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.”
Germany to extend last 2 nuclear power plant lifespans by a few weeks
DW 5 SEpt 22, The economics ministry has issued a recommendation to keep two of Germany’s last atomic energy stations online through the winter as Berlin scrambles to come up with alternatives to Russian gas.
Germany announced on Monday that it would likely be extending the life of two of its remaining nuclear power plants.
Deputy Chancellor Robert Habeck, whose ministerial brief incorporates energy policy, said that the plants were to be put on standby until mid-April 2023, instead of being shut down as planned at the end of the year.
Bavaria’s Isar 2 station as well as Neckarwestheim 2, which is north of Stuttgart, will act as reserve power sources through the winter.
The third remaining plant will not be needed, according to a report by the economics ministry that stress tested the three stations.
“That there are many-hour crisis situations in our power grid over the winter of 2022/2023 is very unlikely,” Habeck said on whether Germany could face blackouts as the result of a looming energy crunch.
At the same press conference, Habeck expressed his extreme confidence in the country’s energy supply following a “stress test” carried out earlier in the day.
“We have a high level of supply security,” the deputy chancellor said. “We have great grid stability.”
The move is a major about-face in German energy policy, where the government has been committed to a complete nuclear phaseout since 2011.
For two of the three parties currently in coalition, the SPD and the Greens in particular, exiting nuclear power was also a decades-long campaign platform. The SPD and Greens together ushered in Germany’s first nuclear phaseout, only for it to be overturned for just 18 months or so by former Chancellor Angela Merkel, who eventually reverted to a shutdown soon after the Fukushima meltdown in Japan…………………………..
Scientists: Too late to completely rollback phaseout of these reactors
Scientists have warned, though, that a long-term extension to the nuclear plants’ lifespan would present much more of a problem because of the extent to which the plants have already begun the decommissioning process. https://www.dw.com/en/germany-to-extend-last-2-nuclear-power-plant-lifespans-by-a-few-weeks/a-63023953
Kiev spreading ‘propaganda by fear’ – French ex-presidential candidate
 |
https://www.rt.com/russia/562148-kiev-spreading-propaganda-fear/1 4 Sept 22, Segolene Royal has faced backlash after questioning Ukrainian accounts of events in Bucha and Mariupol.
A former French presidential candidate has accused Ukrainian leader Vladimir Zelensky of using ‘war propaganda’ as a tool to obstruct the peace process. Veteran politician Segolene Royal also called on the UN and media associations to fight against such tactics.
Royal’s suggestion, that some of the “war crimes” Kiev blames on Russian troops were part of ‘propaganda,’ has made her a target for widespread criticism.
Speaking to BFMTV earlier this week, Royal said that “everyone knows that there is war propaganda by fear.”
As an example, she cited the alleged shelling of a maternity hospital in Mariupol – the story which made headlines in Western media in early March. Zelensky blamed Russia for the incident that, as local authorities claimed, killed three people, including a child. The Russian military denied targeting the medical facility and insisted the whole thing was a “completely staged provocation” by the Ukrainian side.
“You can imagine that if there had been any victim, any baby with blood, in the age of cell phones we would have seen [their photos],” Royal stressed.
The authenticity of the photos presented by Kiev as proof of the claimed Russian attack were questioned by many online. Marianna Vyshemirskaya, one of the pregnant women featured in the images that appeared on the front pages of many major outlets, later claimed that there had been no Russian airstrike on the hospital. She insisted that she told AP journalists about this, but they decided not to mention it in their reportage.
Royal, who used to be a long-term partner of France’s former president Francois Hollande, also commented on the events of April in the town of Bucha near Kiev, after which Zelensky claimed that negotiations with Russia became impossible. Ukrainian authorities accused the Russian forces of multiple atrocities against civilians in the town, including the rape of children. Moscow firmly denied the allegations of war crimes, insisting it was “yet another provocation” by Kiev.
“The stories of child rape for seven hours under the eyes of the parents: but it’s monstrous to go and spread things like that only to interrupt the peace process,” the veteran French politician stated, without elaborating.
She also claimed that Zelensky used accounts of alleged torture of Ukrainian soldiers by Russian troops – which Moscow also vehemently denies – not only to impede any peace process but also to “remobilize” troops. She argued that as “there’s been enough horror of war and casualties” and that “Ukrainian propaganda” should be stopped “under the aegis of the UN and media organizations.”
