Aletho News

ΑΛΗΘΩΣ

Ukrainian Shelling of Zaporozhye NPP Creates Risk of ‘Nuclear Bomb Scenario’

A Russian serviceman inspects a part of a shell on the territory of the Zaporozhye nuclear power plant – © Sputnik / Konstantin Mihalchevskiy
By Ilya Tsukanov – Sputnik – May 31, 2023

International Atomic Energy Agency chief Rafael Grossi has proposed a five-point plan to help ensure safety and security at the Zaporozhye Nuclear Power Plant. Renowned nuclear expert Chris Busby says Grossi’s concerns about the plant’s safety are fully justified, but that much more needs to be done.

In an address before the United Nations Security Council on Tuesday, Rafael Grossi outlined measures which should be taken to prevent a deadly incident at the ZNPP – key among them an immediate halt to attacks of any kind against the facility.

Other necessary measures, he said, include a commitment that the plant won’t be used to store heavy weapons or launch attacks, the preservation of the safety of onsite backup cooling systems and offsite power connections, and assurances that no actions are taken which could undermine these principles.

Grossi characterized the situation at the plant as “extremely fragile and dangerous,” and urged for the measures to be implemented immediately. As usual, he did not attribute responsibility for the deterioration of the security situation around the plant, which has been controlled by Russia since March 2022, and regularly shelled by Ukrainian forces since then.

Ukrainian Permanent Representative to the UN Serhiy Kislitsa disingenuously assured the Security Council that Kiev had “never resorted and will never resort to any steps that could lead to a nuclear incident” at the ZNPP.

Russian Permanent Representative Vassily Nebenzya told the body that the Russian side is already in compliance with Grossi’s recommendations, having implemented them independently “in accordance with decisions taken at the national level.”

“Thus, there have never been any attacks from the territory of the ZNPP [by Russia]. Heavy weapons and ammunition have never been deployed at the plant. There are no military personnel at the Zaporozhye NPP which could be used to carry out attacks from the territory of the plant,” Nebenzya said. Furthermore, he said, Moscow has taken “concrete steps” to protect the plant’s most sensitive structures and systems from sabotage and attack.

‘Absolutely Right to Be Freaking Out’

The IAEA chief “is fully aware” of the dangers associated with the deteriorating security situation at the ZNPP, is “understandably panicking,” and is “absolutely right to be freaking out,” says Chris Busby, a veteran chemical physicist with decades of experience studying the health effects of internal ionizing radiation, who currently serves as the scientific secretary of the European Committee on Radiation Risk.

Speaking to Sputnik and commenting on Grossi’s recommendations, Dr. Busby said that the “common sense” proposals are really just “a list of things that everyone must have been aware of from the very beginning” of the Ukraine crisis, but that regular shelling and missile attacks, and the possibility of the ZNPP becoming a direct battleground in a possible Ukrainian counteroffensive, makes them all the more pressing.

“The Ukrainian ambassador to the United Nations, Mr. Kislitsa, apparently stated [that] ‘we have never resorted and never will resort to steps that could lead to a nuclear incident.’ Well, one problem I have with this is the pronoun ‘We.’ I am a scientist, not a political commentator, but it seems to me that there are many different groups fighting in this war, and all kinds of attacks occur in all kinds of places, people are assassinated, bridges are blown up, undersea pipelines are destroyed, and no one seems to blame the Ukrainian government. Maybe there are a lot of independent nationalist groups (Terrorists? Assassins?) who take matters into their own hands and devise independent strategies,” Busby quipped.

‘Controlled Nuclear Bomb’

“Nuclear energy is a very dangerous technology,” the scientist emphasized, pointing out that at their core, nuclear power plants are “effectively a controlled nuclear bomb.”

“The enormous energy released when a nuclear bomb is detonated—and we have seen the pictures of Hiroshima—is released all at once. Bang! But the chain reaction in uranium that levelled Hiroshima and killed all those people is the same neutron-controlled reaction that occurs in nuclear power plants, except that the reaction is controlled with materials that moderate the rate of production of neutrons, so that the uranium fuel remains at a temperature where it can turn cooling water into steam which in turn turns the turbines that make the electricity,” Dr. Busby explained.

“The problem is, that if the cooling system is damaged, so that the water cannot circulate, the neutrons heat up the uranium fuel very quickly, and there is a meltdown. When the uranium fuel rods melt, they fall to the bottom of the reactor pressure vessel, and at that point, the neutron density increases, a chain reaction occurs and the reactor turns into a bomb and explodes, as happened at Fukushima, and as happened at Chernobyl. Other bad things can also happen: the enormous increase in temperature and radiation can produce hydrogen and this can also explode,” he added.

