Here’s why the risk of a nuclear accident in Ukraine has ‘significantly increased’
https://www.wboi.org/npr-news/npr-news/2022-09-09/heres-why-the-risk-of-a-nuclear-accident-in-ukraine-has-significantly-increased By Geoff Brumfiel, September 9, 2022, The head of the International Atomic Energy Agency is warning that the risk of a nuclear accident at the Zaporizhzhia nuclear power plant has “significantly increased,” following ongoing fighting around the site.
“Let me be clear, the shelling around Zaporizhzhia nuclear plant must stop,” IAEA Director General Rafael Mariano Grossi said in a brief recorded statement released on Friday.
Grossi also warned that the continued fighting might require the plant to shut down its last operating reactor. That would set into motion a chain of events that could intensify the current nuclear crisis. Here’s how.
Nuclear plants need electricity
The Zaporizhzhia nuclear plant is the largest in Europe, capable of producing thousands of megawatts of electricity. But the plant also needs power from the same electricity grid it feeds.
The power is used to run the various parts of the plant, including its safety and cooling systems. Specifically, nuclear power plants require water to be pumped constantly through their cores in order to function safely, and the pumps need electricity.
At Zaporizhzhia, the power is normally supplied by four high-voltage lines, which connect the nuclear complex to Ukraine’s electricity grid, but the conflict has seen those lines systematically cut. The last 750kV line was severed on September 3, according to the IAEA.
A backup line was disconnected two days later due to a fire on the site. In a press conference shortly after returning from Zaporizhzhia, Grossi told reporters that he believed the power lines were being deliberately targeted:
Zaporizhzhia has been making its own power, but that’s a limited solution
Since losing its last connection to the grid on Sept. 5, the nuclear plant has been powering itself in so-called “islanding operation mode.” Under this setup, the Unit 6 reactor has been producing low levels of electricity that are running the rest of the facility.
The reactors at Zaporizhzhia are designed to operate in this mode during startup, according to a nuclear engineer who worked directly with the reactors when the plant began operations in the 1980s, but who was not authorized to speak publicly by his current employer.
“It’s not good, it cannot be done for a long time,” he says. The problem is less to do with the reactor itself than the turbine, generators and other systems–all of which are designed to run at significantly higher power levels than islanding operation mode provides.
Adding to the problem, Grossi said in his statement, is the increasing strain on the plant’s Ukrainian operators. Many of the plant’s current staff of just under 1,000 live in the nearby town of Enerhodar. Its water, sewage and electrical supplies have all been disrupted in recent days by the same fighting that’s damaged the lines around the plant.
“The shelling is putting in danger operators and their families, making it difficult to adequately staff the plant,” Grossi says.
Shutting down the last reactor will trigger emergency generators
With conditions deteriorating, it seems more likely that Ukrainian authorities will decide to power down the last reactor. But in the short term, that could exacerbate the crisis.
That’s because nuclear reactors are more like charcoal grills than gas stoves. Even after they’re shut off, they remain hot for a long period of time. Water must still circulate in the cores to prevent a meltdown.
With its reactors shut down, Zaporizhzhia will switch to backup emergency diesel generators to keep the reactors cool. The emergency generators themselves are a tried-and-true method for cooling a nuclear reactor. In fact, the Nuclear Regulatory Commission requires U.S. plants to switch to emergency diesel generators immediately, bypassing the “islanding operation mode” used in Zaporizhzhia.
“We don’t want to go on the diesel generators, but it’s a situation you can abide by for awhile,” says Steven Nesbit, a nuclear engineer and member of the American Nuclear Society’s rapid response taskforce, which is tracking the current crisis. For example, after losing power during Hurricane Andrew in 1992, the Turkey Point Nuclear Plant in Florida operated for days on emergency diesel power.
If the generators run out of fuel, a meltdown could occur
Continue readingUK and Europe cannot depend on nuclear power, with reactors shutting down, just as winter hits.
The first real winter test of how strained the UK’s energy supplies are will come next month when nuclear reactors start closing for maintenance, just as the heating season kicks off.
