nuclear-news

The News That Matters about the Nuclear Industry Fukushima Chernobyl Mayak Three Mile Island Atomic Testing Radiation Isotope

Nuclear Reactor Faces 18 Hours Without Cooling as “Pipes Burst Like Burning Arteries” Following Technician’s Mistake in Shocking Safety Breakdown.

In a dramatic turn of events, a technician’s error at the Golfech nuclear power plant in France nearly sparked a catastrophe, highlighting the ever-present risks of human error in high-stakes environments.

Eirwen Williams, Sustainability Times, August 17, 2025 

The potential for human error in high-stakes environments is a persistent concern, highlighted by recent events at the Golfech nuclear power plant in France. On June 15, 2025, a critical mistake was narrowly averted, preventing potentially severe consequences. A technician inadvertently closed the wrong cooling valve, leading to an 18-hour shutdown of a critical system. This incident, reminiscent of historical nuclear mishaps, underscores the essential role of vigilance and robust safety protocols in nuclear operations. As we examine this event, it serves as a crucial reminder of the delicate balance required to maintain safety in nuclear power facilities.

An Operation That Almost Went Awry

Human error remains a significant risk in routine operations, particularly in high-stakes environments like nuclear power plants. The incident at Golfech underscores this reality. During a standard inspection of Unit 2, a technician inadvertently closed the cooling valve for Reactor No. 1, which was still operational. This mistake resulted in an 18-hour interruption of the reactor’s cooling system, elevating the risk of a major incident.

The cooling system is vital for preventing overheating in nuclear reactors. The technician’s error interrupted this critical process, but the mistake was detected late in the evening, and the system was restored within 30 minutes. Although the swift response prevented severe consequences, the incident serves as a cautionary tale about the potential dangers inherent in nuclear operations and the need for constant vigilance.

Why Is Cooling Essential for Nuclear Reactors?

Cooling is a fundamental aspect of nuclear reactor operations, critical for preventing overheating and potential disasters. In nuclear reactors, electricity is generated through the fission of uranium atoms, which produces significant heat. This heat transforms water into steam, driving turbines to produce electricity. Without proper temperature regulation, a meltdown could occur, leading to catastrophic consequences.

To manage the heat, reactors typically use water from nearby rivers or seas to maintain a stable temperature. The importance of these cooling systems cannot be overstated, as their failure could result in severe environmental and human impacts. The incident at Golfech highlights the critical role these systems play in ensuring the safety and stability of nuclear operations.

Lessons Learned from the Golfech Incident

The Golfech incident serves as a potent reminder of the challenges involved in nuclear plant operations and the importance of stringent safety protocols. The occurrence of such an error during a routine task underscores the need for continuous training and vigilance. It raises questions about the adequacy of current safety measures and whether additional checks are necessary to prevent similar incidents.

In response to this event, nuclear facilities globally may need to review their procedures and consider implementing more robust systems for monitoring and error prevention. The Golfech incident is a valuable lesson in the critical nature of nuclear safety and the potentially devastating consequences of human error in such sensitive environments………………………………………………………………………. https://www.sustainability-times.com/energy/nuclear-reactor-faces-18-hours-without-cooling-as-pipes-burst-like-burning-arteries-following-technicians-mistake-in-shocking-safety-breakdown/

August 19, 2025 Posted by | France, incidents | Leave a comment

Serious nuclear incident’ took place at Scottish Navy base

14 Aug 25, https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2025/08/14/serious-nuclear-incident-clyde-faslane-navy-base/

MoD admits ‘Category A’ event at HMNB Clyde which will raise concerns about maintenance of Trident nuclear submarines

‘Potentially serious’ event at HMNB Clyde prompts concerns about maintenance of Trident submarines

Category A events are defined as those which carry “actual or high potential for radioactive release to the environment”.

The revelation will raise serious concerns about how the Trident nuclear submarines in Scotland are being maintained. It is also likely to prompt questions over transparency and why the incident was not known about until now.

HMNB Clyde houses every Royal Navy submarine, including the Vanguard-class vessels which are armed with Trident missiles.

On Wednesday afternoon, the SNP demanded an urgent explanation from the Labour Government in Westminster over a “catalogue of failures” including separate contamination nearby.

The MoD declined to offer specific details of the incident, which was first reported by the Helensburgh Advertiser. This means it was unclear if any radiation was leaked into the environment or if there was a risk of this taking place.

