Zaporizhzhia Nuclear Power Plant: The ‘Sum Of All Fears’
Eurasia Review, , By IDN, By Leonam dos Santos Guimarães
Drone attacks on the Zaporizhzhia nuclear power plant, whether carried out by Ukraine or Russia, introduce a new and dangerous dimension to the conflict between the two largest former Soviet Socialist Republics, with possible far-reaching ramifications, not just for the region immediately surrounding the largest nuclear power plant in Europe, but also for all European Union countries and, more broadly, for the international community.
The biggest concern is the potential risk of a severe nuclear accident, which could have dire effects not only on Ukraine and Russia, but also on neighboring countries. The release of radioactive material knows no borders, and a contaminated cloud could spread across multiple nations depending on weather conditions, putting public health and the environment at risk on a significant scale.
The consequences of attacks on nuclear facilities are potentially severe and vast. A nuclear accident can result in the contamination of large areas, affecting land, water and wildlife, with lasting consequences for the environment and human health. It could also force mass evacuations of affected areas, creating humanitarian and refugee crises. In addition to the direct costs of cleanup and containment, a nuclear disaster can have a substantial economic impact on agriculture, land use, and public health.
Containing a leak at a nuclear power plant is a highly complex and challenging operation, depending on several factors. These include the type of damage to the reactor or other critical parts of the facility, as well as the amount and type of radioactive material released.
A plant’s ability to contain a leak depends on its design, existing safety systems, and how well those systems can handle the specific type of accident. The effectiveness of the immediate response, including confining the area, evacuating personnel, and implementing decontamination measures, is crucial to minimizing the impacts of a spill. The availability of technical, human, and financial resources to manage the situation is essential. This also includes international support, as seen after the Chernobyl accident and the Fukushima disaster.
Several factors
The scope of a nuclear accident in Europe will depend on several factors, including the direction and speed of the wind, which determine the dispersion of radioactive particles in the atmosphere, the amount of material released, which the greater the amount, the larger the area potentially affected, and the effectiveness of containment and decontamination measures, which can significantly limit the scope of contamination………………………………………………………….
The possibility that such attacks could trigger a third world war is a serious and plausible concern. An intricate web of military alliances, geopolitical interests and containment strategies influences the dynamics of the current conflict. Attacks against nuclear facilities are perceived as significant escalations of conflict. If considered acts of war, they may justify severe retaliation. The nature and extent of such retaliations would depend on many factors, including the international perception of the incident and the strategic decisions of major world powers.
The risk of a third world war
The involvement of NATO members providing support to Ukraine further complicates the situation. While NATO has been careful in its approach to avoid direct escalation with Russia, the line between support and direct involvement is fine and delicate. Preventing an escalation into a broader conflict will likely depend on intense diplomatic efforts and attempts at de-escalation by all parties involved……………………………………………….. https://www.eurasiareview.com/14042024-zaporizhzhia-nuclear-power-plant-the-sum-of-all-fears-oped/
Ukraine: Briefing on the Zaporizhzhia Nuclear Power Plant
On Monday afternoon (15 April), the Security Council will convene for an
open briefing under the “Threats to international peace and security”
agenda item. Slovenia and the US—the co-penholders on political issues in
Ukraine—supported by France, requested the meeting, which will focus on
the safety and security of the Zaporizhzhia Nuclear Power Plant (ZNPP) in
the city of Enerhodar.
It appears that Russia expressed approval for
holding the meeting, noting the alarming nature of the situation at the
nuclear power plant. International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) Director
General Rafael Mariano Grossi is the anticipated briefer. Ukraine is
expected to participate under rule 37 of the Council’s provisional rules of
procedure.
Security Council Report 12th April 2024
Towards an international regulatory framework for AI safety: lessons from the IAEA’s nuclear safety regulations
- Seokki Cha , Nature, Humanities and Social Sciences Communications volume 11, Article number: 506 (2024)
Abstract
This study explores the necessity and direction of safety regulations for Artificial Intelligence (AI), drawing parallels from the regulatory practices of the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) for nuclear safety. The rapid advancement and global proliferation of AI technologies necessitate the establishment of standardized safety norms to minimize discrepancies between national regulations and enhance the consistency and effectiveness of these rules. The study emphasizes the importance of international collaboration and the engagement of various stakeholders to strengthen the appropriateness of regulations and ensure their continuous updating in response to the evolving risks associated with technological advancements.