The same thing could happen to spent fuel, the scientist said, with these elements continuing to contain all of the fission products of uranium, and will continue to be radioactive for thousands of years.

“These spent fuel rods are still very hot, and have to be kept apart and cooled, just as in the reactor. So, they are stored in spent fuel ponds and cooled with water, or else dry stores and cooled with air and heat exchangers. If the cooling to the spent fuel fails, you have another nuclear bomb scenario,” Busby said.

The scientist estimates that there are about 20,000 tons’ worth of spent fuel rods at the ZPP, plus 60 tons in each of its reactors.

An aerial view shows the spray ponds at the Zaporozhye nuclear power plant © Sputnik

“If one component goes up, they all will, because the radiation levels will, just as with Fukushima and Chernobyl, prevent anyone getting near the plant,” he stressed, noting that this includes even robots – whose electronic circuits would be “wiped out” by the radiation.

The radioactive fallout from a disaster at the ZNPP would “make Europe pretty much uninhabitable,” in Dr. Busby’s estimation, leading to skyrocketing rates of premature deaths from cancers, fertility loss, congenital defects and a host of other illnesses. According to the scientist, the Ukrainian forces shelling the plant probably don’t “have the faintest idea” of what they’re doing, and “what Grossi has termed ‘the rolling of the dice.'”

What Can Be Done?

Dr. Busby believes the best thing that can be done to ensure the ZNPP’s safety is putting the Ukraine crisis to bed. “Failing that, the integrity of the [plant’s] lake must be ensured,” which means protecting the dam feeding it.

“It is water from the lake that is at the base of the cooling system. A buffer zone capable of protecting the power station from attacks should be organized, and this must constitute a no-fly area for missile attacks or personnel incursions. What else? Prayer. It is as bad as you can imagine,” Busby summed up.

The Zaporozhye Nuclear Power Plant is the largest nuclear power plant in Europe, with its six reactors capable of generating up to six gigawatts of power – enough to power over 1.8 million average European homes.

May 31, 2023 Posted by | Nuclear Power, War Crimes | Leave a comment

Why are ‘sensitive US nuclear technologies’ in Ukraine?

By Drago Bosnic | April 26, 2023

When talking about various reasons as to why Russia launched its counteroffensive against NATO aggression in Europe the points usually revolve around historical and strategic/geopolitical aspects of the Ukrainian conflict. And while those points certainly stand regardless, there are other crucial reasons, almost entirely overlooked or even censored by mainstream media. One of those is the aspect of NBC (nuclear, biological, chemical) weapons in Ukraine, all of which fall under the category of weapons of mass destruction (WMDs).

The topic of “biological research facilities“, as infamous neocon warmonger Victoria Nuland ever so euphemistically put it, received a significant amount of attention from media around the world, while the mainstream propaganda machine tried suppressing it. On the other hand, by far the most overlooked aspect of the Ukrainian conflict has been the covert transfer of US nuclear technologies to the Neo-Nazi junta. CNN, the infamous US neoliberal mouthpiece, was the first major mainstream propaganda outlet that broke the story last week.

According to the report, Washington DC has “sensitive nuclear technologies” in at least one (former) Ukrainian nuclear power plant (NPP). CNN claims that “the US has already warned Russia not to touch them”, citing a letter Department of Energy (DoE) allegedly sent to Moscow’s Rosatom corporation. CNN supposedly reviewed the letter (dated March 17) in which the director of DoE’s Office of Nonproliferation Policy, Andrea Ferkile, told Rosatom that the Zaporozhye NPP in Energodar “contains US-origin nuclear technical data that is export-controlled by the United States Government”.

Firstly, the idea that Russia is in any way intimidated by a third-rate US bureaucrat who allegedly “ordered it not to touch anything” is simply absurd. Secondly, both Washington DC and its Kiev puppets are parties to the Treaty on the Non-Proliferation of Nuclear Weapons (NPT), which means that transferring “sensitive nuclear technologies” to the Neo-Nazi junta is a direct violation of that agreement. Worse yet, the US is now (supposedly) threatening Russia through a director of its Office of Nonproliferation Policy, an institution that was supposed to prevent “sensitive US nuclear technologies” from ever reaching Ukraine.

This blatant hypocrisy is only matched by the sheer magnitude of US irresponsibility and WWIII brinkmanship for even considering the possibility to transfer such technologies to an unstable, genocidal and deeply corrupt regime in the middle of a direct confrontation with a nuclear-armed superpower next door. What’s more, CNN admits that the “sensitive US nuclear technologies” in question “could be used in a way that undermines US national security interests”. Once again, this is disturbingly similar to US claims about the so-called “biological research labs”.

