UN nuclear watchdog says situation at Russian-occupied Ukrainian nuclear plant is ‘unsustainable’
May 3, 2022 by Charles Digges, The United Nations nuclear watchdog has warned that Russian troops are
putting “unbelievable pressure” on workers at the Zaporizhzhya nuclear
power plant – which is both the largest in Ukraine and Europe as a whole
– saying the situation is “unsustainable.” Russian forces seized the
plant during a dramatic assault on March 4, and they have since then forced
Ukrainian plant operators to manage the site under extreme conditions. The
UN’s International Atomic Energy Agency has also reported that eight
specialists from Rosatom, Russia’s state nuclear corporation, are also
onsite.
https://bellona.org/news/nuclear-issues/2022-05-un-nuclear-watchdog-says-situation-at-russian-occupied-ukrainian-nuclear-plant-is-unsustainable
Ukraine’s nuclear power plants caught in the Crossfire of War With Russia

Russia’s invasion of Ukraine has triggered fears of another nuclear power disaster in the region, 36 years after the world’s largest nuclear accident. The Revelator, May 2, 2022 – by Jordan Gass-Poore’
It took less than a minute after an unexpected power surge for one of the nuclear reactors at Chornobyl (Chernobyl in the Russian spelling) to explode on April 26, 1986, ripping the roof off and spewing dangerous chemicals into the air.
The event, and emergency cleanup that followed, left 30 workers dead, thousands exposed to cancer-causing nuclear material, and a legacy of radiation. Now, 36 years later and with war raging, Ukraine is desperate to prevent another nuclear disaster.
Nuclear reactors generate more than half of the country’s power. Ukraine is the first country with such a large and established nuclear energy program to experience war, according to the International Atomic Energy Agency.
The country’s 15 nuclear reactors, housed in four power plants, have layers of safeguards to prevent core meltdowns like the one that happened in 1986, when Chornobyl was part of the Soviet Union. But wartime is far from normal conditions, and experts warn that Russian military action poses numerous threats to these facilities.

Andrey Ozharovsky, a Russian engineer turned anti-nuclear activist, said Ukraine’s nuclear infrastructure is “quite vulnerable” to the chaos surrounding military attacks.
Chornobyl, Again
Those attacks have already begun.
The Chornobyl Nuclear Power Plant and the 20-mile exclusion zone around it, set up to limit further spread of radioactive material following the 1986 disaster, were captured by Russian forces on Feb. 24. It was in their control until they withdrew from the site on March 31.

Although Chornobyl is not an active nuclear power plant, the massive cap covering the reactor that exploded decades ago still needs to be maintained to prevent further radiation leakage.
Sensors put in place by the Ukrainian Ecocentre in case of an accident reported a spike in radiation levels shortly after the capture, likely due to Russian military vehicles stirring up radiation in the environment.
The IAEA said the rise wasn’t enough to pose a public health hazard.
Ozharovsky, who was one of the first to raise an alarm about the recent spike at Chornobyl, said he’s concerned that radioactive dust from the site could spread across the continent.
“The most dangerous thing is that they can bring radioactive particles in their hair, in their clothes and their boots,” he says………………………
Nuclear Plant Captured
Chornobyl isn’t the only concern. Ukraine’s active nuclear-power facilities are also at risk.
On March 4, Russian forces captured Europe’s largest active nuclear-power plant, Zaporizhzhia, located in southeastern Ukraine. During intense fighting one of the site’s buildings caught fire, but didn’t harm the plant’s six reactors, and no radiation was released.
Ukrainian technicians continue to monitor Zaporizhzhia, but the country’s regulators have claimed that Rosatom, Russia’s state nuclear power company, has engineers at the plant who are giving orders to staff. Further, Ukraine reports that plant management actions require approval from the Russian commander, according to the IAEA.
“Who is now in charge of the Zaporizhzhia Nuclear Power Plant?” asks Ozharovsky. “The Russian army is around, but armies aren’t nuclear engineers.”
Rosatom released a statement on March 12 and denied that they’re managing the operation of Zaporizhzhia. They characterized their staff’s presence at the plant as “consultative assistance” that takes place “on a regular basis.”