The paper highlights the critical role of subgoal setting mechanisms in AI’s decision-making processes, underscoring their significance in ensuring the technology’s stability and social acceptability. Improperly tuned subgoal setting mechanisms may lead to outcomes that conflict with human intentions, posing risks to users and society at large. The study draws attention to the hidden risks often embedded within AI’s core decision-making mechanisms and advocates for regulatory approaches to guarantee safe and predictable AI operations. Furthermore, the study acknowledges the limitations of directly applying IAEA’s nuclear safety cases to AI due to the distinct characteristics and risks of the two fields.
The paper calls for future research to delve deeper into the need for an independent regulatory framework tailored to AI’s unique features. Additionally, the study emphasizes the importance of accelerating international consensus, developing flexible regulatory models that reflect the situation in each country, exploring harmonization with existing regulations, and researching timely regulatory responses to the fast-paced development of AI technology……………………………………………………………………………………………………. more https://www.nature.com/articles/s41599-024-03017-1
‘Unprecedented infestation’ of rats at Dounreay site
‘Unprecedented infestation’ of rats at Dounreay site. Dounreay has had to
bring in a pest control company to deal with an “unprecedented infestation
of rats over the past few months,” according to a safety rep at the site.
Workers, too, have expressed their concerns about the situation with one
saying hundreds were reportedly seen “scurrying away” when pampas
grass-like plants were removed from around the buildings where they were
nesting.
There have been reports of the rats being seen in vehicles, a
kitchen area and near bins, while concerns have been raised about health
implications.
John O’Groat Journal 11th April 2024
https://www.johnogroat-journal.co.uk/news/unprecedented-infestation-of-rats-at-dounreay-site-347661
UN nuclear watchdog’s board sets emergency meeting after Zaporizhzhia attacks
The U.N. nuclear watchdog’s Board of Governors will hold an emergency
meeting on Thursday at the request of both Ukraine and Russia to discuss
attacks on the Zaporizhzhia Nuclear Power Plant, after the enemies accused
each other of drone attacks. The International Atomic Energy Agency has
said drones struck the Russian-held facility in southern Ukraine on Sunday,
hitting one reactor building. It has not ascribed blame but has demanded
such attacks stop.
Reuters 10th April 2024
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
Nuclear power plants in war zones: Lessons learned from the war in Ukraine
Joanna Przybylak, SECURITY and DEFENCE Quarterly, April 2024
ABSTRACT
The aim of this paper is to examine the lessons learned till mid-2023 from the war in Ukraine to find out how attacking or seizing nuclear power plants (NPPs) can be utilised to advance military and political objectives during an armed conflict.
The qualitative research approach has been applied to the study, focusing on an analysis of academic research and relevant acts of international law. In order to examine Russia’s approach to the attacks against the Chernobyl and Zaporizhzhia NPPs, numerous reports, official statements by the authorities, press releases, and Internet sources have been analysed.
For evaluation of nuclear security and safety standards in Ukraine, the “seven pillars” model proposed by the International Atomic Energy Agency has been adopted. The study indicates that strategically located NPPs can be used as “nuclear shields” for the occupying forces deployed at the plant or nearby. They may also become useful tools of “lawfare” waged with the use of flawed interpretations of international humanitarian law.
Finally, nuclear security-related narrations analysed in the paper clearly prove that seized NPPs can be effectively used in information warfare. The research leads to the conclusion that civil NPPs in war zones can be weaponised and exploited by the hostile forces not only for impeding energy supplies (and thus shattering the public morale of the adversary) but also for blackmailing and coercing the decisionmakers of the attacked state and their international allies with a vision of man-made nuclear disaster……………………………………………………………………………………………………..
Ukrainian artillery cuts last backup power line to Zaporozhye Nuclear Power Plant
Steven Starr, April 6, 2024
The fuel rods within the reactor core and in the spent fuel pools will continue to emit a large amount of heat (from the continuous decay of fission products within the fuel) even after the reactors are in a “cold shutdown”. Thus, electric power is required to run the cooling systems in the spent fuel ponds and the pumps that push cooling water through the reactors. If no offsite electricity is available, diesel generators are required to generate electricity to operate the pumps to cool the reactor and the cooling systems that cool the spent fuel pools.
