Luck is not a safety plan
“We must act now,” said International Atomic Energy Agency director general, Rafael Grossi. But what is his plan? IAEA efforts at creating a “safe zone” around the Zaporizhzhia reactors, where no fighting could then occur, have collapsed. On the geopolitical stage, both Russia and Ukraine appear to harbor the conviction that their side can win the war. NATO and its allies show no signs of insisting on a diplomatic solution, given the benefit to those countries of a Russian defeat.
War devastation is bad enough without adding a nuclear disaster
Luck is not a safety plan — Beyond Nuclear International
How much more perilous can the situation at Zaporizhzhia nuclear power plant become?
By Linda Pentz Gunter, 14 May 23
Luck is not a sound basis on which to rely when we are dealing with nuclear risks. But luck is again what me must depend on as we watch and wait for the worst to happen — or not — at the six-reactor Zaporizhzhia nuclear power plant in Ukraine.
The plant, located in the southwestern region of the country — the area most directly embroiled in some of the most intense fighting, and with parts of it already “annexed” by Russia — has already experienced some frightening near-misses. These include shelling and missile attacks and frequent losses of offsite power that, if not restored promptly, could lead to a meltdown.
The plant has been occupied by Russian forces since March 4, 2022. Rumors abound that a severely depleted workforce is laboring under stressful and even violent conditions, while other staff have fled or have disappeared.
Now we learn that mass evacuations are underway from communities close to the nuclear plant. These include residents of Enerhodar, the city that houses most of the plant workers and their families……………………….
Fears of a Ukrainian offensive designed to recapture some or all of the Russian-held territory appear to have prompted the sudden evacuation. But are people evacuating away from the conflict or from the prospect of a catastrophic outcome at the nuclear power plant, should it become fully engulfed by the fighting? And if that does happen, what might the consequences be?
As a precaution, all six Zaporizhzhia reactors are currently shut down — officially their status is called “cold shutdown”, which is not as final as it sounds and does not mean they are out of danger.
The fuel in the reactor core still requires electricity to power cooling, as do the pumps that supply cooling water to the fuel pools. This means a meltdown is still possible. Cold shutdown just buys workers more time to restore power should it become lost, but a reliable supply of electricity to the site is still essential to avoid disaster…………
The consequences of such an outcome would be drastic not only for the people of Ukraine and neighboring Russia, but for all of Europe, should any or all of these reactors melt down or suffer a fuel pool fire. We only have to look at the fallout map from the 1986 Chornobyl disaster, a single unit with a far smaller radioactive inventory, to understand the potential scale of such a tragedy.
Chornobyl contaminated 40% of the European landmass with long-lived radioactive fallout and created an effectively permanent 1,000 square mile Exclusion Zone around the stricken nuclear site.
Beyond electrical power, water supply is also essential to keep nuclear power plants out of danger. The thermally and radioactively “hot” irradiated fuel rods sitting in cooling pools, must stay submerged. Electrically powered pumps can maintain a steady water supply. But access to water is critical.
In late March, alarms were raised about a dramatic drop in water levels at the reservoir that supplies cooling water to the plant. Ukrainian officials said the Russians had drained the reservoir, increasing the risk of a meltdown at Zaporizhzhia.
But this month, headlines warned that record high water levels could threaten a dam that, if breached, would send floodwaters pouring onto the nuclear site, inundating the plant’s pumping systems.
War, flooding, and human error are all potential disasters waiting in the wings that could trigger a nuclear catastrophe. But what can prevent it?
“We must act now,” said International Atomic Energy Agency director general, Rafael Grossi. But what is his plan? IAEA efforts at creating a “safe zone” around the Zaporizhzhia reactors, where no fighting could then occur, have collapsed. On the geopolitical stage, both Russia and Ukraine appear to harbor the conviction that their side can win the war. NATO and its allies show no signs of insisting on a diplomatic solution, given the benefit to those countries of a Russian defeat.
All of this brutality already comes at immense cost to the population of Ukraine, but also to Russia, where mothers, too, are losing sons to an unnecessary war. A major strike on Europe’s largest nuclear power plant would extend that tragedy across thousands of miles, affecting hundreds of millions of lives. All we’ve got between us and that disaster is luck, which, like the deadly uranium that fuels nuclear power plants, will eventually run out.
NATO Weapons Go Boom, British Missiles Strike Russia – Ukraine War Escalates
The NATO vs Russia proxy war in Ukraine recently escalated a notch or two, with simultaneous ‘Ukrainian’ airstrikes downing two modern Russian fighter jets and two helicopters… well inside ‘Russia proper’. This came the day after British-supplied, longer-range, cruise missiles struck the city of Lugansk, and hours after Russian airstrikes obliterated another huge store of NATO supplies for Ukraine’s much-vaunted ‘counter-offensive’.