Grossi expressed “deep concern” about the situation in a statement last month.
Further Threats
Since then, there’s been more reason for alarm.
On April 16, three missiles flew over the South Ukrainian nuclear power plant, Yuzhnoukrainsk, according to Energoatom, Ukraine’s state-run nuclear power company.
Then on April 26 Energoatom reported that two cruise missiles flew over the Zaporizhzhia Nuclear Power Plant.
The flight of missiles at low altitudes directly above the Zaporizhzhia Nuclear Power Plant site, where 7 nuclear facilities with a huge amount of nuclear material are located, poses huge risks,” says Petro Kotin, Energoatom’s acting president, in a statement released on the company’s Telegram channel. “After all, missiles can hit one or more nuclear facilities, and this threatens a nuclear and radiation catastrophe around the world.”
The day before, Energoatom reported that Russia fired missiles over the cooling pond of the Khmelnytskyi Nuclear Power Plant in northwest Ukraine
Kosharna wrote in an email that if a missile would’ve hit one of the plants the consequences wwould have been “catastrophic” for the world.
Typically nuclear plants use back-up generators to maintain power with a grid disruption and keep the cooling systems functioning normally. In wartime fuel shortages are common, and this risks the stability of the generators. Ukraine’s current shortage is only getting worse, according to the Gas Transmission Operator of Ukraine, a gas pipeline operator
If the grid goes down and the generators are out of fuel and the cooling systems fail, there’s a last resort to prevent radiation from spreading. Containment structures around the reactors are designed to block any release of radiation, but they’re also vulnerable to missile attacks.
Reactor failure isn’t the only significant risk to the operation.
Staff operating facilities under extreme stress also poses a problem, Ozharovsky says, because any mistake they make on the job could be calamitous..

There are also other onsite dangers. Spent nuclear fuel storage pools that are a part of the waste-disposal system contain radioactive material. If they’re damaged the liquid could be released from containment, causing a massive spread of radiation. Japanese scientists considered this to be the “worst-case scenario” of the Fukushima Daiichi Nuclear Power Plant, which had a series of meltdowns after a tsunami struck the plant in 2011.
Ozharovsky said he doesn’t believe the Russian military would deliberately sabotage one of Ukraine’s nuclear power plants because it would threaten their interests. But he added that even the possibility that the nuclear power plants could be harmed accidentally should trigger worldwide alarm.
“For me it’s scary,” he says. “All the other nuclear power plants, like Khmelnytskyi, like Rivne, like South Ukraine (Yuzhnoukrainsk); they can be damaged during this war. And the international community needs to take care of that.”
Any attack on a nuclear plant is a breach of international humanitarian law. The Geneva Convention’s Article 56 considers attacking a nuclear power plant a war crime.
“I hope that many other countries who still have nuclear energy on their territory will rethink physical safety, military safety,” Ozharovsky says. “That’s a challenge no one country can solve.” https://therevelator.org/ukraine-war-nuclear-power/?utm_source=rss&utm_medium=rss&utm_campaign=ukraine-war-nuclear-power

Ask me about … the 1986 Chernobyl nuclear disaster and its lingering effects
PATRICIA SABATINI, Pittsburgh Post-Gazette, psabatini@post-gazette.com 2 May 22,
Olga Klimova-Magnotta is a lecturer and director of the Russian program at the University of Pittsburgh who teaches a humanities course on the 1986 Chernobyl nuclear disaster.
A native of Belarus, she was 7 years old when a massive explosion at the No. 4 reactor at the Chernobyl nuclear power plant in northern Ukraine (then part of the Soviet Union) resulted in a fire and the uncontrolled release of radioactive contamination. Ms. Klimova — who moved to the U.S. in her early 20s ,was living in the Belarus capital of Minsk at the time of the accident, about 200 miles north of the explosion — or about the distance from Pittsburgh to Harrisburg.
She believes her heart problems stem from radiation exposure. “Many children born or growing up during this time had heart diseases,” she said.
“We all had different health issues. … The doctors connected it to the radiation.”