Nuclear output makes up roughly 15% of Britain’s energy mix, and the planned shutdowns may challenge
electricity production when the country can least afford it. Two units at n the Heysham plant in northern England are set to halt for periods between October and November, and more nuclear closures are scheduled through winter.
European power prices have surged amid an energy crisis linked to soaring gas costs caused by Russia’s war in Ukraine. While early winter weather is expected to be mild, the UK grid risks becoming particularly
tight as it gets colder, with the country exporting power to France because of major outages at reactors there.
Bloomberg 7th Sept 2022
Back-up power lines restored to the shut-down Zaporizhzhia nuclear power station
Ukrainian operators of the Zaporizhzhia nuclear power station won’t restart
the plant until its occupying Russian forces leave the facility, the head
of Ukraine’s nuclear agency, Petro Kotin, tells NPR.
Ukrainian workers powered down the war-damaged plant last weekend for safety reasons amid
continued shelling. On Tuesday, workers finished restoring all three backup
power lines — a sliver of good news at the plant that officials and
energy experts have warned could face a catastrophe as fighting continues
around it.
Still, the situation remains tense and unpredictable at
Zaporizhzhia — Europe’s largest nuclear plant, which has been occupied by
Russian troops since early March but is operated mostly by Ukrainian staff
— and concerns about the risk of a nuclear disaster are still looming as
fighting picked up in that part of southern Ukraine.
NPR 15th Sept 2022
https://www.npr.org/2022/09/15/1122908577/ukraine-zaporizhzhia-nuclear-power-plant-operator-russia
40% of Japan’s nuclear plant staff lack experiences of reactivation
By Takashi Maemura and Ayaka Matsuo / Yomiuri Shimbun Staff Writers, September 18, 2022
Nearly 40% of the operations staff at the seven electric power companies that have not yet restarted their nuclear power plants since 2011 have no experience with reactors, a Yomiuri Shimbun survey found.
That group includes Tokyo Electric Power Company Holdings, Inc., the operator of the Fukushima No. 1 nuclear power plant that had an accident during the March 11, 2011, earthquake and tsunami.
Because progress to restart their reactors has been slow, these power companies have sought to maintain their personnel’s skills by dispatching staff to nuclear power plants and thermal power plants operated by other companies.
Currently, only Kansai Electric Power Co., Kyushu Electric Power Co. and Shikoku Electric Power Co. have been able to restart some reactors…………………………………..
Chugoku Electric Power Co.’s Shimane nuclear power plant Reactor No. 2, which is currently shut down, has passed the Nuclear Regulation Authority’s safety examinations, which took about seven years and eight months to complete.
However, the Shimane nuclear power plant has been shut down for more than 10 years, and 41 out of its 107 operators, or 38%, have no experience operating a nuclear power plant. In light of this, Chugoku Electric Power has begun training them this fiscal year, asking Makino, a former operator with more than 30 years of experience, to serve as an instructor.
Main power line reconnected to Zaporizhzhia nuclear power plant
One of the Russian-held Zaporizhzhia nuclear power plant’s four main
power lines has been repaired and is supplying the plant with electricity
from the Ukrainian grid two weeks after it went down, the UN nuclear
watchdog has said.
Even though the six reactors at Zaporizhzhia, Europe’s
biggest nuclear power plant, have been shut down, the fuel in them still
needs cooling to avoid a potentially catastrophic meltdown. The plant
therefore needs electricity to pump water through the reactors’ core. The
power supply at Zaporizhzhia has been a source of concern after the last
main line went down and three backup lines that can connect it to a nearby
coal-fired power plant were also disconnected.
Guardian 17th Sept 2022
France sends reprocessed nuclear fuel to Japan, despite environmental and safety dangers
https://japantoday.com/category/national/france-sends-latest-nuclear-shipment-to-japan CHERBOURG, France 18 Sept 22
Two ships carrying reprocessed nuclear fuel destined for Japan set sail Saturday morning from northern France, an AFP photographer said, despite criticism from environmental campaigners.
