke out about noon and
could have threatened the electrical supply to the heating and cooling
system for the control room of one of the complex’s two older nuclear
reactors, Vogtle Unit 2.
AP News 13th Aug 2024
Wildfire closes 20+ miles of highway across Hanford nuclear site Saturday night
ICHLAND, WA More than 20 miles of Highway 240 across the Hanford nuclear site and part of Highway 24 was closed by a wildfire for a few hours starting at 6 p.m. Saturday. Wind gusts of up to 26 mph in the area fanning the flames Saturday night.
The Hanford site alerted its employees that Highway 240, sometimes called the Hanford highway, was closed from Highway 225 north of Benton City to the intersection with Highway 24. The highway runs between the section of the nuclear reservation closed to the public and Hanford Reach National Monument land, including Rattlesnake Mountain, also closed to the public. Highway 24 was closed from the Vernita Bridge across the Columbia River to the Silver Dollar cafe, according to Hanford officials.
About 7 p.m. the Washington state Department of Transportation announced the Highway 24 closure but both roadways reopened a few hours later. No information about the specific location of the size of the fire was immediately available.
New blast at Europe’s largest nuclear plant in Ukraine
EUROPE’S largest nuclear plant was attacked by drones again today,
posing no direct threat to its safety but underscoring the “extremely
serious situation” at the facility in Ukraine, the United Nations has
said. The International Atomic Energy Agency said its team was aware of an
explosion at a training centre next to the Zaporizhzhia Nuclear Power Plant
today.
Morning Star 9th April 2024
https://morningstaronline.co.uk/article/new-blast-europes-largest-nuclear-plant-ukraine
Attacks on Ukrainian nuclear facilities ‘must cease immediately’: UN atomic watchdog
United Nations, 8 April 2024, Peace and Security 8 Apr 24
The head of the UN nuclear watchdog agency reiterated that attacks against nuclear power plants in Ukraine are “an absolute no go”, following direct military action targeting the Zaporizhzhya Nuclear Power Plant (ZNPP) on Sunday.
Rafael Grossi, Director General of the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA), said the targeting marked a “major escalation” in the level of danger facing the power plant.
It was the first time since Russia’s full-scale invasion of Ukraine in February 2022 that the ZNPP – Europe’s largest nuclear power plant – has been directly targeted. It has been occupied by Russian forces since the early weeks of the fighting.
As of Sunday, while there were “no indications” of damage to critical nuclear safety or security systems, the strikes were “another stark reminder” of the threats to the power plant and other nuclear facilities during the ongoing war, IAEA said.
“Although the damage at unit 6 has not compromised nuclear safety, this was a serious incident that had the potential to undermine the integrity of the reactor’s containment system,” Director General Grossi said.
‘A major escalation’
“This is a major escalation of the nuclear safety and security dangers facing the Zaporizhzhya Nuclear Power Plant. Such reckless attacks significantly increase the risk of a major nuclear accident and must cease immediately,” Mr. Grossi said.
Reiterating that no one can “conceivably benefit” or get any military or political advantage from attacks against nuclear facilities, he stressed such attacks are “an absolute no go”.
“I firmly appeal to military decision makers to abstain from any action violating the basic principles that protect nuclear facilities.”
At least one casualty
According to IAEA, after receiving information from the ZNPP about the drone attacks, its experts stationed at the site went to three affected locations.
They were able to confirm the physical impact of the drone detonations, including at one of the site’s six reactor buildings where surveillance and communication equipment appeared to have been the target.
While they were at the roof of the reactor, Russian troops engaged what appeared to be an approaching drone, the agency said, adding that this was followed by an explosion near the reactor building.
“The IAEA team reported that they observed remnants of drones at this and two other impact locations at the site. At one of them, outside a laboratory, they saw blood stains next to a damaged military logistics vehicle, indicating at least one casualty,” it said.
IAEA experts further reported hearing explosions and rifle fire on the site throughout the day. The team also heard several rounds of outgoing artillery fire from near the plant………………………… https://news.un.org/en/story/2024/04/1148346—
What are the risks at Zaporizhzhia nuclear power plant after drone attack?
By Guy Faulconbridge and Francois Murphy, April 8, 2024, https://www.reuters.com/world/europe/nuclear-power-plant-eye-ukraine-war-2024-04-08/
MOSCOW/VIENNA, – Russia said Ukraine struck the Zaporizhzhia nuclear power station controlled by Russian forces three times on Sunday and demanded the West respond, though Kyiv said it had nothing to do with the attacks.
The International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) has long warned of the risks of a disaster at Zaporizhzhia, Europe’s largest nuclear plant, and urged an end to fighting in the area.
The plant is just 500 km (300 miles) from the site of the world’s worst nuclear accident, the 1986 Chornobyl disaster.
What nuclear material is at the Zaporizhzhia plant, what are the risks and why are Russia and Ukraine fighting over it?
WHAT IS IT AND WHAT WAS ITS CAPACITY?
The Zaporizhzhia nuclear power plant has six Soviet-designed VVER-1000 V-320 water-cooled and water-moderated reactors containing Uranium 235. They were all built in the 1980s, though the sixth only came online in the mid-1990s after the collapse of the Soviet Union.
All but one of the reactors are in cold shutdown. Reactor unit 4 is in “hot shutdown”, mainly for heating purposes.
IAEA Director General Rafael Grossi says that fighting a war around a nuclear plant has put nuclear safety and security in “constant jeopardy”.
WHAT HAPPENED ON APRIL 7?
Russia’s state nuclear corporation, Rosatom, said Ukraine attacked the plant three times on Sunday with drones, first injuring three near a canteen, then attacking a cargo area and then the dome above reactor No. 6.