“It is unlawful under United States law for non-authorized persons, including, but not limited to, Russian citizens and Russian entities such as Rosatom and its subsidiaries, to knowingly and willfully access, possess, control, export, store, seize, review, re-export, ship, transfer, copy, manipulate such technology or technical data, or direct, or authorize others to do the same, without such Russian entities becoming authorized recipients by the Secretary of the US Department of Energy,” the alleged letter reads.

Once again, the US is trying to enforce the self-proclaimed exterritoriality of its laws. However, in the case of Russia, this practice is not only legally void, but is also impossible to implement, especially after the city of Energodar and the Zaporozhye oblast (region) where the NPP is situated voted to join Russia last year. Obviously, CNN’s motivation to report the story was anything but altruistic, as it revolved around an attempt to portray US “demands” to Russia as anything more than a laughing matter to Moscow.

However, what surely isn’t a laughing matter is the seriousness of Russia’s approach to the situation. And for good reason, given the fact that the Kiev regime boasted about its intentions to acquire nuclear weapons nearly a decade before the start of the SMO (special military operation). As early as March 2014 and as late as February 2022, the Neo-Nazi junta has been openly declaring its intention to get WMDs, specifically nuclear weapons, to say nothing of the constant grumbling of many Kiev regime politicians about how they “made a big mistake for giving up on nuclear weapons in 1994”.

This only shows their lack of knowledge on the subject, as Ukraine itself never actually had nuclear weapons, because all those deployed there were Russian-made/controlled. However, this doesn’t stop the Neo-Nazi junta from claiming this Soviet/Russian legacy as its own, despite rabidly Russophobic disdain for all things Soviet. Another important segment of Russian legacy they were happy to harness is its world-class missile technology that Kiev is using to produce strike weapons with possible nuclear warheads to target major Russian cities, including Moscow.

Although Russian air defenses have been successful in downing such missiles, the Neo-Nazi junta could still use other Soviet legacy assets to target the Eurasian giant. Or worse yet, these could be provided by the US/NATO or any of its vassals and satellite states. The fact that the Kiev regime never publicly renounced its intention to acquire nuclear weapons that could be used to arm such missiles is quite telling. It’s also yet another confirmation that Russia’s SMO was the only way to prevent the Neo-Nazi junta from going ahead with its plans. And even if such guarantees were ever given, with the diplomatic scandal surrounding EU/NATO lies about the Minsk agreements, Moscow could hardly ever take them seriously.

Drago Bosnic is an independent geopolitical and military analyst.

April 26, 2023 Posted by | Militarism, Nuclear Power, Progressive Hypocrite, Timeless or most popular | , , , | Leave a comment

IAEA on Kiev’s Remark on Capturing ZNPP by Force: Nuclear Plant Should Not Be Target

Sputnik – 29.03.2023

The Zaporozhye Nuclear Power Plant (ZNPP) should not be considered as a target during current hostilities, International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) Director General Rafael Grossi said on Wednesday, commenting on Kiev’s statement about capturing the plant by force.

During his visit to the territory of the ZNPP, Grossi pointed to the need to agree on one important thing — the nuclear power plant should not be attacked and used for attacks in the other direction.

The idea is the basis of a new concept, currently being developed to protect the ZNPP, the IAEA chief said, adding that it envisages narrowing the safety zone around the plant. He insists that new measures have to be taken in order to protect the Zaporozhye Nuclear Power Plant as situation here is not getting better. According to Grossi, hostilities around the area are intensifying so the agency is developing a new protection concept for the plant, and discusses this issue with Russia and Ukraine.

Rosenergoatom, a subsidiary of Russian state nuclear energy corporation Rosatom supports the stance of IAEA head Rafael Grossi that the ZNPP should not be used as a target or for blackmail, Rosenergoatom spokesman Renat Karchaa said on Wednesday.

“We fully support the position of the IAEA and Mr. Grossi on the inadmissibility of using the ZNPP as a target, but we are also categorically against the use of the plant as an instrument of blackmail and manipulation,” Karchaa told reporters after inspecting the plant’s territory with Grossi.

The Zaporozhye Nuclear Power Plant, under the control of Russian forces since March, is persitently shelled by Ukrainian militants. Moscow has repeatedly warned that such attacks should be considered as acts of nuclear terrorism.

March 29, 2023 Posted by | Nuclear Power, War Crimes | , | Leave a comment

Japanese environment economist says ALPS-treated Fukushima radioactive wastewater still contains radionuclides

Tokyo  urged to stop dumping plan

By Xu Keyue | Global Times | March 27, 2023

While stressing that the so-called treated water from the destroyed Fukushima nuclear plant still contains radionuclides that are not able to be removed, a renowned Japanese environment economist said in an exclusive interview with the Global Times recently that we must persistently demand that the Japanese government and the Tokyo Electric Power Co (TEPCO) stop dumping the nuclear-contaminated wastewater into the ocean.