Talk about the course you teach on Chernobyl. What is the goal?
2021 marked the 35th anniversary of Chernobyl. That’s when I decided to develop the course and draw attention to the Chernobyl tragedy. I wanted students to be aware of the disaster and specifically about its continued effects on the ecosystem and the social, economic, political and cultural lives of people in the area.
Many in the United States didn’t know much about the explosion of the Chernobyl plant before the popular 2019 HBO miniseries [“Chernobyl”]. At least half of my students registered because they watched the miniseries and wanted to learn more.
What stands out in your mind about the catastrophe?
I think it’s the fact that none of us who were living in this area knew the real impact of the disaster. Because radiation is invisible … many of us didn’t know. We were not informed by the government about the negative effects of radiation. There was a lack of information.
When I was growing up after 1986 and in the early 1990s, the disaster affected a lot of people in terms of health. A lot of people started to suffer from [cancer and other health issues]. The numbers of these diseases grew dramatically. Doctors would explain it was because you were a child of Chernobyl.
What are some things about the Chernobyl disaster that you think people would be surprised to know?
I think people would be surprised that the government refused to acknowledge that radiation had a big impact on people’s health.
A lot of volunteers went to Ukraine to do cleanup. It was the Soviet Union. A lot of people in Belarus [also formerly part of the Soviet Union] and Russia and also Ukrainians were sent there. People didn’t get disability or special help with their health issues.
People living in the area were severely affected. Many had long battles with the government trying to get support and get treatment at the hospital. The government denied that the health issues people were having were directly connected to the nuclear disaster.
………….. The radiation hasn’t disappeared. It has a constant effect on people’s health……………………………….. https://www.post-gazette.com/business/powersource/2022/05/02/1986-chernobyl-nuclear-disaster-ukraine-olga-kilmova-magnotta-university-of-pittsburgh/stories/202205010040.
UK Greens the party on the rise – a ‘tectonic shift’ among voters.

Local elections 2022: Greens winning hearts in northeast as party eyes ‘tectonic shift’ among voters. Campaigners welcomed on doorstep in Labour stronghold South Shields as internal polls predict party will make large gains across the country.
The Greens are, by any measure, a party on the rise – both in the northeast and across the country. In a series of remarkable election results last year, they won 155 English and Welsh council seats, helping take their total to a record high of 467. They now lead two authorities, in Brighton and Hove, and Lancaster, are in a ruling coalition in another 13, including Oxfordshire, York and Sheffield, and make up the official opposition in eight more including Bristol, Norwich and Solihull.
Now, it is all but certain this growth will continue on 5 May: a realistic good night would see them smash the 500-seat barrier, party bosses suggest. In particular, they are hoping to move beyond their traditional metropolitan powerbases and establish a greater presence in the north’s old industrial heartlands. The increasing acceptance that the planet is, er, dying on its arse – that’s the climate crisis – has attracted plenty of voters in an area that will pretty quickly find itself under water if global temperatures continue rising.
But, perhaps of greater significance, is a tangible anger here at a sense of being taken for
granted by the dominant Labour Party for too long. “They’re sitting tenants,” one resident fumed. “They reckon they’ve a job for life and that’s how they treat it.”
Independent UK, 1st May 2022
Czech state looking for place to store nuclear waste as EU deadline shortens
English Radio CZ 05/02/2022 The Ministry of Industry is looking for ways to speed up the planned construction of a nuclear waste facility in the Czech Republic, which would enable the country to fulfil the EU’s taxonomy plan for using nuclear energy as a clean source. However, the plan is running into opposition from local districts who don’t want nuclear waste stored near their homes. The Czech Republic has two nuclear power plants, but nowhere to store its nuclear waste. At least in the long term. For now, nuclear waste is being stored in barrels located inside the power plants themselves, says Jiří Bezděk, the spokesman for the Dukovany nuclear power plant, who took Czech Radio on a tour of the facility.
You can see we are now in the storage facility for used nuclear fuel. This fuel can be stored in containers for a period of up to 60 years. Thereafter, you can take it out, check the container and put the fuel back in for another six decades.”