The fuel was due to leave the northern French port city of Cherbourg earlier this month but was delayed by the breakdown of loading equipment.
Environmental activists have denounced the practice of transporting such highly radioactive materials, calling it irresponsible.
The previous transport of MOX fuel to Japan in September 2021 drew protests from environmental group Greenpeace.
MOX fuel is a mixture of reprocessed plutonium and uranium.
“The Pacific Heron and Pacific Egret, the specialised ships belonging to British company PNTL, left Cherbourg harbor on September 17. They will ensure the shipment of MOX nuclear fuel to Japan,” French nuclear technology group Orano said in a statement Saturday.
They are bound for Japan for use in a power plant and Orano said it expected the shipment to arrive in November.
Japan lacks facilities to process waste from its own nuclear reactors and sends most of it overseas, particularly to France.
The operation was carried out “successfully”, Orano said, and it is the second shipment that arrived in Cherbourg from a plant in La Hague, located 20 kilometers away, after the first came on September 7.
Yannick Rousselet of Greenpeace France previously denounced the shipment.
“Transporting such dangerous materials from a nuclear proliferation point of view is completely irresponsible,” he said last month.
MOX is composed of 92 percent uranium oxide and eight percent plutonium oxide, according to Orano.
The plutonium “is not the same as that used by the military,” it said.
Sendai and Genkai nuclear power stations in the path of powerful Typhoon Nanmadol
Strong Typhoon Nanmadol feared to hit southwest Japan’s Kyushu on Sept. 18
Close to Sendai and Genkai nuclear power stations
Record-breaking rainfall+violent winds – peak gusts at 270kph
FUKUOKA https://mainichi.jp/english/articles/20220917/p2a/00m/0na/010000c
Large and powerful Typhoon Nanmadol is predicted to approach southwestern Japan’s Kyushu region and make landfall there between Sept. 18 and 19.
According to the Japan Meteorological Agency (JMA), the 14th typhoon of the year was moving northwestward at a speed of about 20 kilometers per hour over the sea some 190 kilometers east of Minamidaito Island at 9 a.m. on Sept. 17. The tropical storm had a central atmospheric pressure of 910 hectopascals. The maximum sustained wind speed near its center was 198 kph, with peak gusts at 270 kph. Violent winds at a speed of 90 kph or more were recorded within a 185-km radius on the east and a 150-km radius on the west of the storm’s center.
Many parts of Japan may be affected by the typhoon for extended periods of time as it is moving slowly while maintaining its strength. It is feared that the storm could cause record-breaking rainfall and violent winds through Sept. 19, the last day of the three-day weekend, primarily in west Japan and along the Pacific coast of east Japan. The JMA is calling on people to refrain from unnecessary outings.
(Japanese original by Azusa Yamazaki, Kyushu News Department)
Mishandling of Classified Nuclear Documents Is Bad. Mishandling of the Sole Authority to Use Nuclear Weapons Would Be Much Worse.
Union of Concerned Scientists, Eryn MacDonald, 9 Sept 22, Headlines about the discovery of nuclear weapons-related materials in the trove of highly classified documents that former President Trump stashed at his private residence in Mar-a-Lago are not exactly confidence inspiring. The fact that a former president simply walked off with information at the highest levels of classification leaving it unguarded for more than a year should raise alarms for anyone who is concerned about national security.
But if you think it’s unbelievable that it was so easy to sidestep the safeguards and procedures in place to ensure that some of the most secret information known to our government was not packed up and stuck in a basement, I’ve got even worse news for you. Because the process to order the launch of US nuclear weapons has fewer safeguards and would require no sidestepping, leaving it even more vulnerable to the whims of an unstable leader. That decision is put in the hands of a single individual—the president—while the rest of us all just have to cross our fingers and hope that they take this responsibility more seriously than the former president took his responsibility to safeguard those classified documents.