This week on NewsReal, Joe & Niall discuss the latest deceptions in ‘the Ukraine war…. more https://www.sott.net/article/480219-NewsReal-NATO-Weapons-Go-Boom-British-Missiles-Strike-Russia-Ukraine-War-Escalates#
Risks too high at Zaporizhzhia
May 10, 2023 https://beyondnuclear.org/risks-too-high-at-zaporizhzhia/
Beyond Nuclear has put out a press statement warning that the risks of a nuclear catastrophe at Ukraine’s six-reactor Zaporizhzhia nuclear power plant are too high, with rumors of a Ukrainian offensive reportedly prompting mass evacuations of civilians living near the plant. Only an immediate ceasefire — or, better still, a negotiated end to a likely unwinnable war — can protect us from a potentially catastrophic nuclear incident at the plant, which has already endured shelling, missile attacks, and frequent loss of connection to the electrical grid.
The press release begins:
Fears of an imminent Ukrainian offensive that could put the country’s six-reactor Zaporizhzhia nuclear power plant in even greater danger, should prompt immediate efforts to negotiate a ceasefire, if not an end to the Russian war against Ukraine, urged safe energy group, Beyond Nuclear today.
News reports that civilians around the Zaporizhzhia nuclear power plant are being evacuated suggest that the conflict already consuming the southwestern region of Ukraine could be about to escalate, potentially engulfing the nuclear plant.
The Zaporizhzhia nuclear power plant has already escaped close calls, the target of shelling and missile attacks on at least one occasion and with frequent losses of offsite power that, if not restored promptly, could lead to a meltdown.
The plant has been occupied by Russian forces since March 4, 2022. Rumors abound that a severely depleted workforce is laboring under stressful and even violent conditions, while other staff have fled or have disappeared.
As a precaution, all six Zaporizhzhia reactors are currently shut down, but that does not mean they are out of danger.
“The fuel in the reactor core still requires electricity to power cooling, as do the pumps that supply cooling water to the fuel pools,” warned Beyond Nuclear international specialist, Linda Pentz Gunter. “A meltdown is still possible. Putting the reactors in what is termed ‘cold shutdown’ just buys workers more time to restore power, but a reliable supply of electricity to the site is still essential to avoid disaster.
“The consequences not only for the people of Ukraine and neighboring Russia, but for all of Europe, should any or all of these reactors melt down or suffer a fuel pool fire are unimaginably dire,” Pentz Gunter said.
Counting the rising costs of Scotland’s nuclear testing facility
Alan Laird, 12 May 23
https://www.thenational.scot/community/23516945.counting-rising-costs-scotlands-nuclear-testing-facility/
HOW magnanimous of Andrew Bowie, Westminster’s Nuclear Minister, not to “impose nuclear power on Scotland” (The National, May 4), although he’s a bit late with that assurance. But never mind democracy, let’s look at the cost.
Dounreay was commissioned as a test facility in 1955 on our north coast – in other words, “let’s put it waaaay up there in case something goes wrong”.
The initial research reactor “went critical” – a not very reassuring term for “started working” – in 1958.
The Dounreay Fast Reactor started up in 1959 and shut down in 1977 after 15 years of operation. Its maximum output of 14MW was negligible.
A Fast-Breeder Reactor, now an abandoned technology, began supplying 250MW from 1975 till 1995, enough for about 48,000 homes. Its cooling was by liquid sodium – 1500 tons of the stuff – which explodes instantly in contact with air. Cool.
Then there is the military site, HMS Vulcan, for development and testing the reactors of nuclear-powered submarines. From 1963 to 2015, five generations of small reactors have been tested here, routinely run at greater than operational stress to find out any faults before installation in the subs. How reassuring. As with MoD sites on the Clyde, full disclosure of breaches of health and safety are not disclosed. The site is due for decommissioning next year. Estimates of the costs are not available.
In 1998, following safety and pollution concerns, Norway, Sweden and the Irish Republic demanded the immediate closure of the site. PM Tony Blair was advised it would take £1 billion and 100 years to complete the work. By 2006, 25 years and £2.7bn was the estimate, then in 2007 it was 17 years and £2.6bn. In 2019 contracts worth £400m were awarded to continue the clean-up, with a new estimate of £4.3bn and 60 years. I guess no-one actually knows.
The site also took in foreign spent nuclear fuel for reprocessing. Unsurprisingly, many foreign customers refused to take their nuclear waste back. It’s mostly still there, along with Dounreay’s own.
The expected date of the return of the site to brownfield use is 2330. Yes, that’s more than 300 years from now. Uncountable billions of pounds and nearly 400 years of an unusable bit of Scotland is an astounding price to pay for powering 48,000 homes.