……….. the RWRA has nowhere to store the waste.
Originally, the Czech government counted on building a deep nuclear waste storage facility by 2065, but the EUs taxonomy plan which was agreed earlier this year, has cut that deadline to the year 2050.
Both Deputy Industry Minister Tomáš Ehler and the head of the country’s Nuclear Safety Office Dana Drábová have said that fulfilling the shorter deadline is possible on paper. However, it necessitates speeding up relevant research activities as well as finally deciding on where the state wants to build the storage facility.
Founded in 2001, the state’s Radioactive Waste Repository Authority has had over 20 years’ time to find a suitable storage location. And it has. Four locations were approved by the government as suitable prospective sites for a deep storage facility.
However, local residents of each of these proposed sites are strongly against the construction. Some of them have banded into the “Platform against deep storage”, a civic organisation that lobbies for an alternative to deep nuclear waste storage and for the construction of any such facility to be subject to a local district vote. The organisation’s secretary, Edvard Sequens, says that locals have more say in the process in other countries…………….. https://english.radio.cz/czech-state-looking-place-store-nuclear-waste-eu-deadline-shortens-8749305
Finnish consortium abandons Fennovoima nuclear power project
Finnish group abandons plans for Russia-backed nuclear power plant
Contract with Rosatom terminated as war in Ukraine deals final blow to controversial energy project, Ft.com, Richard Milne, Nordic and Baltic Correspondent, 2 May 22,
A Finnish consortium has abandoned controversial plans to build a Russian nuclear power plant in the Nordic country as Moscow’s invasion of Ukraine dealt a terminal blow to the project. The Fennovoima project has been mired in controversy from the outset with Finland’s then environment minister telling the Financial Times in 2014 that it was an example of “Finlandisation”, a loaded term that refers to a smaller country adapting its policies to suit a larger, more powerful neighbour.
The Hanhikivi 1 project was particularly controversial because Rosatom, the Russian state nuclear company, was not just the supplier of the reactor but also the main shareholder and financial backer of the Fennovoima consortium. Rosatom owns 34 per cent while Finnish companies such as energy group Fortum, steelmakers SSAB and Outokumpu as well as local municipalities own the rest. Fennovoima said on Monday that it had terminated the contract with Rosatom due to “significant and growing delays during the last years”, which have been exacerbated by the war in Ukraine. ………………………………….. https://www.ft.com/content/5e7730b5-be55-48a5-8f55-f67d6fb80d77
Britain’s very wrong turn in energy policy

At least Rishi Sunak would appear to have recognised all this nuclear nonsense for the massive con trick it is. As far as the Treasury is concerned, a few hundred million to prop up Rolls-Royce, and a couple of billion to keep the prospect of Sizewell C alive – that’s acceptable, it would seem. Beyond that, from the Chancellor’s perspective, lies one vast funding black hole. Not least because of nuclear waste.
Courtesy of the mainstream media’s cosy relationship with the nuclear industry, we hardly ever hear about this. But the Treasury writes a cheque to the Nuclear Decommissioning Authority of around £2.5bn every year – to deal with the legacy of our earlier nuclear investments in terms of waste management and decommissioning. The price tag just for cleaning up Sellafield has now risen to an astonishing £97bn! On top of that, the anticipated cost of an underground storage facility to house the high-level waste for thousands of years has now risen to as much as £53bn – according to the Government’s own figures. That’s the cost of old nuclear. It will be no different with any new nuclear.
Why a nuclear power policy is clearly the road not to take
Wrong turn — Beyond Nuclear International The establishment’s obsession with nuclear power just won’t die,
more https://wordpress.com/read/feeds/72759838/posts/3984916370
By Jonathon Porritt 1 May 22,
This is absolutely the right time for a new Energy Strategy. Unfortunately, we’ve got absolutely the wrong politicians in charge of it. In the UK, the combination of Prime Minister Boris Johnson and Chancellor of the Exchequer Rishi Sunak all but guarantees that the new Energy Security Strategy will fail on most counts.