The process that the United States has now for making decisions about the use of nuclear weapons is called “sole authority.” It is an outdated artifact of an earlier time that now carries more risks than benefits. ……………
sole authority intentionally includes no checks and balances. No requirement to consult with advisers or Congress. There is also no one with the legal authority to countermand the order if the president does decide to launch…….. And once missiles are launched, there is no going back—they cannot be called back or ordered to self-destruct.
The good news: we can fix it
Times have changed since the decision was made to give the president sole authority over the decision to launch a nuclear attack. Communications systems have improved immensely. And despite the deterioration of US-Russian relations, a surprise Russian nuclear attack on the US homeland is still not a realistic concern these days. And, the US now has a fleet of nuclear ballistic missile submarines that are essentially invulnerable when they are hidden on patrol in the ocean, rendering the need for split-second nuclear launch decisions obsolete.
Unfortunately, the nuclear launch decision-making system has not kept pace with the times. The good news, however, is that it would be an easy fix, that we could implement very quickly. There have been many suggestions of how this could be done, including a proposal by some of my colleagues at UCS.
The UCS proposal would require that the president obtain the consent of two other high-level officials in the presidential line of succession—for example, the vice president and the speaker of the House—to carry out any order to launch a nuclear attack. …………….
The time to change the system is now..…………………………….
We do not have the luxury of waiting for “lessons learned.” We must take the only opportunity we have to change this outdated, undemocratic, and dangerous system—now. Making this change permanent would require action from Congress, but that is no reason to delay the immediate steps that we can take. UCS and many others, including members of Congress, have already asked President Biden to change the decision-making procedures for using nuclear weapons.
You can join us in asking him to take his opportunity to do so, before it is too late.
https://allthingsnuclear.org/emacdonald/mishandling-of-classified-nuclear-documents/
Zaporizhzhia’s ‘last working’ nuclear reactor loses power after Russian shelling
SBS News6 Sept 22, The vast Zaporizhzhia nuclear power plant – the largest nuclear power plant in Europe – was captured by Moscow in March, but is still run by Ukrainian staff……….
The imperilled six-reactor facility in southern Ukraine, which is the largest nuclear power plant in Europe, was captured by Moscow in March, but is still run by Ukrainian staff.
“Today, as a result of a fire caused by shelling, the (last working) transmission line was disconnected,” Energoatom said in a statement on Telegram on Monday.
Advertisement
“As a result, (reactor) unit No. 6, which currently supplies the (plant’s) own needs, was unloaded and disconnected from the grid,” it said.
Ukraine was unable to repair the power lines now because of fighting raging around the station, Ukrainian Energy Minister German Galushchenko wrote on Facebook.
“Any repairs of the power lines are currently impossible- fighting is ongoing around the station,” he said……
Two reactors at the plant, number five and six, remain in use but are currently disconnected from the grid.
They have suffered repeated disconnections due to shelling over the last fortnight.
Zaporizhzhia nuclear power station is still under threat
https://www.thenational.scot/news/20899451.zaporizhzhia-nuclear-power-station-still-threat/ By Jane McLeod, 4 Sept 22,
INSPECTORS from the International Atomic Energy Agency are used to risky missions – from the radioactive aftermath of the Fukushima disaster in Japan to the politically-charged Iranian nuclear programme.
But their deployment amid the war in Ukraine to Zaporizhzhia takes the threat to a new level and underscores the lengths to which the organisation will go in attempts to avert a potentially catastrophic nuclear disaster.
The six-month war, sparked by Russia’s invasion of its western neighbour, is forcing international organisations, including the IAEA, to deploy teams during active hostilities in their efforts to impose order around Ukraine’s nuclear power plants, pursue accountability for war crimes and identify the dead.
The Zaporizhzhia plant was once again knocked offline in the early hours yesterday amid sustained shelling that destroyed a key power line and penetrated deep into the plant’s premises, local Russian-backed authorities said.
The IAEA’s mission is meant to help secure the site as Moscow and Kyiv continue to trade blame for shelling at and around the plant.
The plant has repeatedly suffered complete disconnection from Ukraine’s power grid since last week, with the country’s nuclear energy operator Enerhoatom blaming mortar shelling and fires near the site.