The arguments for nuclear power put forward by the industry and their UK Government lackeys are contradictory, disingenuous and downright dishonest.
Dounreay’s installation is a mere toy compared to Hunterston (both reactors now decommissioned) and Torness (the nuclear regulator thinks it should close by 2024). First estimates for decommissioning these sites is £132 billion and 120 years. I wonder when that estimate will be revised upward?
Just as a footnote, all of the UK’s uranium has to be imported. Much of it from Russia. The real reason the UK Government wants to continue with this outrageous waste of money is for the steady supply of enriched uranium for making atomic bombs. That’s worth it to them at any cost.
Rolls-Royce falls 6% as update lacks oomph and news on small nuclear business
Oliver Haill, 11 May 23, Proactive Investor 11th May 2023
Rolls-Royce Holdings PLC’s (LSE:RR.) shares fell 6% to a month’s low after its trading update contained nothing new, analysts said, with some concern about the lack of updates about its small nuclear reactor business…………
Weatherwatch: concerns over climate impact on UK nuclear power sites
Ex-adviser worries ministers have not taken into account sea level rise and storms in selecting sites
Paul Brown https://www.theguardian.com/news/2023/may/12/weatherwatch-concerns-over-climate-impact-on-uk-nuclear-power-sites
Successive governments since the 1980s have had plans for new generations of nuclear power stations sited around the coasts of the United Kingdom. Although the main reason for building them, according to politicians, is to provide a low-carbon form of electricity to combat the climate crisis, no thought seems to have gone into what the climate crisis might do to the nuclear power stations.
Prof Andy Blowers, a former government adviser on nuclear waste, points out in the Town and Country Planning Association Journal that the eight sites identified in 2011 as suitable for new stations are the same as those identified half a century earlier, on which the first generation of nuclear power stations were built.
The reason the sites were originally chosen was their remoteness, for safety, and their proximity to the sea, for cooling purposes. The latest reasoning is that they would have a better chance of public acceptance because two generations of local people have worked in the industry. The new installations are planned to operate for 60 years and will need another century after closure to cool sufficiently to remove the waste.
Blowers, an opponent of the government plans, worries that ministers seem to have taken no account of sea level rise, intense storms and the prospect of flooding at these sites.
Campaigners against UK nuclear waste dump plan claim victory in local elections
Nuclear storage dump campaigners claim victory in local elections
Call for government to honour wishes
By Daniel Jaines Local Democracy Reporter, The Lincolnite, 11 May 23
Anti-nuclear campaigners have claimed victory in Theddlethorpe after last week’s district and parish council elections.
Opposition councillors, including independent Trais Hesketh, gained a majority of seats with a high voter turnout.
The campaign’s success saw voters “overwhelmingly reject” Nuclear Waste Service’s proposal to build a Geological Disposal Facility beneath the former Conoco gas terminal.
Prior to the election, anti-dump candidates were elected unopposed for eight of the ten available seats on Theddlethorpe Parish Council.
The Guardians of the East Coast campaigners have also claimed support from neighbouring towns such as Mablethorpe, Sutton on Sea, and Trusthorpe.
Ken Smith, chairperson for GOTEC, praised the residents for protesting through the ballot box.
“We now call upon Lincolnshire County Council and East Linsey District Council to honour the people’s decision by withdrawing from the so-called community partnership,” he said.
The Nuclear Free Local Authorities group has also backed the campaigners. Councillor David Blackburn said, “When it comes to a GDF, Mablethorpe, Theddlethorpe, and Sutton on Sea do not represent the ‘willing community’ that the government and nuclear industry say they are looking for to host the dump – instead voters there have clearly said ‘No’.”
………….An NWS spokesperson stated that the GDF would only be built where there was the consent of a willing community.
………………………………………………….. Concerns raised around seismic blasting
There have recently been concerns over the impact of seismic blasting in other areas of the UK as part of exploratory works carried out by NWS ahead of geophysical survey works.
The Lakes Against Nuclear Dump/Radiation Free Lakeland groups fear marine deaths in the Irish Sea and Allerdale’s Solway Firth area as part of Copeland exploration were a result of the seismic tests and have called for them to halt while investigations take place……… https://thelincolnite.co.uk/2023/05/nuclear-storage-dump-campaigners-claim-victory-in-local-elections
Germany’s Nuclear Energy Phase-Out, Explained
NIRS, May 8, 2023
On April 15, 2023 utilities in Germany shut down the country’s three
last remaining nuclear power plants. These closures mark the successful
planned phase-out of German nuclear energy from the nation’s grid. What does this mean for Germany? What lessons should the U.S. take away from the
German energy transition?