The incident is not the first category A incident to take place at Faslane, with the MoD having reported two such cases from 2006 to 2007 and a third that took place in 2023.

The incident was disclosed in a written parliamentary answer by Maria Eagle, the procurement minister, after she was asked to provide the number of Nuclear Site Event Reports (NSERs) at the Coulport and Faslane naval bases.

She said there had been one category A event at Faslane between Jan 1 and April 22, two category B, seven category C and four category D. A further five events were deemed to be “below scale”, meaning they were less serious.

Nearby Coulport, where the UK’s nuclear missiles and warheads are stored, had four category C and nine category D events over the same period.

Ms Eagle told Dave Doogan, the SNP MP who tabled the question: “I cannot provide specific detail for the events as disclosure would, or would be likely to, prejudice the capability, effectiveness or security of any relevant forces.

“I can assure the honourable member that none of the events listed in question 49938 caused harm to the health of any member of staff or to any member of the public and none have resulted in any radiological impact to the environment.”

She also said that NSERs “are raised to foster a robust safety culture that learns from experience, whether that is equipment failures, human error, procedural failings, documentation shortcoming or near-misses”.

Category B incidents are defined as having “actual or high potential for a contained release within [a] building or submarine or unplanned exposure to radiation”.

Category C incidents have “moderate potential for future release”, while category D incidents are unlikely to prompt any release but “may contribute towards an adverse trend”.

Radioactive water leak

It emerged last week that radioactive water from the Coulport and Faslane bases, which are situated near Glasgow, was allowed to leak into the sea after several old pipes burst.

The substance was released into Loch Long because the Royal Navy inadequately maintained a network of around 1,500 pipes on the base, a regulator found.

The Scottish Environment Protection Agency, the pollution watchdog north of the border, found up to half the components at the base were beyond their design life.

David Cullen, a nuclear weapons expert at the Basic defence think tank, said attempts to hide previous serious incidents from the public had been “outrageous”.

Mr Cullen said: “The MoD is almost 10 years into a nearly £2bn infrastructure programme at Faslane and Coulport, and yet they apparently didn’t have a proper asset management system as recently as 2022.

“This negligent approach is far too common in the nuclear weapons programme, and is a direct consequence of a lack of oversight.”

Government accused of ‘cover-up’

Keith Brown, the deputy leader of the SNP, accused the Government of a cover-up in relation to the incident at Faslane.

Mr Brown said: “Nuclear weapons are an ever-present danger and this new information is deeply worrying.

“With repeated reports of serious incidents at Faslane and now confirmed radioactive contamination in Loch Long, it’s clear these weapons are not only poorly maintained but are a direct threat to our environment, our communities, and our safety.

“Worse still, the Labour Government is refusing to provide any details about the category A incident, or the full extent of the contamination, including who could potentially be affected.”

The SNP has vowed to scrap Trident, despite consensus in Westminster and among defence experts that the world is now more dangerous than at any point since the Cold War.

The accusations over a cover-up come after The Telegraph disclosed last month that Britain had secretly offered asylum to almost 24,000 Afghan soldiers and their families.

The Government earmarked £7bn to relocate Afghans to the UK over five years after they were caught up in the most serious data breach in history.

Despite enormous costs to the taxpayer, the breach was kept secret from the public for 683 days by two successive governments after the first use of a super-injunction by ministers.

An MoD spokesman said: “We place the upmost importance on handling radioactive substances safely and securely. Nuclear Site Event Reports demonstrate our robust safety culture and commitment to learn from experience.

“The incidents posed no risk to the public and did not result in any radiological impact to the environment. It is factually incorrect to suggest otherwise. Our Government backs our nuclear deterrent as the ultimate guarantor of our national security.

The MoD said it was unable to disclose details of individual incidents for “national security reasons”. However, it is understood all the NSERs were categorised as having a “low safety significance”.

August 17, 2025 Posted by | incidents, UK | Leave a comment

UK Labour eye ‘utterly reckless’ bonfire of nuclear energy regulations.

SAFETY concerns have been raised by the UK Government’s “utterly
reckless” approach to nuclear energy – as a new report recommends
ministers tear up “needless” regulations.

A taskforce commissioned by
the UK Government to look into nuclear regulations has recommended a
“radical reset” to speed up projects. Fears have been sparked after the
taskforce criticised the “unnecessarily slow, inefficient and costly”
system which governs new nuclear projects.