Noting that the IAEA sent inspectors to Iraq in 2003 and to the former Soviet Republic of Georgia during fighting, Tariq Rauf, the organisation’s former head of verification and security, said: “This is not the first time that an IAEA team has gone into a situation of armed hostilities. But this situation in Zaporizhzhia, I think it’s the most serious situation where the IAEA has sent people in ever, so it’s unprecedented.”
IAEA director general Rafael Mariano Grossi highlighted the risks on Thursday when he led a team to the sprawling plant in southern Ukraine.
“There were moments when fire was obvious – heavy machine guns, artillery, mortars at two or three times were really very concerning, I would say, for all of us,” he said of his team’s journey through an active war zone to reach the plant.
Speaking to reporters after leaving colleagues inside, he said the agency is “not moving” from the plant from now on, and vowed a “continued presence” of agency experts.
But it remains to be seen what exactly the organisation can accomplish.
Rauf added: “The IAEA cannot force a country to implement or enforce nuclear safety and security standards. They can only advise and then it is up to … the state itself.”
In Ukraine, that is further complicated by the Russian occupation of the power station.
The IAEA is not the only international organisation seeking to locate staff permanently in Ukraine amid the ongoing war.
International Criminal Court prosecutor Karim Khan has visited Ukraine three times, set up an office in the country and sent investigators into a conflict zone to gather evidence amid widespread reports of atrocities. National governments including the Netherlands have sent expert investigators to help the court.
Khan told a United Nations meeting in April: “This is a time when we need to mobilise the law and send it into battle, not on the side of Ukraine against the Russian Federation or on the side of the Russian Federation against Ukraine, but on the side of humanity to protect, to preserve, to shield people … who have certain basic rights.”
Super Typhoon Hinnamnor Could Slam Straight Into Nuclear Power Plant
https://www.newsweek.com/typhoon-hinnamnor-south-korea-kori-nuclear-power-plant-1739947 BY JESS THOMSON ON 9/5/22
The most powerful storm in South Korean history is due to collide with a nuclear power plant.
According to the South Korea Meteorological Administration, Super Typhoon Hinnamnor is due to hit on September 6, and may cause multiple casualties. Kori Nuclear Power Plant, which is in the oncoming path of the Category 5 storm near to industrial city Ulsan, has lowered the run rates of three of its nuclear reactors to less than 30 percent in preparation for the typhoon, according to EnergyVoice.
“We’re now entering a phase where we have to minimize casualties,” Han Sang Un, the chief forecaster at Korea Meteorological Administration, said during a briefing on September 5.
“It’s a massive typhoon with a 400-kilometer (248.5 miles) radius, which is big enough to cover Seoul to Busan. Most regions in Korea will experience intense rain and wind,” he said.
Typhoon Sarah, which hit South Korea in 1959, and Typhoon Maemi, which hit in 2003, are thought to be two of the most powerful storms in the nation’s history. Hinnamnor is forecasted to be potentially more powerful. As of September 5, the storm has wind speeds of 127 miles per hour (mph) with gusts around 155 mph, according to the U.S. Joint Typhoon Warning Center.
“Super typhoons are defined as a typhoon in the NW Pacific Ocean basin with 1-minute sustained winds of at least 130 kts (150 mph), which is equivalent to a strong Category 4 or Category 5 on the Saffir-Simpson hurricane wind scale,” Dr. Adam Lea, a senior research associate in hurricanes, typhoons and tropical cyclones for University College London’s Department of Space & Climate Physics, told Newsweek.
“The overall diameter of the storm can be hundreds of km but the very damaging winds are confined to a much smaller region surrounding the eye called the eye wall, which is a ring of thunderstorms surrounding the eye where the most extreme conditions occur. This area typically extends to 100km [around 60 miles] from the eye. Hinnamnor is one of the larger typhoons with typhoon force winds extending up to around 140km [around 85 miles] from the center.”
The Kori Nuclear Power Plant, which is in the path of the storm, may therefore be at risk if the typhoon hits it at full power.