Germany’s Energiewende (“energytransition”) is an overarching policy commitment to achieve a low-carbon, nuclear-free economy and transition to renewable energy. While the recently completed phase-out of nuclear power is a major milestone for Germany’s energy transition, it was by no means a perfect process nor is the current
energy system in Germany a perfect example to follow.
But, Germany’s transition shows that an energy policy grounded in environmental values works – and the earlier climate policy is implemented, the sooner the
climate policy goals can be realized. Above all, the German energy
transition shows the tremendous power of active citizenry, organized social
movements, and activism to transform policy and successfully demand change.
more https://www.nirs.org/germanys-nuclear-energy-phase-out-explained/
Nuclear Free Local Authorities issue appeal to King over Lincolnshire Nuke Dump
Save our sceptred isle: NFLAs issue appeal to King over Lincolnshire Nuke Dump. https://www.nuclearpolicy.info/news/save-our-sceptred-isle-nflas-issue-appeal-to-king-over-lincolnshire-nuke-dump/ 11 May 23
Just days after the Coronation, the English Nuclear Free Local Authorities (NFLAs) have written to the nation’s new Sovereign to ask His Majesty King Charles III to intercede over the plan to locate a nuclear waste dump in East Lincolnshire right next to the first Royal nature reserve.
The East Lincolnshire coast has been selected as the first of the ‘King’s Series of National Nature Reserves’ to mark the commencement of His Majesty’s Reign. A formal announcement by Natural England is expected in the summer.
The ‘Lincolnshire Coronation Coast Nature Reserve’ will cover some 21 square miles, centred upon existing protected areas at Theddlethorpe and Saltfleetby comprising mud flats, salt- and freshwater marshes and sand dunes, which support a diverse variety of wintering and breeding birds, natter jack toads, insects, and plants. The establishment of the reserve would enhance the area’s existing offer to visitors, many of whom flock to adjoining Mablethorpe to enjoy the beautiful Blue Flag award winning beaches.
So it was with regret that Councillor David Blackburn, Chair of the English Forum of the NFLAs had to sound a note of caution in his letter to His Majesty that Nuclear Waste Services has plans to locate a Geological Disposal Facility, a nuclear waste dump, right next to the reserve.
This would be the destination for Britain’s high-level, heat emitting radioactive waste, including its huge stockpile of plutonium. This waste has either already been generated through the UK’s military and civil nuclear programmes over the last 70 years or will be generated in the future through their continuance.
The GDF would comprise a surface facility approximately 1 square KM, which would most likely be located on the site of the former Conoco gas terminal in Theddlethorpe. This would be the railhead receiving regular shipments of nuclear waste. This waste would be transported below ground and out through tunnels beneath the North Sea. As nuclear waste is transported by rail, and there is no current infrastructure in place, there would be a necessity to construct a new rail line to serve the location.
The process of selecting a site for this facility could take between 15 and 20 years after which the construction and operation of such a facility would last more than 100 years.
In his letter, Councillor Blackburn contends that the project is ‘of such an immense size and in (such) a wholly inappropriate location’ that it would be ‘massively disruptive and harmful’ to the flora and fauna of the local environment, including that of the Royal Reserve, and to local people, as well as ‘massively ruinous’ to the local tourist and agrarian economy. Councillor Blackburn ends by appealing to the King on behalf of ‘His Majesty’s many loyal and anxious subjects in the affected area to intercede with relevant Ministers of the Crown to end this folly ‘.
Commenting Cllr Blackburn said: “The creation of this Royal Reserve is a wonderful idea and wholly in keeping with His Majesty the King’s known love for the natural environment. I can only hope that by drawing the Sovereign’s attention to the government’s lunatic plan to locate a nuclear waste dump next to the reserve that the King might be able to intervene to end the threat of it.”
Sowing Seeds of Plunder: A Lose-Lose Situation in Ukraine
President Zelenskyy put the land reform into law in 2020 against the will of the vast majority of the population who feared it would exacerbate corruption and reinforce control by powerful interests in the agricultural sector.
The largest landholders are a mix of Ukrainian oligarchs and foreign interests — mostly European and North American as well as the sovereign fund of Saudi Arabia.
Ed note: The irony of it! Ukrainians hold the hated memory of Soviet Russia starving Ukraine, as it sent their grain to Russia. Now we have the Western world helping themselves to Ukraine’s agriculture – with increasing farming for export, – pushing out the livelihood’s of Ukrainian small farmers. Zelensky – seen as a hero/saviour for now – – but how will this clown be remembered?
y Colin Todhunter, 10 May 23 https://www.globalresearch.ca/sowing-seeds-plunder-lose-lose-situation-ukraine/5818851
It’s a lose-lose situation for Ukrainians. While they are dying to defend their land, financial institutions are insidiously supporting the consolidation of farmland by oligarchs and Western financial interests.