– In Boris Johnson, we have a careless showman, drawn unerringly to ‘big ticket’ announcements, groomed by a nuclear industry that knows exactly how to play to these personality defects.
– In Rishi Sunak, we have a man so detached from the reality of most people’s lives that the prospect of five million UK citizens finding themselves in fuel poverty by the end of the year means literally nothing.
Careless Johnson and callous Sunak is a devastating double-act – with the inconsequential figure of Kwasi Kwarteng (UK Secretary of State for Business, Energy and Industrial Strategy) lurking around to pick up the pieces.
There will, of course, be some welcome commitments in the new UK Strategy, particularly on solar and offshore wind, with a hugely encouraging pipeline of new developments in both now underpinning the UK’s decarbonisation strategy. Onshore wind may well get more encouragement than in the past, but the aesthetic sensibilities of Tory Nimbies will still matter more to Johnson and Sunak than the opportunity to ramp up the single most cost-effective source of renewable electricity – coming in at an astonishing 20% of the cost of new nuclear! Yet again, those ‘hard-working families’ Johnson constantly refers to will pay the price for this appalling policy failure.
The UK establishment’s obsession with nuclear power just won’t die. Boris Johnson is heading off down a well-worn path. Margaret Thatcher promised to build a nuclear reactor every year for ten years at the start of her time in office. In 2006, Tony Blair vowed to bring back nuclear power ‘with a vengeance’. David Cameron’s Government identified opportunities for a massive expansion of nuclear.
However, apart from Sizewell B (which came online in 1995) and EDF’s grotesquely expensive monster emerging at Hinkley Point C, there’s nothing to show for all that overblown nuclear enthusiasm. The industry blames this 40-year failure on everyone else – including a generation of anti-nuclear campaigners. In truth, the blame lies entirely with the industry itself, mendaciously promoting outdated, dangerous, increasingly expensive technologies.
Johnson’s big nuclear bets will almost certainly include big reactors at both Sizewell C and Wylfa, and as many as possible of the so-called ‘small reactors’ being pushed by Rolls-Royce. Regardless of the hype, the economic reality of all of these bets is dire:
Sizewell C – with the Chinese out of the picture, the Government will be looking to its new Regulated Asset Base funding model (with consumers having to pay up front) to persuade private investors to get on board. Backed (so far) by the promise of £1.75bn of taxpayers’ money.
Wylfa – so much effort has gone into trying to get a new reactor at Wylfa over the line over the last ten years! All to no avail – primarily for economic reasons. Any renewed ‘firm commitment’ for Wylfa will mean as little as all previous commitments.
Rolls-Royce’s Small Modular Reactors – apparently, Johnson is particularly excited by this prospect, even though they’re not even remotely small (at 470MW, they’re actually as big as the first generation of Magnox reactors here in the UK!), and no-one has ever done modular construction (offsite in factory settings) before now.
And none of these ‘exciting prospects’ will give Johnson (let alone hard-pressed UK consumers) one single electron in terms of helping to meet the Government’s target to have carbon-free electricity by 2035.
Continue readingGermany backs a plan to put sanctions on the supply from Russia, of uranium, the fuel for Europe’s so called ”independent self-sufficient, sovereign” nuclear energy.

Russia faces threat of sanctions on nuclear power industry as Germany backs uranium ban https://www.politico.eu/article/russia-nuclear-power-uranium-plants-europe-imports-germany-sanctions-ukraine-war/
Move would hit the supply of uranium to the EU’s Russian-built reactors, as well as new nuclear projects., BY BARBARA MOENS, ZIA WEISE, AMERICA HERNANDEZ AND LEONIE KIJEWSKI. April 29, 2022 Germany has thrown its weight behind demands to sanction uranium imports from Russia and other parts of Vladimir Putin’s civil nuclear industry in retaliation for his invasion of Ukraine, five EU diplomats told POLITICO.
Such a move could hit the supply of uranium that fuels the bloc’s Russian-built power reactors, as well as new nuclear projects managed by Russia’s Rosatom Western Europe subsidiary, based in Paris.