After BFMTV tweeted a fragment of her interview with a caption “Segolene Royal questions certain war crimes in Ukraine,” the politician responded that this was “false,” as she’d “never denied war crimes.”
On Saturday, Royal published the final part of her remarks which, as she said, was cut by the television network. In this fragment she says that “there is a form of one-upmanship in the description of the horror, to encourage arms deliveries and to refrain from setting up negotiation and peace processes.”
“To plead for peace is to act for the end of the suffering of the Ukrainian people and of Russian aggression,” she wrote in a caption to the video.
Royal’s interview was condemned by some politicians as well as by many social media users. The Stand With Ukraine group representing the victims and the families of victims of “Russian aggression” even announced that it was considering filing a complaint against Royal in order to defend “the honor of disappeared.”
Meanwhile, the president of the party The Patriots, Florian Philippot, criticized “the aggressive and crazy reactions” to Royal’s remarks and said that she “has every right, and an intellectual duty” to question war propaganda.
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.
UK government grants £3.3M funding for Advanced Modular Development and Demonstration Nuclear Reactors
Six ground-breaking nuclear technology projects across the UK have
received government backing to help develop the next generation of nuclear
reactors. The £3.3M funding will support the early-stage innovation for
the winning projects, ………….. Through the Advanced Modular
Reactor Research, Development and Demonstration (AMR RD&D) programme, the
funding support the development of technology such as high temperature gas
reactors (HTGRs), helping revolutionise the way the UK gets its energy. The
innovative projects being backed by the government include National Nuclear
Laboratory in Cheshire, which is coordinating a UK-Japan team to design an
innovative HTGR and U-Battery Developments in Slough, for a study to
determine the optimum size, type, cost, and delivery method for a U-Battery
AMR suitable for demonstration in the UK.
New Civil Engineer 5th Sept 2022
https://www.newcivilengineer.com/latest/6-nuclear-innovations-win-government-funding-05-09-2022/
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.
Nuclear power for Britain – a “financial basket case “
Recent days have seen Government ministers blaming opposition parties for
the failure to deploy nuclear power in the UK. But the problem is not
politicians, not the Conservatives, Labour or anyone else; it is the
extreme difficulty of delivering nuclear power itself.
Financially, it is a basket case, and any other technology with similar problems simply wouldn’t
get past the lobbyists’ meetings with politicians. On August 7th Kwasi
Kwarteng produced a tweet blaming Nick Clegg and Labour for delays in
building nuclear power, saying: ‘Thanks to Labour’s 13-year moratorium
and Lib Dem blockers in the Coalition, we made no progress on nuclear.
Supply chains disappeared. Since 2015, we got Hinkley approved and Sizewell
C received planning consent last month. ‘
However, this explanation does
not stand up to serious analysis. In their 2005 manifesto the Conservatives
did not even mention nuclear power, referring instead to renewables and
energy efficiency as a means of protecting energy security. By the 2010
election both Labour and Conservatives were backing the idea of building
more nuclear power plant, but Conservatives ruled out giving nuclear
subsidies. Their manifesto said they would be ‘clearing the way for new
nuclear power stations – provided they receive no public subsidy’ .Of
course the Liberal Democrats were very much opposed to new nuclear power
before they joined the Coalition in 2010.
But then it was the Liberal
Democrat Energy Secretary of State Chris Huhne who proposed a new
electricity market reform consultation paper at the end of 2010. This
allowed, in effect, nuclear power to receive public subsidies under the
cover that this same subsidy would be available to other low carbon
sources. This laid the basis for the current contracts for difference (CfD)
regime which is funding Hinkley C.
But in practice the offer of a generous
CfD for Hinkley C proved not to satisfy the prospective nuclear generators.
This included EDF which was/is backed by the French state who wanted to
promote France’s new European Pressurised Reactor (EPR) design. The most
fundamental problem was that no major British political party was then
willing to underwrite cost overruns – this was seen as giving nuclear
constructors a blank cheque, which it is. Nevertheless this underwriting
has now, latterly, been given EDF for Sizewell C under the so-called
‘RAB’ arrangements.
100% Renewables 3rd Sept 2022
UK’s Nuclear Gambit Faces Long Odds Even With Sizewell Approval
The 24 gigawatt-target is “not viable if each project happens by negotiation that takes five to 10 years,” said Luba Kotzeva de Diaz, managing director European energy & renewables at Lazard Ltd.