So says Frédéric Mousseau, Policy Director of the Oakland Institute, an independent think tank.
Depending on which sources to believe, between 100,000 and 300,000 Ukrainian soldiers (possibly more) have died during the conflict with Russia. That figure, of course, does not include civilian casualties.
The mainstream narrative in the West is that Russia grabbed Crimea and then invaded Ukraine. Russia is portrayed as the outright aggressor which wants to restore its control over large swathes of Europe.
The expansion of NATO towards the east, the US-backed coup in 2014 – followed by eight years of the shelling of the ethnic Russian eastern parts of the country by the regime in Kyiv resulting in around 14,000 deaths – led up to the military intervention by Russia, which regards the expansionism and militarism as an existential threat.
It is not the purpose of this article to explore these issues. Much has already been written on this elsewhere. But billions of dollars’ worth of military hardware has been sent to Ukraine by the NATO countries and hundreds of thousands of young Ukrainians have died.
They died in the belief that they were protecting their nation – their land. A land that is among the most fertile in the world.
Professor Olena Borodina of the National Academy of Sciences of Ukraine says:
“Today, thousands of rural boys and girls, farmers, are fighting and dying in the war. They have lost everything. The processes of free land sale and purchase are increasingly liberalised and advertised. This really threatens the rights of Ukrainians to their land, for which they give their lives.”
Borodina is quoted in the February 2023 report by the Oakland Institute War and Theft: The Takeover of Ukraine’s Agricultural Land, which reveals how oligarchs and financial interests are expanding control over Ukraine’s agricultural land with help and financing from Western financial institutions.
Aid provided to Ukraine in recent years has been tied to a drastic structural adjustment programme requiring the creation of a land market through a law that leads to greater concentration of land in the hands of powerful interests. The programme also includes austerity measures, cuts in social safety nets and the privatisation of key sectors of the economy.
Frédéric Mousseau, co-author of the report, says:
“Despite being at the centre of news cycle and international policy, little attention has gone to the core of the conflict — who controls the agricultural land in the country known as the breadbasket of Europe. [The] Answer to this question is paramount to understanding the major stakes in the war.”
The report shows the total amount of land controlled by oligarchs, corrupt individuals and large agribusinesses is over nine million hectares — exceeding 28% of Ukraine’s arable land (the rest is used by over eight million Ukrainian farmers).
Amidst Chaos of War, a New Report Exposes the Stealth Take-over of Ukrainian Agricultural Land
The largest landholders are a mix of Ukrainian oligarchs and foreign interests — mostly European and North American as well as the sovereign fund of Saudi Arabia. A number of large US pension funds, foundations and university endowments are also invested in Ukrainian land through NCH Capital – a US-based private equity fund, which is the fifth largest landholder in the country.
President Zelenskyy put the land reform into law in 2020 against the will of the vast majority of the population who feared it would exacerbate corruption and reinforce control by powerful interests in the agricultural sector.
The Oakland Institute notes that, while large landholders are securing massive financing from Western financial institutions, Ukrainian farmers — essential for ensuring domestic food supply — receive virtually no support. With the land market in place, amid high economic stress and war, this difference of treatment will lead to more land consolidation by large agribusinesses.
All but one of the ten largest landholding firms are registered overseas, mainly in tax havens such as Cyprus or Luxembourg. The report identifies many prominent investors, including Vanguard Group, Kopernik Global Investors, BNP Asset Management Holding, Goldman Sachs-owned NN Investment Partners Holdings, and Norges Bank Investment Management, which manages Norway’s sovereign wealth fund.
Most of the agribusiness firms are substantially indebted to Western financial institutions, in particular the European Bank for Reconstruction and Development, the European Investment Bank, and the International Finance Corporation – the private sector arm of the World Bank.
Together, these institutions have been major lenders to Ukrainian agribusinesses, with close to US$1.7 billion lent to just six of Ukraine’s largest landholding firms in recent years. Other key lenders are a mix of mainly European and North American financial institutions, both public and private.
The report notes that this gives creditors financial stakes in the operation of the agribusinesses and confers significant leverage over them. Meanwhile, Ukrainian farmers have had to operate with limited amounts of land and financing, and many are now on the verge of poverty.
International financial institutions are in effect subsidising the concentration of land and a destructive industrial model of agriculture based on the intensive use of synthetic inputs, fossil fuels and large-scale monocropping.