Kenichi Oshima, professor at Ryukoku University, told the Global Times that the Japanese government and TEPCO should not release the nuclear-contaminated wastewater.

The Japanese government and TEPCO plan to use ALPS – Advanced Liquid Processing System – to treat the nuclear-contaminated wastewater from the Fukushima nuclear accident and then release the treated water into the ocean. The treated water contains radionuclides including ruthenium, strontium-90 and iodine-129, in addition to tritium, Oshima noted.

Before the release, TEPCO developed a “Radiation and Environmental Impact Assessment Report on Ocean Discharge of ALPS Processed Water” to assess the impact of ocean discharge.

“Nevertheless, we believe it is impossible to accurately predict the ecological effects of ocean discharges over the next several decades,” the Japanese environment economist said.

Commenting on the so-called treated Fukushima water, Mao Ning, spokesperson for the Chinese Foreign Ministry, said on Monday that Japan has been claiming that ALPS-treated nuclear-contaminated water is safe and harmless and that it opposes calling the water “nuclear-contaminated”. The fact, however, is that the water contains over 60 radionuclides, many of which cannot be treated effectively with existing technologies.

Some long-lived radionuclides may spread with ocean currents and form a bioconcentration effect, which will multiply the total amount of radionuclides in the environment, causing unpredictable hazards to the marine environment and human health, Mao pointed out, noting that the discharge will last as long as 30 years or even longer.

Mao’s remarks are made in response to Japanese Minister of Economy, Trade and Industry Yasutoshi Nishimura, who claimed on Friday that the use of “nuclear-contaminated water” is a “misunderstanding of facts” after the heads of state of China and Russia expressed serious concern about Japan’s plan to dump the nuclear-contaminated water in a joint statement released on March 21.

The maturity and effectiveness of the ALPS technology has not been evaluated or certified by a third party, and the treatment of such large quantities and complex components of nuclear-contaminated wastewater is unprecedented, and its long-term effectiveness is in doubt, Mao said.

Oshima noted that in 2015, the Japanese government and TEPCO pledged in writing that they would never discharge the nuclear-contaminated water into the ocean without the understanding of fishermen and the public. The Japanese government and TEPCO have been explaining the situation to fishermen and local residents but have not obtained their consent.

However, the Japanese government and TEPCO are not listening to the voices of the people, including those involved in the fishing industry, Oshima revealed.

“We must persistently demand that the [Japanese] government and TEPCO stop discharging ALPS-treated water,” he stressed.

The Japanese professor raised two alternatives in dealing with the radioactive wastewater.

The first is to store the water in large tanks. The half-life of tritium is 12.3 years, so after 123 years of storage, the radioactivity will have decayed to 1/1,000 of its original level. Japan has experience in oil stockpiling, so this is feasible, said Oshima.

The second is mortar solidification. Mortar solidification can prevent leakage. Mortar solidification has been used in the US, Oshima noted.

What Japan needs to do now is to take seriously the legitimate concerns of the international community, faithfully perform its international obligations, handle the nuclear-contaminated water in the safest and most prudent way, including fully studying alternatives to ocean discharge, Mao urged.

Also, rather than whitewash its ocean discharge decision, Japan needs to fully subject itself to international oversight, and avoid, to the maximum extent possible, imposing unpredictable risks on the international community, Mao said.

March 28, 2023 Posted by | Environmentalism, Nuclear Power | , | Leave a comment

Australian premiers spar over nuclear sub waste disposal

RT | March 16, 2023

The Australian political establishment is divided as to where the federal government should dispose of nuclear waste associated with the country’s expanded submarine deal with its AUKUS allies.

An accord was struck by the leadership of the countries which make up the trilateral AUKUS alliance – Australia, the United States and the United Kingdom – when they met in San Diego, California earlier this week, which rubber-stamped the sale of nuclear-powered submarines by Washington to Canberra.

In addition, Australia Prime Minister Anthony Albanese confirmed that his country would construct its own fleet of nuclear submarines, which will be delivered in the early 2040s. The terms of the agreement stipulate that the Australian government will be responsible for the disposal of nuclear waste from the vessels – but this appears to have opened a new political front for the country’s various state leaders.

“I think the waste can go where all the jobs are going,” said Victorian Premier Daniel Andrews via the Australian Broadcasting Corporation on Thursday, referencing the 8,000 jobs which are expected to be generated in South Australia during the construction of the military submarines. “I don’t think that’s unreasonable, is it?”