Natural disasters of this kind are historically very bad news for power plants: the Fukushima Daiichi nuclear plant in Japan was severely damaged by a tsunami caused by a 9.0-magnitude earthquake in 2011, leading to some 150,000 people to be evacuated from the communities close to the disaster site.
According to Lea, a super typhoon hitting land at peak intensity would cause extreme to catastrophic damage to most buildings not built to resist such winds.
However, typhoon Hinnamnor has weakened considerably from its peak intensity.
“I am not knowledgeable on nuclear power plants, but the buildings are very sturdily constructed and will withstand the winds comfortably,” he said. “In advance of typhoon Maemi in 2003, five nuclear plants were shut down automatically and were ultimately unaffected.”
The typhoon is forecasted by the South Korea Meteorological Administration to hit the resort island of Jeju at about 1 a.m. local time on September 6, and southern coastal cities including Ulsan and Busan at about 7 a.m. Residents have been advised to remain indoors, and according to Bloomberg, 200 residents in coastal areas of Busan have been asked to evacuate to shelters on September 5.
Safety a ‘top priority’ for anti-nuclear groups seeking answers on nuclear rail transport
The Nuclear Free Local Authorities have joined with the Close Capenhurst Campaign, Highlands against Nuclear Transport (HANT) and Radiation Free Lakeland to highlight the issue of safety in nuclear rail transport in the UK.
For many years, Close Capenhurst, HANT, and Radiation Free Lakeland have raised issues of concern relating to the rail transportation of nuclear fuel and nuclear waste, particularly in relation to train movements in the North-West of England and from the former Dounreay plant on the North Scottish coast. The NFLA published its own analysis of the rail, sea and road transport of nuclear materials in June 2021[i], with member authorities expressing concerns about such movements through their own areas.
Although nuclear rail transport has a good record, the hazardous nature of the cargoes carried, and the consequences of any accident, means that all four organisations have resolved to work together to raise questions about safety standards and accident preparedness in the industry. They have today sent a joint question set to the head of Direct Rail Services (DRS), Chris Connolly, asking for answers on a range of safety issues, and it is hoped this will also open a dialogue with industry leaders.
Direct Rail Services (DRS) was established in 1995 as ‘lead supplier of rail transport and associated services to the nuclear industry’[ii]. In 2021, DRS was brought under the umbrella of Nuclear Transport Services (NTS), a new division of the restructured Nuclear Decommissioning Authority (NDA) responsible for the transportation of nuclear materials by rail, road, sea and air. The NDA is the publicly funded body responsible for decommissioning Britain’s old nuclear power stations and moving and managing spent fuel, radioactive waste and other materials from operational or redundant nuclear plants to storage at Sellafield or Drigg, both on the West Cumbrian coast. New nuclear fuel rods and materials are also transported from operating plants from manufacturing facilities at Capenhurst, near Chester, and Springfields, near Preston.
Commenting on the latest initiative, the Chair of the NFLA Steering Committee, Councillor David Blackburn, said: “All of our organisations are opposed to civil nuclear power generation, and so nuclear waste, but we are pragmatic; we cannot simply magic ‘nuclear away’. Although the case for renewables rather than nuclear – on the grounds of cost, time, practicality and safety – becomes stronger every day, the present government remains intent on building new nuclear power plants and keeping existing plants online for several years yet, and the decommissioning of closed stations will take many decades to complete. Consequently, there shall continue to be nuclear fuel rods and nuclear waste in transit for many years to come.
“We intend our questions to provoke debate and to open a dialogue between ourselves as campaigners opposed to nuclear power and those in the industry who are responsible for nuclear rail transportation. For when it comes to safety, it is best to talk. The absolute priority for all concerned about nuclear transport – whether for or against nuclear power – must be to ensure the best possible safety standards are maintained in the industry, for the well-being of the public, for NTS staff, and for our natural environment, for so long as the transport of these materials continues, whilst, for our part, we continue to work for the eventual elimination of nuclear power.”
The NFLA intends to publish a full Briefing of the responses and the dialogue in due course.