Much of what is happening in Ukraine is part of a wider trend: private equity funds being injected into agriculture throughout the world and used to lease or buy up farms on the cheap and aggregate them into large-scale, industrial grain and soybean concerns. These funds use pension funds, sovereign wealth funds, endowment funds and investments from governments, banks, insurance companies and high net worth individuals (see the 2020 report ‘Barbarians at the Barn‘ by Grain.org).
Financialising agriculture this way shifts power to people with no connection to farming. In the words of BlackRock’s Larry Fink: “Go long agriculture and water and go to the beach.”
Funds tend to invest for between 10 and 15 years, resulting in good returns for investors but can leave a trail of long-term environmental and social devastation and serve to undermine local and regional food insecurity.
By contrast, according to the Oakland Institute, small-scale farmers in Ukraine demonstrate resilience and enormous potential for leading the expansion of a different production model based on agroecology and producing healthy food. Whereas large agribusinesses are geared towards export markets, it is Ukraine’s small and medium-sized farmers who guarantee the country’s food security.
This is underlined by the State Statistics Service of Ukraine in its report ‘Main agricultural characteristics of households in rural areas in 2011’, which showed that smallholder farmers in Ukraine operate 16% of agricultural land, but provide 55% of agricultural output, including 97% of potatoes, 97% of honey, 88% of vegetables, 83% of fruits and berries and 80% of milk.
In June 2020, the IMF approved an 18-month, strings-attached $5 billion loan programme with Ukraine. Also that year, the World Bank incorporated measures relating to the sale of public agricultural land as conditions in a $350 million Development Policy Loan (COVID ‘relief package’) to Ukraine. This included a required ‘prior action’ to “enable the sale of agricultural land and the use of land as collateral.”
According to the Oakland Institute:
“Ukraine is now the world’s third-largest debtor to the International Monetary Fund and its crippling debt burden will likely result in additional pressure from its creditors, bondholders and international financial institutions on how post-war reconstruction – estimated to cost US$750 billion – should happen.”
Financial institutions are leveraging Ukraine’s crippling debt to drive further privatisation and liberalisation – backing the country into a corner to make it an offer it can’t refuse.
Since the war began, the Ukrainian flag has been raised outside parliament buildings in the West and iconic landmarks have been lit up in its colours. An image bite used to conjure up feelings of solidarity and support for that nation while serving to distract from the harsh machinations of geopolitics and modern-day economic plunder that is unhindered by national borders and has scant regard for the plight of ordinary citizens.
Zaporizhzhia nuclear plant facing ‘catastrophic’ staff shortage amid Russian evacuation
Russia plans to relocate thousands of staff from nuclear plant, atomic energy company claims, warning of ‘catastrophic lack of qualified personnel’
Associated Press, 11 May 23
Russia plans to relocate about 2,700 Ukrainian staff from Europe’s largest nuclear plant, Ukraine’s atomic energy company has claimed, warning of a potential “catastrophic lack of qualified personnel” at the Zaporizhzhia facility in Russian-occupied southern Ukraine.
Workers who signed employment contracts with Russia’s nuclear agency Rosatom following Moscow’s capture of the Zaporizhzhia plant early in the war are set to be taken to Russia along with their families, Energoatom said in a Telegram post on Wednesday.
The company did not specify whether the employees would be forcibly moved out of the plant, nor was it immediately possible to verify Energoatom’s claims about Moscow’s plan.
Removing staff would “exacerbate the already extremely urgent issue” of staff shortages, Energoatom said.
The Moscow-installed governor of the region ordered civilian evacuations from the area last Saturday, including from the nearby city of Enerhodar where most plant workers live. The full scope of the evacuation order was not clear.
Russian forces seized the Zaporizhzhia plant days after Russian president, Vladimir Putin, ordered the invasion of Ukraine in February 2022. Russian occupiers left the Ukrainian staff in place to keep the plant running but the exact number of workers currently at the plant is not known.
Fighting near the plant has fuelled fears of a potential catastrophic incident like the one at Chornobyl, in northern Ukraine, where a reactor exploded in 1986 and contaminated a vast area in the world’s worst nuclear accident.
Zaporizhzhia is one of the 10 biggest nuclear plants in the world. While its six reactors have been shut down for months, it still needs power and qualified staff to operate crucial cooling systems and other safety features…………………. more https://www.theguardian.com/world/2023/may/11/zaporizhzhia-nuclear-plant-facing-catastrophic-staff-shortage-amid-russian-evacuation
Profitable industry in trying to clean up dead nuclear reactors
Magnox is ready to start a major decommissioning project to clean-up and
demolish four ‘blower house’ superstructures that surround Berkeley
site’s two reactor buildings. Altrad has bagged a £31m contract for the
design, asbestos removal, deplant, demolition and construction works in and
around the blower houses.