West Australian Premier Mark McGowan has also indicated that nuclear waste disposal sites are unwelcome in his state, joining Andrews in suggesting South Australia as the most appropriate location.

Susan Close, the acting South Australian premier who doubles as the region’s environment minister, responded to the suggestions by saying the decision on nuclear waste locations should be dictated by science and not by “state leaders trying to move nuclear waste that doesn’t yet exist across the border.”

A final decision on the location of the site is not expected for another 12 months, and the site that is eventually selected won’t be required for use until around 2055.

The AUKUS deal will see Australia become the seventh nation with nuclear-powered submarines in its military arsenal, and comes amid Western concerns about China’s military expansion in the Indo-Pacific region. Beijing has rebuked the AUKUS nuclear submarine agreement, saying it contradicts accepted norms of nuclear non-proliferation.

March 16, 2023 Posted by | Environmentalism, Militarism, Nuclear Power | , | Leave a comment

Iran follows parliament’s strategic law, Safeguards, NPT, not JCPOA: Atomic Energy Organization of Iran

Press TV – March 5, 2023

The head of the Atomic Energy Organization of Iran (AEOI) says the country remains committed to the Safeguard Agreement with the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) and the nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty (NPT), considering them as the basis for its nuclear activities, along with the strategic law adopted by the Iranian parliament.

Mohammad Eslami made the remark in an interview on Sunday, following a trip to Iran by Director General of the IAEA Rafael Mariano Grossi.

Commenting on Grossi’s visit, he said Iran’s interactions with the agency should continue and “we must not allow the destructive Zionist and terrorist current to take advantage of our relations and find excuses to mount pressure on the country.”

Eslami added that the nuclear deal reached in 2015, officially known as the Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action (JCPOA), can no longer be taken as the basis of Iran’s activities.

“Naturally, the JCPOA, with which the other side does not comply, cannot form the basis of our action, because the basis of the Islamic Republic of Iran’s action is the strategic law passed by the Islamic Consultative Assembly (Iranian parliament) and the removal of unjust sanctions” that have been imposed on the country, the AEOI head said.

The law, dubbed the Strategic Action Plan to Counter Sanctions was adopted by Iranian lawmakers in December 2020 to counter sanctions imposed on Iran by the United States and its Western allies, and promote the country’s peaceful nuclear program.

Under the parliament’s law, the Iranian administration is required to restrict the IAEA’s inspections and accelerate the development of the country’s nuclear program beyond the limits set under the JCPOA.

Eslami added, “We fulfill our responsibilities and [carry out] our activities according to the strategic law. The important point is that we take our steps based on this law and within the framework of the Safeguards [Agreement] and the NPT…. but they intend to exaggerate these steps in line with their double standards and create [media] hype.”

“We announced yesterday that we are committed to the Safeguards and the NPT, and the agency oversees and assesses our activities. However, this oversight must be carried out within frameworks and considerations acceptable for the Islamic Republic of Iran,” he said.

Explaining about a controversial IAEA report, claiming that uranium particles enriched to about 84 percent of purity have been found in Iran, Eslami said the agency has mentioned such particles in a report to its Board of Governors.

“However, after repeated assessments and inspections, and through the interaction carried out [between Iran and the IAEA], it was decided that the criterion for measuring [the degree of enrichment] should be the final output of the production line.”

“No enrichment above 60 percent has taken place in storage tanks that are currently operating and whose entire process is being supervised by the IAEA, according to the Safeguards Agreement. [Therefore,] they have practically announced the closure of this case. The case of 84-percent [enriched] uranium particles has been closed and decided,” Iran’s nuclear chief said.

Eslami added that pressures exerted on the IAEA chief by Western media with regard to Iran’s nuclear activities are masterminded by “the Zionist current.”

“They are angry and upset with Mr. Grossi’s trip [to Iran] and are increasing pressure on him. It is natural [for them] to mount media pressures as a result of their anger with the [IAEA] director general’s visit to Iran,” the AEOI head said.

March 5, 2023 Posted by | Nuclear Power | , , | Leave a comment

Ukraine could stage false flag operation on nuclear power plant to force Western intervention

By Ahmed Adel | January 25, 2023

The Ukrainian military are storing Western weapons in nuclear power plants in the hope that Russia will strike them. However, as Russia is unlikely to make this mistake, it cannot be ruled out that Kiev will stage a false flag operation to force direct Western intervention and increase the supply of weapons.

According to the director of the Russian Foreign Intelligence Service, Sergey Naryshkin, HIMARS missiles and other foreign air defence systems, as well as large-calibre artillery ammunition, are deployed at Ukrainian nuclear power plants.