A prolonged failure of the cooling systems (from loss of electric power) to continuously remove heat from the spent fuels will eventually cause the water in the pools to boil off and expose the spent fuel rods to steam and/or air. Exposure of the fuel rods to steam and/or air will cause them to overheat to the point of rupture or ignition, leading to the massive release of radioactivity. (The Soviet-designed reactors have their spent fuel pools inside the primary containment, unlike US reactors that locate spent fuel pools outside primary containment).
The fuel inside the steel reactor containment vessels must also be cooled (by pumping cooling water through the containment vessel). Failure of the cooling pumps to circulate water through the core will lead to the water in the containment vessel to superheat and eventually lead to the damage of the fuel rods, which would release large amounts of highly radioactive fission products.
Offsite power to the Zaporozhye Nuclear Power Plant (ZNPP) has historically been provided by the Zaporozhye Thermal Power Station, which is located several kilometers away from the ZNPP. I think the damage to backup power line from Ukrainian artillery fire refers to the destruction of the power lines and power transformers that connect the Thermal Power Station to ZNPP.
Russia urges IAEA to publicly reveal Ukrainian attacks on nuclear plant
https://www.rt.com/russia/595516-russia-iaea-zaporozhye-attacks/ 6 Apr 24
The Zaporozhye NPP lost the connection to its last remaining backup power line after artillery fire was heard in the vicinity
Moscow has appealed to the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA), urging it to publicly record the recurring attacks by the Ukrainian army on the Zaporozhye Nuclear Power Plant.
The plant is Europe’s largest atomic power station, with six reactor cores capable of generating a gigawatt of electricity each. The plant came under Moscow’s control in 2022, early on in the Ukraine conflict, and was formally transferred to Rosatom management after Zaporozhye Region was incorporated into Russia following a referendum. Kiev claimed it was illegally occupied and insisted that Russia kept heavy weapons at the plant and was attacking Ukrainian forces from it.
Kiev has since targeted the facility with artillery, missile, and drone attacks, and has sent armed groups to try and seize it. Earlier this week, the NPP lost the connection to its only remaining back-up power line, a key source of the electricity it needs to cool its reactors, with the IAEA team on the ground reporting that it heard “numerous rounds of artillery fire” in the vicinity of the plant. On Friday, the NPP wrote on Telegram that it has been repeatedly attacked by Ukrainian drones recently.
Russian Foreign Ministry spokeswoman Maria Zakharova warned Kiev on Friday against further attacks on the plant, noting that they could harm critical infrastructure and destabilize the facility. She also appealed to the IAEA to make the recent attacks and their perpetrators known to the public.
“We strongly urge the IAEA and its leadership to actively use the experts present at the station to publicly record all cases of attacks from the Ukrainian side and clearly state where the threat to the safe operation of this facility really comes from,” she said in a statement.
In a statement to TASS late Friday, the IAEA said it was aware of the reported attacks and was studying them, but refused to give any further details.
The IAEA deployed a permanent on-site monitoring mission to the plant in September 2022, but has repeatedly declined to publicly assess the incidents involving the facility or name Ukraine as the perpetrator.
Experts from the agency said the plant is now entirely dependent on the only remaining 750-kilowatt line for off-site power. The NPP reported that the loss of connection to the backup power line is being investigated, and noted that the radiation background at the station and the surrounding area so far remains unchanged.
Mystery of America’s first fatal nuclear disaster – explosion of small nuclear reactor
– with rumors still rife over 60 years later that explosion in remote Idaho town was triggered by one man’s murderous rage amid LOVE TRIANGLE
COMMENT. The accident never got the same attention as Three Mile Island (1979), Chernobyl (1986) or Fukushima (2011). But the sensational story behind it lives in infamy, even though some experts believe it may have been made up by government officials.
- It happened at the Stationary Low-Power Plant Number 1 (SL-1) in January 1961
- All three technicians there died during routine maintenance on the lab’s reactor
- The trio were eventually retrieved, at the cost of 790 being exposed to radiation
The first half of the video above spells out the technical details – the second half describes the deaths, and the autopsies, mutilation of bodies, and disposal of highly radioactive body parts. Final report showed the flaws in the reactor and its procedures, which were the underlying cause of this disaster.
By ALEX HAMMER FOR DAILYMAIL.COM, 7 April 2024
The SL-1 accident is the only fatal nuclear reactor event to ever occur on US soil.
An earth-shattering explosion at the Stationary Low-Power Plant Number 1 (SL-1) in January 1961 saw all three technicians on staff killed during what was meant to be routine maintenance of the government lab’s nuclear reactor.
