What is the chance of a nuclear catastrophe in the midst of the war in Ukraine? | World

Normal levels of radiation have been exceeded in the Chernobyl Exclusion Zone — which includes four closed reactors, one of which exploded in 1986 and littered radioactive waste across Europe, according to the Chernobyl State Nuclear Regulatory Authority. Ukraineclaiming that there is military activity in the area.

But in addition to the Chernobyl nuclear power plant, there are concerns that some of the 15 active nuclear reactors in the region Ukraine It could be caught in the crossfire between Russian and Ukrainian forces.

“It is a unique situation in the history of nuclear energy — indeed, in history — where a country operating 15 nuclear reactors is in the midst of an all-out war,” says Sean Burnie, a nuclear energy expert at Greenpeace East Asia. In an interview with DW. These stations provide about half of the electricity in the world Ukrainealthough only nine of the 15 reactors are currently operating, says Burnie.

“The idea of ​​protection [as instalações nucleares] In the event of a full-scale war it has never been part of a nation’s planning, at least in terms of commercial nuclear power,” he says.

Although some Cold War-era reactors were built in an underground area of ​​the then Soviet Union to avoid military threats, the “mega facilities” in Ukraine They are all built on the ground, explains Burney.

Burnie wrote, “The nuclear power plant is one of the most complex and sensitive of all industrial facilities, and requires an extremely complex array of spare resources—and at all times—to maintain its integrity. This cannot be guaranteed in war.” His colleague Jan Vande Putti, also from Greenpeace in East Asia, made a statement on Wednesday (02/03) about the vulnerability of nuclear plants during military conflict.

Radiation leakage risk

Operating reactors are particularly vulnerable in the event of a power outage during the war. If heavy bombardment in the area blocks a plant’s power supply, reactor cooling and fuel stored in places with relatively fragile walls could be disrupted.

At worst, Burnie said, it could lead to a Fukushima-like meltdown and “release huge amounts of radioactivity.”

These fears are exacerbated by increased military activity south of the Zaporizhzhya plant – one of the two largest in Europe, which has six reactors and stores spent nuclear fuel. The statement said that the armed conflict in the Zaporizhia region “raises the specter of great dangers.”

The site is already at risk, the authors say, as some older reactors were built and designed half a century ago, in the 1970s. Roger Spotz, a nuclear activist for France’s Greenpeace and Luxembourg, says the original 40-year lifespan of these reactors has already been extended – as in France.

“The biggest risk is that the missile will hit places where fuel is stored or cannot be cooled due to a malfunctioning power system,” Spotz comments. “You need electricity running 24 hours a day,” he says, adding that standby diesel generators may not be able to run for several weeks, something that would be necessary in times of war.

Burnie said there was an unlikely chance of a direct attack on the nuclear facilities, but that structures constructed to store fuel could be “accidentally destroyed” in the crossfire.

“Establishments containing dangerous forces”

Doug Weir, director of research and policy at the UK-based Conflict and Environment Observatory, says, referring to the Geneva conference.

Burnie believes that Russia, which has more than twice as many reactors, Ukraineunderstands the consequences of a direct attack on these facilities – including nuclear contamination from Russia itself if the winds blow to the east.

“We don’t expect to see a premeditated attack on places like Zaporizhzhya, but the types of heavy weapons that Russia uses are not particularly accurate,” Ware said. “A battle in the vicinity of such sites should be avoided at all costs.”

On Monday, Petro Cotten, chief operator of the state-owned nuclear power plant in UkraineEnergoatom has expressed to the IAEA its concern about Russian columns of military and artillery equipment “moving in the immediate vicinity” of nuclear facilities.

When notifying the IAEA about explosions near nuclear power plants, Cotten said that “extremely unwanted threats to the entire planet” could be among the consequences, urging the IAEA to step in and support a 30-kilometre safe zone around the nuclear facilities.

Another concern, Spotz says, is that the Russian military could take over a nuclear plant and not have the personnel to properly manage it. “You need several hundred technicians who know installation,” he says.

Greenpeace statement regarding the vulnerability of nuclear power plants in Ukraine Employees say it will be needed in case of flooding of the Dnipro River, which flows near the Zaporizhzhia plant.

If the Dnipro system of dams and reservoirs – which supplies water to cool the Zaporizhzhya reactors – is damaged and the water supply is limited, the nuclear fuel could begin to overheat and release radiation.

“All of these facilities need constant monitoring,” Burnie says. “They are not passively safe.”