“There is credible information that Ukrainian troops are stockpiling the Western-supplied weapons and ammunition on the territory of nuclear power plants,” Naryshkin said, according to a statement on the intelligence service’s website.

According to the intelligence chief, several cars loaded with “lethal cargo” were delivered by rail to the Rovno Nuclear Power Plant in western Ukraine during the last week of December alone.

“They rely on the calculation that the Russian Armed Forces would not strike nuclear power plants because they realise the danger of a nuclear disaster,” Naryshkin said.

He expressed the hope that no one in Kiev would deliberately think of blowing up the nuclear power plants in a false flag operation. False flag operations are often used by international terrorists, as seen on a frequent basis during the peak of the Syrian war, or by the US to justify their own invasions and interventions.

The Ukrainian Armed Forces often receive weapons that are of very poor quality. This fact alone heightens the risk of an accidental explosion, something that could unleash a nuclear catastrophe and be blamed on Moscow.

Alarmingly, in addition to nuclear power plants, the Ukrainian military also uses residential buildings to house Western weapons. Ukrainian soldiers are fully aware of the fact that the Russian military does not strike civilian populations. The Russian military does not strike at nuclear plants, especially as any spill over can directly affect Russian citizens.

Ukrainian soldiers on the other hand have consistently used civilians as human shields, even before the Russian military operation began in 2022, as reported by the United Nations. The Ukrainian military is desperate for more weapons, tanks, howitzers, and ammunition, and such an incident could unite the West in providing Kiev with what it demands.

Ukraine’s nuclear plants are located near the border with Romania, Slovakia and Poland. Therefore, delivering military equipment from the West is a relatively straightforward process. According to intelligence data, only in the last week of December, several railway wagons with “lethal cargo” were delivered from abroad via the Rafalovka railway station to the Rivne nuclear power plant, located only 170km from the Polish border.

None-the-less, according to Andrei Golovatyuk, a colonel in the Russian army reserve, Moscow will certainly find a way to destroy ammunition and Western weapons stores without endangering the lives and health of the civilian population.

“They are doing this on purpose so that the Russian armed forces cannot shell their weapons depots. But our army will certainly not do that to avoid damaging the nuclear power plant,” he added.

Mykhailo Podolyak, an adviser to Ukraine President Volodomyr Zelensky, claimed that his country has never used nuclear power plants to store weapons.

“Ukraine has never stored any weapons on NPP territory, as falsely claimed by Russia’s Foreign Intelligence Service. On the contrary, the Russian Federation seized the Zaporizhzhia nuclear power plant and keeps its military there,” he said on Twitter, alluding that a military presence and weapons storage is the same thing.

Podolyak said that Kiev remained “open to inspecting bodies, including the IAEA” and that “Russian lies are aimed to justify their provocations.”

However, it does question what kind of “justification” Russia gets for its military operation by claiming that Ukraine stores weapons in nuclear power plants. Moscow obviously gains no “justification” and rather its justification is hinged on Kiev’s unrelenting fascistic policies towards minorities since 2014.

Rather, it is more likely that Podolyak is making nonsensical statements as Kiev is stunned that their false flag operation cannot be implemented because Moscow has already called it out. The Kiev regime is currently desperate for Western weaponry, particularly tanks, and was likely hoping that a nuclear incident could force the issue, or even better, force a direct intervention.

Podolyak tweeted on January 21 that “Today’s indecision is killing more of our people. Every day of delay is the death of Ukrainians. Think faster.”

However, even if US and German-made tanks start arriving in Ukraine, the situation is already too late for the Ukrainian military because it struggles to maintain a semblance of order in the face of Russia’s unrelenting onslaught. Rather, Kiev is responsible for the death of Ukrainians as it refuses to find a peace with Moscow. Therefore, it cannot be entirely discounted that as Ukraine becomes more desperate, it may resort to reckless measures, such as false flag operations on nuclear power plants.

Ahmed Adel is a Cairo-based geopolitics and political economy researcher.

January 25, 2023 Posted by | False Flag Terrorism, Nuclear Power | | 1 Comment

Nuclear Ukraine?

Kiev is capable of building an atomic device, and its leaders often outline such thoughts

By Olga Sukharevskaya | RT | January 6, 2023

Last year, Western media and high-ranking politicians actively discussed the possibility of Russian troops using atomic weapons in Ukraine. There has even been speculation on the likelihood of a nuclear war breaking out. However, it could be said that the risk is probably a lot higher on the other side of the barricades.