Four of the diplomats said sanctioning Russia’s nuclear industry was discussed in a meeting with EU ambassadors and the Commission earlier this week, with Poland and the Baltic countries leading the calls to act.
“Germany’s ambassador on Wednesday announced Berlin’s new position, saying they are not only OK with oil sanctions, but they actively support an oil phaseout, rather than just a price cap, and a ban on Russian uranium,” one EU diplomat said.
The fact that Germany, the EU’s economic powerhouse, is now on board makes the move significantly more likely. A wide range of MEPs have also asked for nuclear to be included in EU sanctions.
“It is important for the Germans, Austrians and others that the EU reduces its energy dependency on Russia across the board. This includes banning imports of Russian nuclear fuels as well. For them it is a bit of a no-brainer,” an EU diplomat said.
The European Commission is working on proposals for a sixth package of sanctions against Russia, including potentially measures targeting oil. Details are expected to be discussed with EU countries in the coming days as European governments seek to intensify pressure on Putin by cutting off the revenues from energy exports that finance his invasion of Ukraine.
It is not yet clear how soon sanctions on nuclear imports to the EU could be imposed.
But any move against Russia’s nuclear industry would not be pain free for Europeans. The EU imports almost all of its uranium from outside the bloc. About 20 percent comes from Russia, making it the second-biggest supplier to the EU after Niger.
The USA has not been able to confirm the allegations that Russia used chemical weapons in Ukraine
US comments on chemical attack accusations against Russia, RT, Fri, 29 Apr 2022,
Washington has been “very much focused” on the matter but is unable to verify reports, Secretary of State Antony Blinken said.
The United States has not been able to verify reports of the alleged use of chemical weapons by Russian forces in Ukraine but is “very, very much focused” on the matter, Secretary of State Antony Blinken said during a hearing of the House Foreign Affairs Committee on Thursday.
Republican Representative Adam Kinzinger asked Blinken to provide an update on the government’s recent claims that chemical weapons may have been used by Russia. Noting that it might be more appropriate to discuss this issue “in a different setting,” Blinken underlined that the US government is looking at the matter “very, very carefully.”
“I don’t believe that we’ve been able to verify that use, but I want to come back to you,” he told Kinzinger.
He added that there are different kinds of chemical agents that could have been used, “including riot-control agents that would be prohibited.”
“But in terms of the use of chemical weapons, I think what I can say here is that we have not yet verified the use but it is something we are very, very much focused on,” Blinken stressed.
Two weeks ago, Blinken said the government “had credible information” that Russian forces may use “a variety of riot-control agents, including tear gas mixed with chemical agents” in “the aggressive campaign to take Mariupol.”
On the same day, State Department spokesman Ned Price said the US government was concerned that “Russia may seek to resort to chemical weapons.”
The Russian Embassy in Washington called Price’s statements “provocative” and called on the US authorities to intensify the process of chemical demilitarization of their own country instead of “spreading disinformation.”
According to a NBC report, released in early April, US intelligence officials have deliberately leaked some “low-confidence” information about the Ukraine conflict in order to win an “info war” against the Kremlin and discourage Russia from actually using chemical weapons. Thus, when the American media cited US “intelligence” to warn that Russia was preparing to carry out a chemical attack in Ukraine, and when President Joe Biden repeated these warnings, they were participating in a disinformation campaign, the NBC report revealed.
Meanwhile, Moscow has repeatedly warned of possible chemical attacks by Ukraine’s Security Service (SBU). In mid-March, Russian Defense Ministry spokesman Igor Konashenkov said Russia knew “for certain” that the SBU was preparing “a provocation using poisonous substances against civilians” with the support of Western countries.
“The purpose of the provocation is to accuse Russia of using chemical weapons against the population of Ukraine,” Konashenkov claimed.
He also emphasized that Russia, “unlike the United States,” has met its international obligations and completely destroyed all stockpiles of chemical weapons.
Moscow sent its troops to Ukraine in late February, following Kiev’s failure to implement the terms of the Minsk agreements, first signed in 2014, and Russia’s eventual recognition of the Donbass republics of Donetsk and Lugansk. The German- and French-brokered Minsk Protocol was designed to give the breakaway regions special status within the Ukrainian state.