Following a painstaking operation, the men’s bodies were retrieved – at the cost of 790 others being exposed to radiation out in Idaho‘s Lost River desert
The three men were then wrapped in hundred pounds of lead, interned in steel coffins and buried under a slab of concrete to prevent any further spread. The lab was also considered lost and was buried a few hundred yards away.
But rumors surrounding the incident still swirl today, with some speculating the disaster was in fact a murder-suicide triggered by a sordid squabble after one of the crew members engaged in an affair with another’s wife.
Indeed, one report claims that the man responsible for the explosion had received a phone call from his wife asking for a divorce just minutes earlier – while the co-worker accused of sleeping with his wife was later found pinned to the ceiling directly above the blown reactor.
The explosion occurred at the Stationary Low-Power Plant Number 1 (SL-1) in January 1961, and saw three technicians on staff killed. A subsequent report from the United States Atomic Energy Commission suggested the meltdown may not have been the result of an error.
Army Specialists Jack Byrnes, 22, and Richard McKinley, 26, and Navy Seabee Richard Legg, 26 were tasked with manning the remote laboratory’s desolate halls, and all died in the blast. AEC special investigator Leo Miazga implied Legg was sleeping with Byrnes’ wife
………………………………………………….The Stationary Low-Power Plant was constructed at the National Reactor Testing Station, now known as Idaho National Laboratory, some 40 miles west of Idaho Falls.
Eight miles south was the aptly named Atomic City, which today boasts a population of around 40, despite – and perhaps due – to its hazardous history……………………..
reactors were designed to be small, lightweight, and easy to maintain – capable of operating for three years without refueling.
But these reactors – powered by boiling water – incorporated several new technologies, many of which required regular maintenance.
New practices at the plant included the use of enriched uranium fuel and burnable poison strips (BPS) to prolong core life, and five control rods from the typical 20 to 50 to simplify maintenance.
Inadequately tested technologies commonly exhibited operational malfunctions, NASA scientists wrote in a 2007 report – citing a phenomenon known as control rod ‘stickiness’ in particular.
The toxic spewing event of 1961 occurred after an 11-day maintenance shutdown at the lab over the Christmas holiday, only a half a year into its lifetime.
It is believed the explosion was triggered when technicians attempted a manual rod travel exercise after a control rod exhibited ‘stickiness’ – a term that refers to when a rod catches more neutrons than usual, creating less energy……………………………………………..
Fewer rods, however, means more bags of balls splitting – a theory that unfortunately became a reality for the three men on duty the night of January 3, 1961.
While performing a basic maintenance procedure – attaching the control rods to the control rod drive mechanism – Byrnes was tasked with manually lifting the control rod about four inches before attaching it to the mechanism.
However, the young technician is said to have raised the central rod to a height of 20 inches in 0.5 seconds – causing the reactor to go ‘supercritical’ in just four milliseconds.
The core power level surged to 20,000 megawatts – 6,000 times the rated power output.
The heat generated by the power surge vaporized the water powering core and keeping it cool, while hammering steam into the top of the reactor.
This caused an explosion of colossal proportions, and the 26,000-pound reactor to lift nine feet off the ground.
Photos from the investigation that followed show the control rod lodged in the ceiling of the SL-1 Reactor building – now buried in the Idaho desert.
Autopsies showed that Byrnes and Legg died instantly, while McKinley – whose wife was pregnant at the time- exhibited signs of diffuse bleeding within his scalp, indicating he survived for some two hours before succumbing to his wounds.
Legg, meanwhile, had been impaled by a heavy shield plug propelled by the blast with a velocity of 85 feet per second, with officials finding both him and the debris pinned to the ceiling.
All three men died of physical trauma – all of which was incurred from a chain reaction in the uranium fuel that caused temperatures to soar to more than 3,600 degrees.
A rescue operation was eventually launched, though with the highly toxic core exposed, another crisis akin the one seen a quarter century later in Chernobyl was also occurring.
Unaware, first responders responding to an alarm at first thought nothing was afoot – because, at first glance, the reactor building’s exterior looked normal.
There had also been two false alarms tripped earlier in the day, further quelling suspicions.
That quickly changed when they entered the building – after which their radiation detectors immediately went off.
Levels of 25 roentgens (r) were recorded, causing an evacuation – despite whole body doses of 1,000r typically being considered a death sentence.