Ukraine’s Atomic History

Ukraine was a nuclear state after the collapse of the USSR, when 1,700 active atomic warheads remained in the country. Its politicians of that time had the prudence to abandon this status. The weapons were taken to Russia under international control, and their means of delivery were destroyed. Ukraine’s missile silos, with the exception of one which is now a museum near Kiev, were blown up, while its strategic bombers capable of carrying nuclear weapons were either transferred to Russia or destroyed.

Despite this, there were still many nuclear specialists in Ukraine, as research into nuclear fission has been conducted in Kharkov since the 1930s. In addition, five nuclear power plants were built in Ukraine during the Soviet years: Zaporozhye, Rovno, Khmelnitsky, and South-Ukrainian, as well as the infamous Chernobyl, where an accident involving a power unit led to an explosion that spewed radioactive fallout throughout Europe.

In addition, uranium is extracted at a deposit in Ukraine’s Kirovograd Region and enriched at a plant in the city of Zheltye Vody. In the 2010s, there were plans with Russia’s Rosatom to build a plant in Ukraine that would produce fuel for nuclear power stations. However, these were abandoned after the Maidan coup in 2014, when the country adopted an adversarial stance towards Russia.

At present, three of Ukraine’s five original nuclear power plants remain under its control. Chernobyl, which continued to generate electricity even after the 1986 accident, was finally decommissioned in 2020, while Zaporozhye, the largest nuclear power plant in Europe, has been guarded by Russian troops since last year. It is currently being run by Rosatom but does not produce electricity, largely for safety reasons. This is due to regular rocket and artillery attacks by Ukrainian troops, which have damaged numerous pieces of auxiliary equipment.

Push to Reobtain Nuclear Weapons

It should be noted that not everyone in Ukraine was happy that the country gave up its nuclear weapons. Ukrainian politicians have often failed to hide the fact that their dream of reobtaining nuclear weapons is not so much connected with their country’s security, as the desire to dictate their will to the rest of the world. Radical Ukrainian nationalists were particularly dissatisfied with the abandonment of the country’s nuclear status, and many of their manifestos contain a clause calling for it to be restored.

For example, “the return of nuclear weapons” is specifically cited as a goal in paragraph 2 of the Military Doctrine section in the program statement of the Patriot of Ukraine organization, while paragraph 7 of its Foreign Policy section reads: “The ultimate goal of Ukrainian foreign policy is world domination.” Patriot of Ukraine was created in 2014 by the notorious Andrey Biletsky, who formed it based on the ideology of the neo-Nazi Azov Battalion and had dreamed of Ukraine possessing nuclear weapons as far back as 2007.

In 2009, the Ternopil Regional Council, which was then dominated by Oleg Tianibok’s neo-Nazi Svoboda Party (called the Social-National Party until 2004), demanded that Ukraine’s president, prime minister, and head of the Verkhovna Rada “terminate the Budapest Memorandum of 1994 and restore Ukraine’s nuclear status.”

Ukraine’s longing for an atomic bomb especially increased after February 2014. In an interview with USA Today in March of that year, Ukrainian MP Pavel Rizanenko called Ukraine’s accession to the Treaty on the Non-Proliferation of Nuclear Weapons a “big mistake.” And that was not just the opinion of one MP. Just a few days later, representatives of the Batkivshchyna party, headed by ex-Prime Minister Yulia Timoshenko, and UDAR, headed by Kiev’s current mayor, Vitaly Klitschko, including the secretary of the parliamentary Committee on National Security and Defense, Sergey Kaplin, submitted a bill on withdrawing from the non-proliferation treaty. Kaplin claimed that Ukraine could create nuclear weapons in just two years because it already had almost everything necessary: The fissile materials, equipment (except centrifuges), technology, specialists, and even means of delivery. In September of the same year, Ukraine’s minister of defense, Valery Geletey, also expressed the desire to develop nuclear weapons.

In December 2018, the former representative of the Ukrainian mission to NATO, Major General Pyotr Garashchuk, announced the real possibility of Ukraine creating its own nuclear weapons. In 2019, Aleksandr Turchinov, who usurped power in Ukraine in February of 2014, called Ukraine’s renunciation of nuclear weapons a “historic mistake.” Following him, in April 2021, the Ukrainian ambassador to Germany, Andrey Melnik, stated that if the West did not help Ukraine in its confrontation with Russia, the country would launch a nuclear program and create an atomic bomb. And on February 19, 2022, before the start of Russia’s special military operation, Ukrainian President Vladimir Zelensky announced at the Munich Security Conference that Ukraine has the right to abandon the Budapest Memorandum, which proclaimed the country’s nuclear-free status.