Its final report is expected to
focus on tackling what the UK Government described as a “culture of risk
aversion” in nuclear energy regulation. Earlier this year, the UK
Government announced it was scrapping a raft of nuclear regulations,
including changing the rules so that new projects could be built across the
entirety of England and Wales. New nuclear projects are de facto banned in
Scotland.

 The National 11th Aug 2025, https://www.thenational.scot/news/25381085.labour-eye-utterly-reckless-bonfire-nuclear-energy-regulations/

August 13, 2025 Posted by | safety, UK | Leave a comment

UN nuclear watchdog official to visit Iran in a bid to improve ties but no inspections planned

The deputy head of the United Nations’ nuclear watchdog will visit Iran in
a bid to rekindle soured ties, the Islamic Republic’s foreign minister said
Sunday. There will be no inspection of Iran’s nuclear facilities during the
visit by the International Atomic Energy Agency scheduled for Monday,
Foreign Minister Abbas Araghchi said. The visit would be the first
following Israel and Iran’s 12-day war in June, when some of its key
nuclear facilities were struck.

Daily Mail 10th Aug 2025. https://www.dailymail.co.uk/wires/ap/article-14987939/UN-nuclear-watchdog-official-visit-Iran-bid-improve-ties-no-inspections-planned.html

August 13, 2025 Posted by | Iran, safety | Leave a comment

New report on British nuclear submarines should raise alarm bells across Australia.

Yellow Nuclear Submarine, 3D rendering

Friends of the Earth Australia, 11 Aug 25, https://newshub.medianet.com.au/2025/08/new-report-on-british-nuclear-submarines-should-raise-alarm-bells-across-australia/113276/

A detailed new report on the British nuclear submarine experience should ring alarm bells across Australia. The report has been written for Friends of the Earth Australia by British scientist Tim Deere-Jones, who has a B.Sc. degree in Maritime Studies and has operated a Marine Pollution Research Consultancy since the 1980s.

Mr. Deere-Jones said:

“The British experience with nuclear submarines reveals a litany of safety risks, cost blowouts and delays. It can confidently be predicted that these problems will beset the AUKUS submarine programme.”

“Operational risks include radiological pollution of marine and coastal environments and wildlife; risks of radioactivity doses to coastal populations; and the serious risk of dangerous collisions between civilian vessels and nuclear submarines, especially in the approaches to busy naval and civilian sea ways and fishing grounds.

“Ominously, the problems seem to be worsening.”

Dr. Jim Green, national nuclear campaigner with Friends of the Earth Australia, said:

“The report reveals disturbing patterns of unacceptable safety risks, an appalling lack of transparency, cost-blowouts and delays.

“None of the issues raised in Tim Deere-Jones’ report have been adequately addressed in the Australian context. Indeed a federal EPBC Act assessment absurdly precluded nuclear accident impact assessments as ‘out of scope’. If those vital issues are addressed at all, it will be by a new, non-independent military regulator ‒ a blatant, deliberate breach of the fundamental principle of regulatory independence.

“The Australian government must immediately initiate a thorough, independent review of the AUKUS submarine project and this report should be an important input into that inquiry.”

The report, ‘The British experience with nuclear-powered submarines: lessons for Australia’, is online at https://nuclear.foe.org.au/nuclear-subs/ or direct download https://nuclear.foe.org.au/wp-content/uploads/Deere-Jones-nuclear-submarine-report-final-August-2025.pdf

August 12, 2025 Posted by | AUSTRALIA, safety | Leave a comment

Fire safety improvements required at Dungeness A

Sam Williams, 7 Aug 25, https://www.kentonline.co.uk/romney-marsh/news/fire-safety-improvements-required-at-power-station-328268/

Fire safety failings have been uncovered at a nuclear site in Kent, prompting a formal enforcement notice from the UK’s watchdog.

The Office for Nuclear Regulation (ONR) issued the notice to Nuclear Restoration Services (NRS) following inspections at its Dungeness A site on Romney Marsh.

Inspectors identified several safety shortfalls in the Fill House facility, a building used to retrieve and manage nuclear waste.

According to the ONR, issues were found with the site’s risk assessment, fire safety protocols, firefighting arrangements, and fire detection systems.

Tom Eagleton, ONR superintending inspector, said: “Fire safety is important in order to protect workers and the public, and we expect the necessary standards to be maintained at all times.