IAEA experts at the site went to the three locations of the attacks and confirmed there had been an attack.
“Russian troops engaged what appeared to be an approaching drone,” the IAEA said. “This was followed by an explosion near the reactor building.”
“While the team so far has not observed any structural damage to systems, structures, and components important to nuclear safety or security of the plant, they reported observing minor superficial scorching to the top of the reactor dome roof of Unit 6 and scoring of a concrete slab supporting the primary make-up water storage tanks,” the IAEA said.
The IAEA did not say directly who was to blame for the attacks.
A Ukrainian intelligence official said Kyiv had nothing to do with any strikes on the station and suggested they were the work of Russians themselves.
WHAT ARE THE RISKS?
Russian forces took control of the plant in early March 2022, weeks after invading Ukraine. Special Russian military units guard the facility and a unit of Russia’s state nuclear company, Rosatom, runs the plant.
Nuclear reactors’ containment structures like Zaporizhzhia’s are made of steel-lined reinforced concrete designed to withstand the impact of a small plane crash so there is little immediate risk from a minor attack on those structures.
A 1989 study by the U.S. Department of Energy found that the model of containment structure used in Zaporizhzia “exhibits vulnerabilities to the effects of an aircraft crash” and a fighter jet crashing downwards into the dome, where the structure is thinner, could penetrate it, causing concrete chunks and aircraft engine parts to fall inside.
External power lines essential to cooling nuclear fuel in the reactors are a softer potential target. Cooling fuel even in reactors in cold shutdown is necessary to prevent a nuclear meltdown.
Since the war began the plant has lost all external power eight times, most recently in December last year, forcing it to rely on emergency diesel generators for power. Water is also needed to cool fuel.
Pressurised water is used to transfer heat away from the reactors even when they are shut down, and pumped water is also used to cool down removed spent nuclear fuel from the reactors.
Without enough water, or power to pump the water, the fuel could melt down and the zirconium cladding could release hydrogen, which can explode.
WHAT ABOUT THE SPENT FUEL?
Besides the reactors, there is also a dry spent fuel storage facility at the site for used nuclear fuel assemblies, and spent fuel pools at each reactor site that are used to cool down the used nuclear fuel.
Without water supply to the pools, the water evaporates and the temperatures increase, risking a fire that could release a number of radioactive isotopes.
An emission of hydrogen from a spent fuel pool caused an explosion at reactor 4 in Japan’s Fukushima nuclear disaster in 2011.
WHAT HAPPENS IN A MELTDOWN?
A meltdown of the fuel could trigger a fire or explosion that could release a plume of radionuclides into the air which could then spread over a large area.
The Chornobyl accident spread Iodine-131, Caesium-134, Strontium-90 and Caesium-137 across parts of northern Ukraine, Belarus, Russia, northern and central Europe.
Nearly 8.4 million people in Belarus, Russia and Ukraine were exposed to radiation, according to the United Nations. Around 50 deaths are directly attributed to the disaster itself.
But 600,000 “liquidators”, involved in fire-fighting and clean-up operations, were exposed to high doses of radiation. Hundreds of thousands were resettled.
There is mounting evidence that the health impact of the Chornobyl disaster was much more serious than initially presented at the time and in the years following the accident.
Incidence of thyroid cancer in children across swathes of Belarus, Russia and Ukraine increased after the accident. There was a much higher incidence of endocrine disorders, anaemia and respiratory diseases among children in contaminated areas.
Reports: 2 mishaps in LANL’s plutonium facility in one day
In two separate incidents on the same day last month, Los Alamos National Laboratory workers accidentally set off decontamination showers, causing flooding in the lab’s plutonium facility, and a technician stuffed radioactive wipes into a vest pocket and took them home, a government watchdog says. Reports: 2 mishaps in LANL’s plutonium facility in one day
1 This Month
10 June – Assessing Canada’s Investments in Small Modular Nuclear Reactors – https://zoom.us/meeting/register/IiqHA5feRhaEBycOLNTJlA#/registration
Cuba Is Not a Failed State – It Is a Besieged State
PETITION: “Global Appeal to Endorse Palestinian Right of Return of Refugees”
To see nuclear-related stories in greater depth and intensity – go to https://nuclearinformation.wordpress.com
-
Archives
- June 2026 (89)
- May 2026 (306)
- April 2026 (356)
- March 2026 (251)
- February 2026 (268)
- January 2026 (308)
- December 2025 (358)
- November 2025 (359)
- October 2025 (376)
- September 2025 (257)
- August 2025 (319)
- July 2025 (230)
-
Categories
- 1
- 1 NUCLEAR ISSUES
- business and costs
- climate change
- culture and arts
- ENERGY
- environment
- health
- history
- indigenous issues
- Legal
- marketing of nuclear
- media
- opposition to nuclear
- PERSONAL STORIES
- politics
- politics international
- Religion and ethics
- safety
- secrets,lies and civil liberties
- spinbuster
- technology
- Uranium
- wastes
- weapons and war
- Women
- 2 WORLD
- ACTION
- AFRICA
- Atrocities
- AUSTRALIA
- Christina's notes
- Christina's themes
- culture and arts
- Events
- Fuk 2022
- Fuk 2023
- Fukushima 2017
- Fukushima 2018
- fukushima 2019
- Fukushima 2020
- Fukushima 2021
- general
- global warming
- Humour (God we need it)
- Nuclear
- RARE EARTHS
- Reference
- resources – print
- Resources -audiovicual
- Weekly Newsletter
- World
- World Nuclear
- YouTube
-
RSS
Entries RSS
Comments RSS
nuclear-news 