The firm will also be supported by Veolia KDC
Decommissioning Services, NSG Environmental, OBR Construction, Mammoet, and
Cavendish Nuclear. Ross McAllister, Magnox programme delivery director
said: “This is one of the largest decommissioning projects that Berkeley
site has seen for several years.
“It was originally planned for the
2070’s so it is fantastic to bring that forward by five decades in our aim
to deliver our mission better, faster and even safer. “The blower houses
circulated gas through the reactors to transfer heat into 310 tonne boilers
to create steam to turn the turbines and generate electricity. The last of
the 15 gigantic metal boilers was transported to Sweden for cleaning,
smelting and recycling in 2013. “The buildings will be emptied of the
residual metallic low-level waste and undergo a full asbestos clean before
being demolished.
Construction Enquirer 10th May 2023
Prevent, protect, consult – the NFLA (Nuclear Free Local Authorities)’ three priorities for UK radioactive waste policy
The UK Government has its priorities ‘all wrong’ in its proposals for the future management of radioactive substances and nuclear decommissioning, so says the UK/Ireland Nuclear Free Local Authorities in its response to the Department for Energy Security and Net Zero’s consultation on its proposals for the future management of radioactive substances and nuclear decommissioning.
Instead of an emphasis on cutting costs and reducing the burdens on the nuclear industry as DESNZ would like, the NFLA believes that government and the nuclear industry should do everything necessary for the protection of human health and safeguarding our natural environment – whatever the cost.
To the NFLA, government policy and industry practice should focus upon three main tenets:
- Preventing the creation of more radioactive waste, by not building any more nuclear power plants, by closing and decommissioning existing ones as quickly as possible, and by not revisiting mad-cap schemes that have failed before, like repurposing plutonium as reactor fuel, which creates yet more waste and risks nuclear weapons proliferation;
- Protecting the public and the natural environment, by ‘concentrating and containing’ existing waste on or near the surface on the sites where it was created or is currently stored and having a policy of active ongoing management, with the facility of retrieval if waste is stored below ground. This is opposed to government policy which for high-level waste is focused upon transportation by rail to a Geological Disposal Facility into which the waste would be deposited and forgotten about and for lower-level wastes is one of ‘dilute and disperse’, which involves incineration releasing radiation into the atmosphere or dumping into municipal waste tips or discharging it into rivers or oceans.
- Consulting the public, over the storage and treatment of radioactive waste, and its transportation if this should continue, and also educating the public on the radiological risks attached to these activities; all too often consultation is tokenistic, not inclusive and not open, with the nuclear industry still conducting much of its business behind closed doors.
The author of our response was Pete Roche, the NFLA Policy Advisor (Scotland). Pete has over fifty years of environmental and anti-nuclear campaigning experience, having first been involved in protests against the construction of the Torness Nuclear Power Station in the 1970s.
The NFLA’s full response can be read at the end of this media release [on original]; it amounts to a resounding ‘No’.
The DESNZ consultation is still open for public comments until 24 May 2023.
The consultation papers can be found at https://www.gov.uk/government/consultations/managing-radioactive-substances-and-nuclear-decommissioning
For more information, please contact NFLA Secretary Richard Outram by email on richard.outram@manchester.gov.uk or mobile 07583097793
The success of the Zelensky regime coming unstuck?
Zelensky regime’s fate is sealed Indian Punchline BY M. K. BHADRAKUMAR
The West’s cryptic or mocking remarks doubting the Kremlin statement on the failed Ukrainian attempt to assassinate President Vladimir Putin do not detract from the fact that Moscow has no reason on earth to fabricate such a grave allegation that has prompted the scaling down of its Victory Day celebrations on May 9, which is a triumphal moment in all of Russian history, especially now when it is fighting off the recrudescence of Nazi ideology on Europe’s political landscape single-handedly all over again.
The alacrity with which the US Secretary of State Antony Blinken debunked the Kremlin allegation, perhaps, gives the game away. It is in the neocon DNA to duck in such defining moments. That said, predictably, Blinken also distanced the Biden administration from the Kremlin attack.
Earlier, the chairman of Joints Chiefs of Staff General Marks Milley also did a similar thing in an interview with the Foreign Affairs magazine disowning in advance any responsibility for the upcoming Ukrainian “counteroffensive”. This is the Biden Administration’s new refrain — hear no evil, speak no evil. No more talk, either, of backing Kiev all the way “no matter what it takes” — as Biden used to say ad nauseam.
The heart of the matter is that Kiev’s much touted “counteroffensive” is struggling amidst widespread western prognosis that it is destined to be a damp squib. Actually, the salience of the Foreign Affairs podcast this week with Gen. Milley was also his diffidence about the outcome. Milley refused to be categorical that Kiev would even launch its “counteroffensive”!