“This enforcement notice sets out the specific improvements that must be made by NRS to ensure adequate fire safety provisions are in place.

“We will continue to monitor NRS’ progress in addressing these issues in line with the relevant legislation.”

The enforcement action has been taken under the Regulatory Reform (Fire Safety) Order 2005. NRS has been given a deadline of September 30, 2025, to rectify the problems and meet the required standards.

August 11, 2025 Posted by | safety, UK | Leave a comment

Trump’s Nuclear Energy Overhaul Sparks Alarms Over Safety.

Oil Price, By Felicity Bradstock – Aug 03, 2025

  • Trump has announced plans to quadruple U.S. nuclear power by 2050, pushing for rapid approval of new reactors and slashing regulatory barriers.
  • Experts warn that undermining the independent Nuclear Regulatory Commission could erode essential safety standards and risk public backlash.
  • Critics argue the slow growth of U.S. nuclear energy stems from high costs, not overregulation, citing costly delays at projects like Plant Vogtle.

The President of the United States, Donald Trump, is betting big on nuclear power and aims to fast-track projects to prepare for the massive increase in electricity demand over the next decade. However, experts fear that his plans to accelerate project development could compromise safety standards, particularly as the independent U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission comes under threat.

In May, the Trump administration announced a target to deploy 300 GW of net new nuclear capacity by 2050 to quadruple domestic nuclear power, as well as to begin construction on 10 large reactors by 2030 and expand domestic nuclear fuel production. Trump signed three executive orders to support these aims: Reform of the Nuclear Regulatory CommissionDeployment of Advanced Nuclear Reactor Technologies for National Security; and Reforming Nuclear Reactor Testing at the Department of Energy.

Trump’s orders establish arbitrary deadlines for decisions on construction permits and operating licenses, even for new designs that have not yet been assessed; demand a review of all NRC regulations within 18 months; and allow for the construction of nuclear reactors on federal lands without NRC review.

While deploying more nuclear power could help the U.S. respond to the rising domestic electricity demand, there are widespread concerns that President Trump’s rapid approval of new nuclear projects threatens to weaken the independent Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC), which assesses projects for health and safety and ensures reactors operate securely. The objective of Trump’s executive orders is to reduce regulations and accelerate the approval of nuclear plants by overhauling the NRC…………………………………………..

………………. Weakening the powers of the independent NRC to give greater control to the government’s Department of Energy and Defence undermines the stringent safety standards that were previously enforced for the development and running of nuclear plants. At worst, this could lead to another nuclear disaster, which could jeopardise the health, or even lives, of people across the U.S.  https://oilprice.com/Energy/Energy-General/Trumps-Nuclear-Energy-Overhaul-Sparks-Alarms-Over-Safety.html

August 6, 2025 Posted by | safety, USA | Leave a comment

IAEA reports hearing explosions, sees smoke near Ukraine’s Zaporizhzhia nuclear plant.

 The International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) said on Saturday that its
team at Ukraine’s Zaporizhzhia Nuclear Power Plant (ZNPP) heard explosions
and saw smoke coming from a nearby location. The nuclear plant said one of
its auxiliary facilities was attacked today, IAEA said in a statement.

 Reuters 2nd Aug 2025, https://www.reuters.com/world/europe/iaea-reports-hearing-explosions-sees-smoke-near-ukraines-zaporizhzhia-nuclear-2025-08-02/

August 5, 2025 Posted by | safety, Ukraine | Leave a comment

Metsamor could trigger next global nuclear emergency and Armenians denying it.

 Metsamor could trigger next global nuclear emergency and Armenians denying
it. In recent days, several Armenian news channels (websites) have been
engaged in a smear campaign, asserting that the Azerbaijani media has
“falsely” highlighted the Metsamor nuclear power plant under the guise of
“propaganda for the country’s politics.” They claim that Armenia’s nuclear
power plant does not pose any threat to the region and that the allegations
against it are unfounded. However, Azerbaijan, Türkiye, and even Georgia
have periodically asserted that this plant presents a significant threat
and have repeatedly submitted resolutions to the International Atomic
Energy Agency addressing their concerns. In this article, we will discover
how problematic and valid the notion of posing a threat is, for Metsamor
Plant.