- EDF’s Hinkley Point C is over budget and behind schedule
- Government’s 24-gigawatt nuclear target seen as unrealistic
Bloomberg. By Rachel Morison, September 4, 2022 , The UK’s audacious push to triple nuclear power capacity inched forward with the promise of government funding for the Sizewell C station, but doubts remain about the government’s ability to greenlight enough projects by 2030 to meet that goal.
Considering it took about 10 years for Electricite de France SA’s plant to get this far, the government’s “go big” gambit on nuclear energy — to help wean the nation off Russian fossil fuels and reduce emissions — is seen as a long shot. And those odds may get worse for the successor to Prime Minister Boris Johnson.
……….. The government wants to deliver eight new nuclear reactors this decade — needing approval at a pace equivalent to one a year. A construction program of this scale hasn’t been achieved on the continent since the French in the 1970s, prompting calls on leaders to find alternative paths for achieving energy independence and legally binding emissions cuts.
“It will be extremely difficult for the government,” said Asgeir Heimisson, senior associate at Aurora Energy Research Ltd. “Investment would need to occur approximately every three years from 2022, requiring a total of about £180 billion of capital expenditure.”
That’s a challenge for the new prime minister, who will take over in coming days amid a recession spurred by record energy prices and an inflation rate set to hit 14% this winter.
By 2050, a 24 gigawatt-strong fleet of new reactors is supposed to provide stable backup for offshore wind, the most-advanced renewable technology in Britain. The near-term ambition here is massive, too: reaching 50 gigawatts this decade………………………………..
The Sizewell project still needs significant backing from private investors before a final investment decision is made. It would follow on from Hinkley Point C, the UK’s first nuclear plant in three decades. Progress at Hinkley is costing more and taking longer to build than planned, stoking concerns about whether the government is right to rely so heavily on the technology.
Financing is the biggest hurdle for new stations, with the price tag for Sizewell being £20 billion ($23 billion) at the start of this year, but materials costs have surged since. An overhaul of the financing mechanism is meant to attract more funds. The regulated asset base, or RAB, model is supposed to encourage private investors and dilute the construction risk shouldered by the developer and taxpayers.
The government’s £700 million investment is expected to form a 20% stake in the project, with EDF taking another 20%. Greencoat Capital LLC, one of the UK’s biggest managers of renewable-energy funds, is considering investing, founder Richard Nourse said in July.
Sizewell represents a “glimmer of hope” for the nuclear industry, said Vince Zabielski, partner at Pillsbury Winthrop Shaw Pittman LLC. “The investment shows promise, but the decision is about 10 years late.”
…………The 24 gigawatt-target is “not viable if each project happens by negotiation that takes five to 10 years,” said Luba Kotzeva de Diaz, managing director European energy & renewables at Lazard Ltd. — With assistance by Ellen Milligan https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2022-09-04/uk-s-nuclear-gambit-faces-long-odds-even-with-sizewell-approval
Youth- led 7 day anti-nuclear march against UK government’s plan for small nuclear reactors
Members of the youth cohort of CND Cymru will be embarking on a 7-day march
from Trawsfynydd Nuclear Power Station in Gwynedd to Wylfa Nuclear Power
Station on Ynys Môn in September, in protest against the Westminster
government’s decision to locate Small Modular Nuclear Reactors (SMRs) on
the decommissioned sites.
This decision came hand in hand with the growing
frustration felt by young people following the government’s
‘greenwashing’ of nuclear energy; selling it as a form of clean, safe and
homegrown energy in the backdrop of the climate crisis.
We are equally concerned about the disastrous effects of uranium mining on the lands of
indigenous people in Australia as well as in areas of the Global South –
not to mention the links between nuclear power, the military and nuclear
weapons.
The young people who have decided to march against the
construction of SMRs in Trawsfynydd and Wylfa want their voices heard in
the debates that will depict the future landscape in which they will have
to live in. They demand to see preparations for a genuinely green future
and the creation of jobs that will not come at the expense of the health of
workers and their communities, or the environment.
Climate justice cannot
be achieved by nuclear energy. We will be walking with the support of the
Public and Commercial Services Union (PCS), Nuclear Free Local Authorities
(NFLA), CADNO, PAWB, Cymdeithas yr Iaith, XR Cymru, Youth Fusion and Mabon
ap Gwynfor (MS). Although the march will be youth-led, anyone wishing to
join will be most welcome.