The Kremlin has since demanded that Ukraine officially declare itself a neutral country that will never join NATO. Kiev insists the Russian offensive was completely unprovoked and has denied claims it was planning to retake the two republics by force.
. https://www.sott.net/article/467307-US-comments-on-chemical-attack-accusations-against-Russia
Fear in Europe, of nuclear war causes soaring demand for nuclear bunkers
![]() ![]() | |||
Demand for Nuclear Bunkers Soars as Russia-Ukraine War Fuels Fear in Europe.
NewsWeek, BY NATALIE COLAROSSI 4/30/22 Companies across Europe are reporting a sharp rise in demand for bomb shelters and bunkers as citizens fear Russia may soon use nuclear weapons in the ongoing war with Ukraine.
Residents in Germany, Switzerland, France and the U.K. have increasingly been seeking information about building and buying protective shelters amid fears that the war could spread further into Europe, several companies recently told The Telegraph. Russia has repeatedly warned the West not to interfere in its invasion of Ukraine, and has alluded to the possibility of using nuclear weapons if tensions further escalate.
Following two months of bloody fighting in Ukraine, Europeans—and even some Americans—are fearful that Russian President Vladimir Putin could soon target other nations with deadly weapons…………………………….. https://www.newsweek.com/demand-nuclear-bunkers-soars-russia-ukraine-war-fuels-fear-europe-1702467
IAEA probing Ukraine report that a missile flew over a nuclear power plant.
![]() |
https://www.reuters.com/world/iaea-probing-ukraine-report-that-missile-flew-over-nuclear-power-plant-2022-04-28/ Reuters April 28 Reporting by David Ljunggren Editing by Chris Reese – The International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) said on Thursday it was probing a Ukrainian report that a missile had flown directly over a nuclear power station, saying this would be “extremely serious” if true.
IAEA Director General Rafael Grossi said Kyiv had formally told it on Thursday the missile flew over the south Ukraine plant on April 16. The facility is near the city of Yuzhnoukrainsk, some 350 km (220 miles) south of Kyiv.
“Had such a missile gone astray, it could have had a severe impact on the physical integrity of the plant, potentially leading to a nuclear accident,” he said in a statement.
Grossi did not say who had fired the missile but Kyiv had earlier accused Moscow of sending rockets directly over nuclear plants.
Is France really the poster boy for nuclear power? Nearly half of its reactors are shut down for maintenance and safety reasons

Nearly half of France’s nuclear reactors taken offline, adding to
electricity demand on European grid. France’s problems have raised
questions about the UK’s big bets on nuclear, which the government calls a
“necessity, not a luxury”.
Currently 27 of France’s 56 reactors have been
shut down due to routine maintenance or defects, forcing EDF to buy
electricity from the European grid instead, at a time of soaring demand
amid the gas crisis. France’s problems have raised questions from critics
about the reliability of nuclear, and about Britain’s recent big bets on
the energy source.
Sky News 29th April 2022
Russia Just Tested the World’s Largest Nuclear-Tipped Missile
Putin claims the weapon can hit any target on Earth, but there’s less than meets the eye.
BY KYLE MIZOKAMI, APR 29, 2022 Russia has tested the world’s largest and heaviest nuclear missile, the RS-28 Sarmat intercontinental ballistic missile (ICBM). The missile, which lifted off from northern Russia last week, weighs 458,000 pounds, or as much as 11 F-22A Raptor fighters.
Sarmat can deliver up to ten thermonuclear warheads and has the range to strike anywhere on Earth. But as powerful as it is, the missile has distinct trade-offs that could make it less impressive than it sounds……………https://www.popularmechanics.com/military/weapons/a39827639/russia-sarmat-nuclear-tipped-missile/
Russia’s Antiquated Nuclear Warning System Jeopardizes Us All
As the war in Ukraine’s pits Russia against the West, it’s time to look at Moscow’s weak satellite systems, which raise the chances of nuclear conflict. by David K. Shipler
Since Russian President Vladimir Putin announced a heightened nuclear alert level, much of the world has worried that he might go nuclear in his war against Ukraine. But there is another concern: a false alarm from Russian early-warning systems, which experts believe are dangerously vulnerable to errors.