Collective madness — Zaporizhzhia is the poster child for abandoning the use of nuclear power.
The IAEA team that went to Zaporizhizhia aren’t superheroes and can’t fix what’s broken
Collective madness — Beyond Nuclear International By Linda Pentz Gunter
The deadly peril posed by nuclear power plants embroiled in a war zone — something we have been warning about since before the Russian invasion of Ukraine — just came into even sharper focus.
The continued military activity around the Zaporizhzhia nuclear power plant, home to six of Ukraine’s 15 reactors, has raised worldwide concern about the terrible consequences should a missile strike a reactor, or worse, the unprotected irradiated fuel pools or radioactive waste storage casks.
Let’s remember that the 1986 Chornobyl nuclear disaster — the result of the explosion of a single, relatively new unit — has rendered a 1,000 square mile region (the Exlusion Zone) uninhabitable still today and for the foreseeable future. Any one of the Zaporizhzhia reactors contains a far larger radioactive inventory and a more densely packed fuel pool than was the case at Chornobyl. A major breach of any one of the six would release long-lasting radioactive contamination into the environment, forcing permanent evacuations and sickening countless people.
Several obvious conclusions emerge from all this.
- Nuclear reactors cannot be in a war zone.
- The consequences of an attack on a nuclear plant could be catastrophic, long-lasting and far-reaching.
- It is impossible to predict where a war might happen (Lindsey Graham’s recent reckless statements remind us that yes, there could even be (civil) war again here in the US).
- The odds of a catastrophic failure at a nuclear plant must be zero given the unacceptable consequences; an impossibility.
- Nuclear power plants are not only ill-suited to the climate of war, but also to both the present and impending extremes of climate change (major sea-level rise; floods; fires; violent weather events etc).
Therefore, it is senseless and irresponsible to continue using nuclear power as an energy source.
Instead, as a 14-person delegation from the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) made its way to the Zaporizhzhia plant, its General Secretary, Rafael Grossi, stated that theirs was a mission “that seeks to prevent a nuclear accident and to preserve this important — the largest, the biggest — nuclear power plant in Europe”.
Preserve? Well, as Henry Sokolski just reminded us in his August 31 article — The Zaporizhzhia Nuclear Plant Is Kindling for World War III — “The IAEA was founded seventy years ago to promote nuclear power.” It is set up to “conduct occasional nuclear audits, not to physically protect plants against military attacks or to demilitarize zones around them,” he wrote. “The IAEA can’t provide the Zaporizhzhia plant with any defenses, nor will it risk keeping IAEA staff on-site to serve as defensive tripwires.”
James Acton, co-director of the nuclear policy program at the Carnegie Endowment for International Peace, issued similar warnings about the limitations of the IAEA delegation when he was interviewed about the worsening situation at Zaporizhzhia and the IAEA visit on the August 29th edition of The Rachel Maddow Show.
“We should be realistic about what they can achieve,” he said. “It’s their job to report what’s going on in the plant, to assess the safety and security features on the plant and to report back. They don’t have a magic way of defending the plant or repairing broken equipment.”
The White House has called for the Zaporizhzhia reactors to be shut down. It should be calling for all reactors to be shut down. Instead, it is blindly persisting with nuclear power as a present and future energy program.
The White House is not alone, of course. The illogical — and arguably insane — response to the war in Ukraine by a number of governments has been to insist on the continued or even expanded use of nuclear energy. Given what is at stake in so doing — and given the obvious safer, faster and cheaper alternatives of energy efficiency and renewable energy— this appears to be a symptom of some kind of collective madness.
Let’s face it, if Zaporizhzhia was a 6-acre wind farm instead of a 6-reactor nuclear power plant, we wouldn’t even be talking about it, let alone worrying about how to pronounce it.
Linda Pentz Gunter is the international specialist at Beyond Nuclear and writes for and curates Beyond Nuclear International.
IAEA at Zaporizhia nuclear station: Dr Paul Dorfman assesses the risks
The “physical integrity” of the Zaporizhzhia nuclear power station in
south-eastern Ukraine has been “violated”, the head of the
International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) has said, as he voiced his fears
for the site.