CND Cymru 4th Sept 2022
If people take part in referendums in Donbass region, Ukraine government will prosecute them as criminal offenders
Kiev threatens pro-Russia Ukrainians with jail terms. more https://www.rt.com/russia/562159-kiev-referendum-jail-time/ 4 Sept 22, Ukraine’s deputy prime minister warns that voting in referendums in Moscow-controlled territories is a criminal offence
Ukrainian citizens risk criminal prosecution and a jail time of up to 12 years if they participate in referendums on joining Russia, Ukrainian Deputy Prime Minister Irina Vereshchuk warned on Saturday.
“There are not and will not be any referendums on our Ukrainian land,” Vereshchuk stated during a national broadcast.
Pro-Russian authorities in the Zaporozhye, Kharkov and Kherson Regions, as well the Donetsk and Lugansk People’s Republics, previously spoke of potentially holding referendums on uniting with Russia, but so far no dates have been set.
“It’s all a farce and a circus. But for our citizens who will take part in this, there is actually an article of the Criminal Code,” Kiev’s deputy prime minister said.
“If collaboration is proven, or, for example, participation in the referendum or incitement to participate in the referendum, then people can receive up to 12 years with confiscation (of assets),” she warned.
Vereshchuk urged Ukrainians who remain in Russia-controlled territories to evacuate or avoid voting in any plebiscites, as “no pressure, no violent incitement, etc., can later justify the fact that a person went to the referendum.”
When asked, how many people potentially might take part in voting, Vereshchuk claimed the percentage is “tiny… not even 2%.”
The Ukrainian government previously warned that citizens who attempt to become Russian citizens could be punished with up to 15 years in prison.
Ukrainian government wants to sell nuclear energy to Germany
DW, 4 Sept 22, Kyiv offers nuclear energy to Germany. Ukrainian Prime Minister Denys Shmyhal has said a proposal to export electricity to Germany amid the ongoing energy crisis would be “a very good deal for both sides.” DW rounds up the latest…….
“Currently, Ukraine exports its electricity to Moldova, Romania, Slovakia and Poland. But we are quite ready to expand our exports to Germany,” Ukrainian Prime Minister Denys Shmyhal told the dpa news agency on Saturday.
“We have a sufficient amount of electricity in Ukraine, thanks to our nuclear power plants,” he said. The issue will be discussed during Shmyhal’s visit to Berlin over the weekend, where he will be meeting with Chancellor Olaf Scholz.
Electricity consumption in Ukraine has fallen since the start of the Russian invasion, due to the mass exodus of refugees and an economic slump.
Shmyhal said such a deal “would be very good for both sides.”…….
Ukraine operates four nuclear power plants with a total capacity of more than 14 gigawatts.
However, observers fear Russia’s capture of the Zaporizhzhia facility — the largest nuclear power plant in Europe — could lead to a serious accident if the war intensifies…………. https://www.dw.com/en/russia-ukraine-updates-kyiv-offers-nuclear-energy-to-germany/a-63009289
“This is Not Our War” • Czech People Rise Up Against NATOSTAN War — Calculus of Decay
Tens of thousands took to the streets to protest the NATO involvement in the Russia/Ukraine war:
“This is Not Our War” • Czech People Rise Up Against NATOSTAN War — Calculus of Decay
Nikopol under attack: Residents flee fighting near Zaporizhzhia nuclear power plant
Euro News 4 Set 22, Every day, people gather in a wooded park just 30 kilometres from Ukraine’s Zaporizhzhia nuclear power plant and set up temporary shelters.
Some are from the southern Ukrainian city of Nikopol, situated down the river from Europe’s biggest nuclear power station.
The campers have fled Nikopol to escape shelling, with many of them sleeping in tents or their cars. When the rumbling of artillery fire stops, they return to Nikopol to work or check if their homes are still in one piece.
Attacks on Nikopol – located just 10 kilometres from Zaporizhzhia – have intensified over the past couple of weeks, as Russia and Ukrainian continue to exchange deadly blows in their six-month conflict. ……
More than 50% of Nikopol’s residents have fled the city, according to local authorities, with many of those who remain being forced to sleep in basements and shelters. https://www.euronews.com/2022/09/04/nikopol-under-attack-residents-flee-fighting-near-zaporizhzhia-nuclear-power-plant
—
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
1 This Month
of the week– Nuclear Reactor Information Task Force
14 May – online event From Bombs to Data Centres: the Face of Nuclear Colonialism
To see nuclear-related stories in greater depth and intensity – go to https://nuclearinformation.wordpress.com
-
Archives
- May 2026 (102)
- 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 