Still, any whole-body radiation dose can increase a person’s lifetime risk of fatal cancer, and the levels left lingering were roughly the equivalent of undergoing 5,000 consecutive chest X-rays.
The rescuers thus rotated trips inside to reduce risks to their safety – rushing in with hazmat suits in 65-second intervals.
Eventually, the men’s bodies were recovered, but they remained highly radioactive.
Such radiation can take centuries to dissipate – so the military men’s especially stricken parts, their hands and organs, had to be removed and buried along with wreckage from the lab site.
The rest of the remains were shipped off to their families, and like the debris, were buried in lead-lined coffins beneath layers of concrete in each of their hometowns…………………………………………………………………………………………… https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-13271859/mystery-america-nuclear-disaster-idaho-love-triangle-murder-suicide.html
EDF confirms cracks on 1.3 GW Paluel 2 reactor
(Montel) EDF has found cracks on its Paluel 2 (1.3 GW) nuclear reactor in the north of France, a company spokeswoman told Montel on Friday, confirming prior comments by the firm’s executive director Cedric Lewandowski.
Reporting by: Caroline Pailliez, 05 Apr 2024, https://montelnews.com/news/df0e8352-e018-4d1d-af96-63266d385d3c/edf-confirms-corrosion-cracks-on-paluel-2-1-3-gw-reactor
Questioned by a parliamentary committee late on Thursday, Lewandowski said the French state-run firm had “recently” found traces of corrosion at its Blayais 4 (910 MW) and Paluel 2 reactors. He gave no further details.
Contacted by Montel, an EDF spokeswoman confirmed the firm had found cracks at the Paluel unit but refused to provide any other details such as when and where the corrosion was found or whether repairs were underway.
“The possibility of carrying out this type of repair on shutdowns scheduled for 2024 is included in our production forecasts,” she added.
Paluel 2 has been offline for maintenance and refueling since 2 February. The outage was initially scheduled to last 98 days but EDF warned last week the shutdown could be extended up to a “total of 135 days”.
The reactor is currently due to return to service on 10 May.
The news comes after EDF confirmed last month that a 30-day outage extension at its Blayais 4 (910 MW) reactor was due to corrosion.
“No surprise”
Lewandowski told the committee in the upper house that the “recent discovery” of corrosion at Blayais 4 and Paluel 2 “came as no surprise”.
Having checked France’s newest reactors, which it said were most susceptible to corrosion, the firm was now probing older units, such as at Blayais and Paluel, he said, adding EDF knew it would also find cracks of “lesser importance” on those units.
Corrosion was “still with us” and “would be until 2025” when the firm was due to complete its probe of France’s 56 reactors, he said.
“Fortunately, we are now in the process of mastering it… Our construction sites are getting faster and faster, our ability to understand the phenomenon is now almost total.”
EDF warned in December it might have to extend one in three planned outages for around 30 days on average at 13 reactors this year and 13 reactors in 2025, based on the probability of finding corrosion on units yet to be examined.
The issue has dogged the company, with reactor outages jumping 47% in 2022 due to problems at numerous units, with output plunging to a 33-year low of 279 TWh.
Edited by: Chris Eales, Robin Newbold
TEPCO plans new installations at Fukushima nuclear plant, to deal with radioactive leakage
In the wake of recent contaminated water leakage at Japan’s Fukushima
Daiichi Nuclear Power Plant, the plant’s operator Tokyo Electric Power
Company (TEPCO) has announced its plan for new installations as a
preventive measure, local media reported.
TEPCO is expected to install new
piping and ventilation ports designed to guide any spewing liquid to fall
within the building, thereby containing the spread of contamination,
national news agency Kyodo reported, citing the company’s announcement on
Friday. The construction is slated to commence on Monday and is expected to
be completed by the end of the month, according to the operator.
CGTN 6th April 2024
1 This Month
Website of the Week
New book – https://www.amazon.com/dp/1923372157?utm_source=substack&utm_medium=email
Now until to February 10, 2026 Radioactive waste storage in France: the debate is finally open! How to participate?
-
Archives
- January 2026 (138)
- December 2025 (358)
- November 2025 (359)
- October 2025 (377)
- September 2025 (258)
- August 2025 (319)
- July 2025 (230)
- June 2025 (348)
- May 2025 (261)
- April 2025 (305)
- March 2025 (319)
- February 2025 (234)
-
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 