 Azer News 2nd Aug 2025,
https://www.azernews.az/analysis/245496.html

August 5, 2025 Posted by | EUROPE, safety | Leave a comment

Mystery grows around state of Russian nuclear submarine base that is just 75 miles from epicentre of 8.8-magnitude megaquake

 A colossal 8.8-magnitude earthquake rocked Russia’s far eastern Kamchatka
Peninsula early yesterday morning – raising serious questions about the
condition of Russia’s key nuclear submarine bases, located alarmingly close
to the epicentre. The quake, tied for the sixth strongest in recorded
history, struck just 75 miles from Avacha Bay, where some of the Russian
Navy’s most strategic nuclear assets, including Borei and Delta-class
ballistic missile submarines, are based. Though Russian authorities are
insisting the situation is under control, with ‘no reported fatalities or
serious injuries’, military analysts and international observers are
sounding the alarm over the potential impact on these high-security naval
installations.

 Mail 31st July 2025, https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-14956551/Russian-nuclear-submarine-base-earthquake.html

August 4, 2025 Posted by | Russia, safety | Leave a comment

French submarine-maker targeted by hackers

Cyber attackers claim to have uncovered source code for submarine weapon systems.

 A French naval giant is investigating a potential cyber attack after
hackers claimed to have obtained sensitive data about the country’s
nuclear submarines. Naval Group, a state-owned ship maker that traces its
origins back almost 400 years to the reign of Louis XIII, said it had
“immediately launched technical investigations” after cyber criminals
threatened to publish files on the dark web.

 Telegraph 27th July 2025, https://www.telegraph.co.uk/business/2025/07/27/french-submarine-maker-targeted-by-hackers/

July 29, 2025 Posted by | France, safety | Leave a comment

The real story of Chernobyl, the worst nuclear disaster in history

The Chernobyl Sarcophagus Memorial sculpture was erected in 2006 and is dedicated to the memory of the heroic plant workers and emergency crew who prevented a global catastrophe .

28 July 25,https://www.history.co.uk/articles/the-story-of-chernobyl-the-worst-nuclear-disaster-in-history

On 26th April 1986, a routine safety test went catastrophically wrong and triggered the worst nuclear accident of all time. The incident at the Chernobyl Nuclear Power Plant near Pripyat, Ukraine led to the release of 400 times more radiation than the atomic bomb dropped on Hiroshima during WW2.

31 people died in the immediate aftermath, whilst the long-term health effects caused by Chernobyl are still a hotly debated subject. Approximately 60,000 square miles around the plant were contaminated and an area nearly twice the city of London remains an exclusion zone to this day.

Background of Chernobyl

Lying just 10 miles from the Belarus-Ukraine border and around 62 miles north of the Ukrainian capital Kyiv, the Chernobyl Nuclear Power Plant was commissioned in 1977 as part of the old Soviet Union, with the first reactor supplying power to the grid later that year. By 1984, four reactors had entered commercial operation, each capable of producing 1,000 megawatts of electrical power.

Just under two miles from the plant was the city of Pripyat, founded in 1970 and named after the nearby river. It was built to serve the power plant and at the time of the disaster, its total population was just shy of 50,000.

Nuclear disaster unfolds

Throughout Friday, 25th April 1986, Chernobyl’s engineers lowered power at Reactor No. 4 in preparation for a safety test to be conducted later that evening. The test was supposed to check whether the reactor turbines could continue powering emergency water coolant pumps in the event of a power failure.

Ironically, the safety test was anything but safe as human error and substandard reactor design led to a partial meltdown of the core.

The experiment was poorly conceived and equally badly executed. Firstly, the less-experienced night shift crew carried out the safety test and later claimed they had not received full instructions from the day shift crew on how to properly conduct it. Secondly, the emergency core cooling system for Reactor 4 was disabled along with the emergency shutdown system.

Finally, the reactor’s power level dropped to a dangerously unstable level at which point the engineers removed most of the control rods in violation of safety guidelines. Although power began to return, it was far from under control.

Explosion in Reactor 4

At 1:23am on 26th April, the safety test was given the all-clear by plant supervisors. Almost immediately a power surge occurred, triggering the engineers to re-insert all 211 control rods. The control rods were graphite tipped, a design flaw that would prove fatal as they increased the reaction in the core, instead of lowering it.

The subsequent steam explosions blew off the steel and concrete lid of the reactor as the core suffered a partial meltdown. Two engineers were killed instantly whilst two more suffered severe burns. The explosion, along with the resulting fires, released at least 5% of the radioactive reactor core into the atmosphere. Blown by the wind, radioactive materials were spread to many parts of Europe over the coming days.