There is a huge dilemma today as the entire western narrative of a Russian defeat stands exposed as a pack of lies, and alongside, the myth of Kiev’s military prowess to take on the far superior military might of a superpower has evaporated. The Ukrainian military is being ground to the dust systematically. In reality, Ukraine has become an open wound that is fast turning gangrene, and little time is left to cauterise the wound.
However, Kiev regime is ridden with factionalism. There are powerful cliques who are averse to peace talks with Russia short of capitulation by Moscow and instead want an escalation so that the Western powers remain committed. And even after Boris Johnson’s exit, they have supporters in the West.
The militant clique ensconced in the power structure in Kiev could well have been the perpetrators of this dangerous act of provocation directed against the Kremlin with an ulterior agenda to trigger a Russian retaliation.
From Blinken’s vacuous remark, it seems the neocons in the Biden Administration led by Victoria Nuland are in no mood to rein in the mavericks in Kiev, either. As for Europe, it has lost its voice too.
This will probably show up in history books as a historic failure of European leadership and at its core lies the paradox that it is not France but the German government that has aligned itself closer with the US in the Ukraine war and risking an intra-European “epoch of confrontation.”
Even otherwise, these are fateful times, with the political middle ground already shrinking in France and Italy and is much weakened in Germany itself in the wake of the pandemic, the war, and inflation. Importantly, this is only partly an economic story, as the decline of the centre and the de-industrialisation in Europe are closely related and the social fabric that supported the centre has come unstuck.
……………………………………….. The considered Kremlin reaction is available from the remarks by the Russian Ambassador to the US, Anatoly Antonov:
“How would Americans react if a drone hit the White House, the Capitol or the Pentagon? The answer is obvious for any politician as well as for an average citizen: the punishment will be harsh and inevitable.” ………………………………………… more https://www.indianpunchline.com/zelensky-regimes-fate-is-sealed/
Ukraine war: ‘Mad panic’ as Russia evacuates town near Zaporizhzhia plant
BBC 8 May 23
Russia has sparked a “mad panic” as it evacuates a town near the contested Zaporizhzhia nuclear power plant, a Ukrainian official says.
Russia has told people to leave 18 settlements in the Zaporizhzhia region, including Enerhodar near the plant, ahead of Kyiv’s anticipated offensive.
The Ukrainian mayor of Melitopol, Ivan Fedorov, said there were five-hour waits as thousands of cars left.
The UN’s nuclear watchdog warned a “severe nuclear accident” could occur.
Speaking to the BBC’s Newshour programme Rafael Grossi – the director of the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) – said the evacuation of residents near the nuclear facility indicated the possibility of heavy fighting between Russian and Ukrainian forces around the plant.
Although its reactors were not producing electricity they were still loaded with nuclear material, he said.
Mr Grossi added that he had had to travel through a minefield when he visited the plant a few weeks ago.
Earlier, the IAEA warned in a statement that situation at the Zaporizhzhia facility was “becoming increasingly unpredictable and potentially dangerous”.
Operating staff were still at the site but there was “deep concern about the increasingly tense, stressful, and challenging conditions for personnel and their families”.
It said IAEA experts at the plant had “received information that the announced evacuation of residents from the nearby town of Enerhodar – where most plant staff live – has started”.
On Friday, the Russian-installed regional head Yevgeny Balitsky said that “in the past few days, the enemy has stepped up shelling of settlements close to the front line”.
“I have therefore made a decision to evacuate first of all children and parents, elderly people, disabled people and hospital patients,” he wrote on social media. .
The IAEA has issued warnings previously about safety at the plant – which Russia captured in the opening days of its invasion last year – after shelling caused temporary power cuts.
In March the IAEA warned the plant was running on diesel generators to keep vital cooling systems going, after damage to power lines.
Since Russia launched its invasion in February 2022 the number of staff at the plant has declined, the IAEA says, “but site management has stated that it has remained sufficient for the safe operation of the plant”.
Russian forces occupy much of the Zaporizhzhia region but not the regional capital Zaporizhzhia, which lies just north-east of Enerhodar across the Dnipro reservoir.
On Sunday, the Ukrainian general staff said civilians were being evacuated to the cities of Berdyansk and Prymorsk, further inside Russian-held territory……………………….. https://www.bbc.com/news/world-europe-65515443
-
Archives
- May 2026 (72)
- April 2026 (356)
- March 2026 (251)
- February 2026 (268)
- January 2026 (308)
- December 2025 (358)
- November 2025 (359)
- October 2025 (376)
- September 2025 (257)
- August 2025 (319)
- July 2025 (230)
- June 2025 (348)
-
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 