Rafael Grossi led a team of inspectors to the
Russian-controlled plant that has been frequently shelled in recent weeks,
raising fears of a nuclear incident. “It is obvious that the plant and
physical integrity of the plant has been violated several times,” Grossi
told reporters after he returned with part of his team to the
Ukrainian-controlled area on Thursday.
“I worried, I worry and I will
continue to be worried about the plant,” he said, while adding that the
situation was “more predictable” now. Rafael Grossi speaks to the media
before setting off to visit the Zaporizhzhia nuclear power plant “We have
spent there four or five hours. I have seen a lot, and I have my people
there, we were able to tour the whole site,” Grossi said about the
long-anticipated inspection. He said that part of his 14-strong mission to
the plant would stay at the facility “until Sunday or Monday, continuing
with the assessment”.
Guardian 2nd Sept 2022
Very real risks of nuclear catastrophe at Zaporizhia nuclear station, with the memory of Chernobyl ever present
War in Ukraine. What are the risks of a nuclear accident around the
Zaporijjia power plant? For weeks, the international community has had its
sights set on the Zaporijjia nuclear power plant, which the Russians and
Ukrainians have accused each other of bombing. This Thursday, September 1,
IAEA experts arrived at the plant to assess the security situation there.
Its director general, Rafael Grossi, had earlier warned of the “real risk
of nuclear disaster”. What are the real risks of a nuclear accident around
this plant? In Zaporijjia, near the eponymous nuclear power plant, occupied
by Russian forces and the target of regular bombardments, the inhabitants
are now preparing for the worst, and some are already imagining seeing the
reactors explode.
Because the fighting around this power plant with its
imposing silhouette, the largest in Europe, has revived painful memories of
the Chernobyl disaster, which occurred in Ukraine on April 26, 1986. That
year, a reactor exploded, causing the largest civilian nuclear accident in
history and releasing a radioactive cloud that spread across Europe.
According to the UN, around thirty operators and firefighters lost their
lives there, killed by acute radiation, but the human toll of the disaster
is still debated today. According to different sources, the number of
deaths as a result of this nuclear accident varies from a few hundred to
several thousand. The NGO Greenpeace even estimates that it would have
caused 200,000 additional deaths between 1990 and 2004.
Thirty-six years later, this Chernobyl disaster is still present in people’s minds, and some
fear that the scenario will repeat itself in Zaporijjia. But are the fears
of the inhabitants of Zaporijjia, located barely fifty kilometers as the
crow flies from the plant, really justified? Is a serious nuclear accident
really possible?
“Yes, serious accidents are possible, nuclear power plants
being machines that are intrinsically very sensitive to external
aggressions and not being designed to operate in a context of armed
conflict” , explains Bernard Laponche, former nuclear engineer at the
Commissariat at the atomic energy (CEA), doctor in nuclear physics and
president of the Global Chance association. And this, especially since no
one knows today what the current state of this plant is.
Ouest France 1st Sept 2022
1 This Month
To see nuclear-related stories in greater depth and intensity – go to https://nuclearinformation.wordpress.com/
Now until to February 10, 2026 Radioactive waste storage in France: the debate is finally open! How to participate?
12 February – Webinar The Big Push: New Nuclear Projects in Canada
Thursday, February 12, 7 pm Eastern | 2nd of 4 sessions in the 2026 Nuclear Waste Online webinar series.
Join a webinar on the push for new nuclear generation in Canada. Go to Northwatch.org to register or use the registration link https://us02web.zoom.us/webinar/register/WN_ZfWOf1GITqSRIZX8CB-A9w
-
Archives
- February 2026 (76)
- January 2026 (308)
- December 2025 (358)
- November 2025 (359)
- October 2025 (376)
- September 2025 (258)
- August 2025 (319)
- July 2025 (230)
- June 2025 (348)
- May 2025 (261)
- April 2025 (305)
- March 2025 (319)
-
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 