Emergency response begins

Firefighters quickly arrived on the scene but without proper protective clothing, many perished in the coming months from acute radiation syndrome. By dawn, all the fires were suppressed except for the one in the reactor core.

The other three reactors were shut down a short while later. The following day officials ordered helicopters to begin dumping more than 5,000 tonnes of sand, lead, clay, and boron onto the burning reactor to help extinguish the core fire.

A Soviet cover-up

It took nearly 36 hours for Soviet officials to begin evacuating nearby Pripyat. The city’s residents were unaware of the true dangers presented by the previous day’s events. Advised to pack only necessities, the people of Pripyat were loaded onto buses believing their evacuation to be temporary. Little did they know, they would never return to their homes again.

Two days after the catastrophic explosion the rest of the world remained in the dark as the Soviets attempted to cover up the event. However, on 28th April, Swedish radiation monitoring stations 800 miles away began detecting high levels of radiation. With their backs to the wall, the Soviets finally made a statement, with the Kremlin admitting an accident had occurred at Chernobyl, but assuring the world that officials had it under control.

Heroism on display

In the days that followed, hundreds of workers risked their lives to contain radiation leaking from the reactor core.

On 4th May, three divers made their way through the dark flooded basement of Reactor 4 to turn valves and drain the ‘bubbler pools’ sitting below the core. Had they not succeeded in their mission, molten nuclear material would have eventually melted its way down to the pools.

This would have triggered a radiation-contaminated steam explosion and destroyed the entire plant along with its three other reactors, causing unimaginable damage and nuclear fallout that the world would have struggled to recover from.

Radioactive debris also needed to be removed from the roof of the reactor. After robots failed to do the job, workers equipped with heavy protective gear were sent in.

Nicknamed ‘Bio-robots’, these workers were unable to spend more than 90 seconds on the roof due to the extreme levels of radiation. In the end, 5,000 men went up on the irradiated rooftop to successfully clear the radioactive material from it.

Clean-up commences

By mid-May, Soviet leader Mikhail Gorbachev had ordered thousands of firefighters, miners, and soldiers to begin the long and arduous task of cleaning up. Known as ‘Liquidators’, 600,000 – 800,000 of them began burying radioactive debris and topsoil, as well as shooting all wildlife (both domestic and wild) within the 19-mile exclusion zone surrounding the power plant.

Nicknamed ‘Bio-robots’, these workers were unable to spend more than 90 seconds on the roof due to the extreme levels of radiation. In the end, 5,000 men went up on the irradiated rooftop to successfully clear the radioactive material from it.

Clean-up commences

By mid-May, Soviet leader Mikhail Gorbachev had ordered thousands of firefighters, miners, and soldiers to begin the long and arduous task of cleaning up. Known as ‘Liquidators’, 600,000 – 800,000 of them began burying radioactive debris and topsoil, as well as shooting all wildlife (both domestic and wild) within the 19-mile exclusion zone surrounding the power plant.

Aftermath

The Chernobyl Exclusion Zone was eventually extended to cover approximately 1,000 square miles, whereby it was declared uninhabitable for over 20,000 years. The other three reactors at Chernobyl remained active until their individual shutdowns in 1991, 1996, and 2000. Gorbachev later wrote that he believed the incident at Chernobyl was the ‘real cause of the collapse of the Soviet Union’.

Whilst the lasting health effects of the disaster remain unclear and much debated, various sources have estimated that thousands of cancer deaths can be linked back to Chernobyl.

July 29, 2025 Posted by | incidents, Reference, Ukraine | Leave a comment

5 worst nuclear disasters from around the world

Nuclear disasters can be caused by a variety of factors, but they all have the potential to have widespread impacts that can linger for generations.

28 July 25 https://www.history.co.uk/articles/worst-nuclear-disasters

Harnessing the biblical power of nuclear fission was never going to be a risk-free proposition and the world has been shaken by several shocking accidents since the atomic age began. Here are five of the worst.

1. Kyshtym

Decades before the Chernobyl power plant was even built, the Soviet Union experienced a radioactive eruption which irradiated thousands of square miles of the Ural Mountains region. The source of the calamity was the Mayak plutonium-processing plant near the town of Kyshtym – a facility which had been quickly erected to produce essential materials for the Soviet Union’s nuclear weapons programme.