The risk of a catastrophic mistake has been a threat since the outset of the nuclear age, but miscalculation becomes more likely in a period of heightened Russian-American tension. Leaders would have only minutes to make fateful decisions, so each side needs to be able to “see” clearly whether the other has launched missiles before retaliating. Ambiguity in a moment of “crisis perception,” the Rand Corporation has noted, can spark “conflict when one nation misinterprets an event (such as a training exercise, a weather phenomenon, or a malfunction) as an indicator of a nuclear attack.”
Russia and the United States are the most heavily armed of the nine nuclear powers, which include China, France, the United Kingdom, North Korea, Pakistan, India, and Israel. (Iran is poised to join the club.) But only the U.S. has comprehensive surveillance of the globe, provided by three active geosynchronous satellites, with two in reserve, whose infrared receptors can spot missile plumes. That data is supplemented by radar, which gives the U.S. the capacity to double-check that a launch has actually occurred.
Specialists call this verification by both satellite and radar “dual phenomenology.” The Russians don’t have it, at least not reliably. They lack adequate space-based monitoring to supplement their radar.
What they have is a “terrible and dangerous technology shortfall,” according to Theodore Postol, a professor of science, technology, and national security policy at MIT and a former scientific adviser to the chief of naval operations……………………… https://washingtonmonthly.com/2022/04/29/russias-antiquated-nuclear-warning-system-jeopardizes-us-all/
International Atomic Energy Agency very concerned at dangers at Ukraine’s Zaporizhzhia nuclear complex.

Atomic agency: Danger signs at ‘occupied’ nuclear site in Ukraine
Rafael Grossi tells AP the Zaporizhzhia facility requires repairs and the current situation there is ‘not sustainable’. Aljazeera,
The International Atomic Energy Agency’s (IAEA) director-general says the level of safety at Europe’s largest nuclear plant, which is currently under Russian military occupation in Ukraine, is like a “red light blinking” as his organisation tries in vain to gain access to the site.
Rafael Grossi said that the IAEA needs access to the Zaporizhzhia nuclear power plant in southern Ukraine so its inspectors can, among other things, reestablish the site’s connections with the Vienna-based headquarters of the UN agency.
Ukraine’s 15 nuclear reactors gives it one of the largest nuclear power capacities in the world, and Russia’s invasion has essentially turned parts of country into a nuclear minefield.
Again and again since the invasion, nuclear experts have watched in alarm as Russian forces have come uncomfortably close to multiple nuclear plants in Ukraine.
Grossi said the Zaporizhzhia plant requires repairs.
“There are two units that are active, in active operation … others that are in repairs or in cool down. And there are some activities, technical activities and also inspection activities that need to be performed,” Grossi said.
“So the situation as I have described it, and I would repeat it today, is not sustainable as it is,” he said.
“So this is a pending issue. This is a red light blinking.”…………
The IAEA chief said he is continuing to press Russia’s government for access to the Zaporizhzhia plant………
“There cannot be any military action in or around a nuclear power plant,” Grossi said, adding that he has appealed to Russia about this.
“This is unprecedented to have a war unfolding amidst one of the world’s largest nuclear infrastructures, which, of course, makes for a number of fragile or weak points that could be, of course, exploited wittingly or unwittingly,” he added.
“So this requires a lot of activity on our side and cooperation. Cooperation from the Russian side. Understanding from the Ukrainian side so that we can avoid an accident.”…………..
Russia’s invasion of Ukraine, along with US and European support for Ukraine in the conflict, have increased tensions between Russia and the West, but it’s “imperative for us to look for common denominators in spite of these difficulties”, Grossi said.
“We cannot afford to stop. We have to continue. It’s in the world’s interest,” he said of global nuclear safety. https://www.aljazeera.com/news/2022/4/27/un-nuke-chief-wants-ukraine-zaporizhzhia-plant
-
Archives
- May 2026 (126)
- 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