The breakneck pace of development meant safety fell by the wayside, to the point where staff failed to fix a malfunctioning cooling system designed to keep tanks of nuclear waste at safe temperature levels. On 29th September 1957, one of these steel tanks finally exploded, blowing off a metre-thick concrete lid and sending out a cloud of nuclear fallout.

The local population was kept in the dark about the explosion and a whole week went by before they were evacuated. It wasn’t until 1976 that the details of the disaster were leaked to the Western press by an exiled Russian scientist. The true health impact is impossible to know for sure, although increased rates of cancer and other medical issues have been associated with the disaster.

2. Windscale

The name ‘Windscale’ isn’t known to many people these days, because this British nuclear site was renamed ‘Sellafield’ in 1981. Windscale was then notorious as the site of one of the world’s worst nuclear accidents and the resulting bad PR was a reason why the authorities decided to rebrand.

Back in 1957, Windscale’s towering reactors were producing weapons-grade plutonium for Britain’s nuclear arsenal, but disaster struck in the form of a fire in one of the reactors on 10th October. Workers had to bravely battle to extinguish the inferno, despite the real risk of being irradiated by the burning uranium.

3. Chernobyl

Ironically, the disaster whose name is a byword for nuclear calamity only occurred because of a safety test.

In the early hours of 26th April 1986, workers at the Chernobyl nuclear plant initiated an experiment to assess how the reactor cooling mechanisms would function in the event of a power outage. A combination of design flaws and human error caused the test to go catastrophically wrong, leading to a power surge and a steam explosion which tore the 1,000-ton cover off reactor number four.

Another explosion followed and the reactor was now a terrifying crater expelling radioactive contaminants into the atmosphere. One worker staring directly at the core recounted how the blue, ionised air was ‘flooding up into infinity’ – a spectacle both beautiful and terrifying.

The nearby city of Pripyat was evacuated 36 hours later, abruptly going from a bustling urban centre to an eerie ghost town. Chernobyl workers and firefighters killed by the initial explosions and ensuing radiation poisoning numbered at least 30.

Contrary to popular belief, the three so-called Chernobyl divers who were sent in on a ‘suicide mission’ to drain water from the plant, actually survived their excursion. But the consequences of Chernobyl were immense, with a vast Exclusion Zone being enforced, and the disaster thought to be linked with thousands of cancer deaths.

4. Three Mile Island

Prior to Chernobyl, three words were synonymous with nuclear disaster: Three Mile Island. The incident at this power plant in Pennsylvania on 28th March 1979 was made all the more notorious because it took place less than two weeks after the release of The China Syndrome, a star-studded disaster movie about the imminent threat of a nuclear meltdown.

Although Three Mile Island was fortunately ‘only’ a partial meltdown caused by a cooling malfunction, it was enough to release radioactive materials into the environment. The state’s governor advised that pregnant women and young children should evacuate the area. Before long, around 140,000 people had fled.

Though most experts believe the health effects to have been minimal, Three Mile Island galvanised anti-nuclear activists in the US, with Jane Fonda – star of The China Syndrome – giving a speech at an anti-nuclear protest held in the wake of the accident.

5. Fukushima

The disaster at the Fukushima power plant on 11th March 2011 had the most dramatic origin of all nuclear accidents. Namely, a gigantic tsunami which had been in turn triggered by an undersea earthquake off the coast of Japan.

It was the most powerful earthquake in Japan’s history, and the tsunami waves easily crashed over the plant’s seawall, flooding the reactor buildings and knocking out the emergency diesel generators providing backup power for the coolant systems.

The untamed residual heat within the reactors caused three partial meltdowns and subsequent gas explosions, leading to at least 160,000 people evacuating the area after the accident.

July 29, 2025 Posted by | incidents | Leave a comment

The Kyshtym disaster: Russia’s hidden nuclear crisis

The Kyshtym disaster in 1957 was the Soviet Union’s biggest nuclear crisis until Chernobyl. So, why did the Soviets keep quiet about the former for decades?

28 July 25, https://www.history.co.uk/articles/kyshtym-disaster-russia-hidden-nuclear-crisis

What would be considered the worst nuclear disaster in history? Many scholars would say Chernobyl, when an explosion at a nuclear power plant in northern Ukraine released dangerous levels of radiation.

This was on 26th April 1986, when Ukraine was still part of the Soviet Union. Was Chernobyl inevitable? Many historians do believe that Soviet authorities failed to learn lessons from an earlier nuclear crisis on their own soil. Below, we at Sky HISTORY look back at the 1957 Kyshtym disaster — and how the Soviets kept it under wraps for decades.

Was there really a nuclear plant in Kyshtym?

The nuclear plant at the heart of the Kyshtym disaster was not actually in the Russian town of that name. Instead, it was in a secretive ‘closed city’ nearby, called Chelyabinsk-40. Today, it is called Ozyorsk. (Both Kyshtym and Ozyorsk are in Russia’s Chelyabinsk Oblast.)

In the 1940s, the Soviets realised that they were trailing the United States in the development of nuclear weapons. To help themselves catch up, they hastily built what is now commonly known as the Mayak nuclear plant.

This facility, which still stands today, was tasked with processing plutonium needed to make nuclear weapons. However, because the plant was assembled in a rush, many safety risks of the project were not considered sufficiently.

The Kyshtym explosion and its immediate aftermath

Before the Kyshtym disaster, it was routine for Mayak workers to deposit radioactive waste into the Techa River. This bode ill (literally) for villagers along the river who used it as a source of drinking water.

So, Mayak staff later decided to store such waste in an underground storage compartment of the plant itself. This space comprised 14 stainless steel containers attached to a concrete base.

However, in the 1950s, the cooling system in one of these tanks started to malfunction. This led the waste in the container to heat up and eventually, on 29th September 1957, explode. The force sent 20 curies of radioactive material flying a kilometre into the air.

The wind blew the radioactive particles over an area of about 20,000 square kilometres inhabited by approximately 270,000 people. This was generally to the northeast, away from Chelyabinsk-40, which lay upwind from the Mayak plant.

How did authorities initially react?

Residents of nearby areas were not initially notified of what had happened. This was largely due to the Soviet Union’s strong culture of secrecy during the Cold War. The national government didn’t want to let slip that Mayak even existed, let alone that a nuclear explosion had happened there.

It was also around the same time that the Soviet Union launched its Sputnik satellite, a big PR coup. Admitting responsibility for what was the world’s biggest nuclear disaster to date would have been more than an inconvenient fly in the ointment.

Still, the Soviets also knew that doing what they could to limit the radioactive contamination would go some way towards keeping everyone in the dark. So, while about 10,000 local residents were evacuated over the next two years, they weren’t told exactly why.

A cover-up lasting for decades

Almost 17,000 hectares of the contaminated area was turned into East Ural Nature Reserve in 1968. Members of the public were barred from entry, which remains the case to this day. Scientists have studied the reserve to monitor the long-term effects of nuclear radiation on its ecology.

The Kyshtym disaster was kept secret from the public until 1976, when Soviet dissident Zhores Medvedev reported about it in New Scientist magazine. However, the Soviet government still did not openly acknowledge the Kyshtym disaster before accidentally revealing it to the United Nations in the late 1980s.

It is estimated that thousands of cancer cases may have resulted from exposure to radiation caused by the nuclear explosion way back in 1957.

How does Kyshtym compare to Chernobyl?

On the International Nuclear and Radiological Event Scale (INES), Kyshtym is classified as Level 6. Chernobyl, an even bigger catastrophe, is ranked just one level higher (Level 7) on the INES. Kyshtym released about 40% as much radioactivity as Chernobyl.

Chernobyl is thought to have affected a larger population, too, as 335,000 people were evacuated in the wake of the 1986 disaster. Also, while Chernobyl quickly claimed 31 lives, none were lost in the immediate aftermath of Kyshtym.

July 28, 2025 Posted by | history, incidents, Reference, Russia | Leave a comment

The next Chernobyl? Soviet-era nuclear power plant is branded a ‘ticking time bomb’ that could go off at ‘any moment’

 A Soviet-era nuclear power plant in an earthquake zone has been branded
‘Chernobyl in waiting’ and a ‘ticking time bomb’ amid fears of a looming
disaster. The Armenian Nuclear Power Plant was opened in 1976 and comprises
two reactors, reportedly supplying the nation with 40 per cent of its
electricity. But it stands in a seismic zone, and has already been
shuttered once before, closing for six years after the Spitak Earthquake in
1988.

 Daily Mail 25th July 2025,
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/sciencetech/article-14939915/Chernobyl-nuclear-power-plant-ticking-time-bomb.html

July 28, 2025 Posted by | EUROPE, safety | Leave a comment