Perhaps the most striking statement by a Ukrainian politician was made by David Arakhamia, the head of the Ukrainian parliament’s ruling parliamentary faction, Servant of the People. “We could blackmail the whole world, and we would be given money to service (nuclear weapons), as is happening in many other countries now,” he said in mid-2021.

Range of Possibilities

Is Ukraine technically capable of creating an atomic bomb? Absolutely. Yes, enriching uranium-235 to the purity necessary to set off a chain reaction would cost a lot, primarily to create centrifuges for separating isotopes. However, though this may be the most effective way to separate isotopes, it’s not the only one. The first American bombs dropped on Hiroshima and Nagasaki were created without the use of this technology.

In addition, it should not be forgotten that there are not only uranium, but also plutonium bombs. Breeder reactors are used to synthesize this chemical element, most often using heavy-water reactor technology, and research reactors are capable of producing weapons-grade plutonium. There is presently a nuclear research installation at the Kharkov Institute of Physics and Technology, and a VVR-M reactor suitable for plutonium production at the Institute for Nuclear Research of Ukraine’s National Academy of Sciences in Kiev. Until March 2022, there was a US-built facility in Kharkov that could produce isotopes by irradiating the starting materials with a powerful neutron flux, which could also be used to develop fissile materials for a bomb.

In addition, Ukraine has the technical capability to create a nuclear weapon based on uranium-233, rather than uranium-235, which is usually used. A similar bomb was tested by the US in 1955 during Operation Teapot, and its power was comparable to that of the Fat Man bomb that destroyed the Japanese city of Nagasaki. To obtain uranium-233, it is enough to replace one of the fuel assemblies of a conventional nuclear power plant reactor with a thorium-232 cassette, a supply of which is located near Mariupol, a city that was fiercely defended by Ukrainian nationalists from the Azov regiment earlier this year.

There is another indirect sign that both uranium and plutonium versions of nuclear weapons have been secretly developed at the direction of the post-Maidan authorities. At the beginning of 2021, Ukraine completely banned the export of spent nuclear fuel (SNF) to Russia, as was required by an agreement on its supply by Rosatom. SNF, among other things, is a source of weapons-grade plutonium, which can be isolated from fuel cells that have been in a nuclear power plant reactor.

Nuclear Power on the Brink of Disaster

Just as dangerous is the nuclear power policy pursued by the Ukrainian government.

Ukraine inherited five nuclear power plants with 18 active reactors from the USSR. Three of them located at the Chernobyl NPP were decommissioned by 2000. Five of the six reactors at the Zaporozhye NPP, three of the four reactors at the Rovno NPP, one of the two reactors at the Khmelnitsky NPP, and all three reactors at the South Ukraine NPP have exceeded their original lifespans and received extensions of their operating lives for another 10 to 15 years. The license extensions have sometimes been granted with violations of existing regulations since, after 2015, Ukraine’s State Nuclear Regulatory Inspectorate stopped cooperating with Russian vendors and has not overhauled reactor vessels, which become brittle after prolonged exposure to neutron radiation. Back in 2015, independent experts noted the critical condition of Reactor 1 of the South Ukraine NPP, which, nevertheless, has had its service life extended until 2025.

Ukraine’s Union of Veterans of Nuclear Energy and Industry sent a warning letter to the government in April 2020, arguing that the country’s nuclear energy sector was faced with a “threatening situation,” which, according to the authors of the letter, could well result in “a new Chernobyl.”

The lack of accountability, which led to the 1986 disaster, does not stop at neglecting the technical condition of the reactors that are not being properly monitored and maintained by their developers. During Viktor President Yushchenko’s administration, the decision was made to replace some of the standard fuel rods in Ukrainian reactors with unlicensed fuel assemblies supplied by Westinghouse Electric Company. In 2012, that experiment led to an emergency shutdown of Reactor 3 of the South Ukraine NPP, after Westinghouse fuel assemblies were damaged due to the specific design features of the American counterfeits.

That fuel assemblies fabricated by Westinghouse tend to malfunction in Soviet-designed reactors was not a revelation. They have repeatedly caused emergencies at NPPs in Finland, Hungary, the Czech Republic, and Slovakia, but that did not deter the Ukrainian leadership. Not even losses of around $175 million caused by using non-standard assemblies persuaded Ukraine against conducting risky experiments with its nuclear assets.

The new ‘revolutionary’ government, which came to power in 2014, was quick to plunge into its own experiments with nuclear power together with Westinghouse, which was suffering from financial distress. For the company, which filed for bankruptcy in 2017, the Ukrainian market could have been a much-needed lifeline – however, it wasn’t to be, because it once again emerged that the counterfeit fuel assemblies were dangerous for VVER-type reactors. Emergencies at Ukrainian NPPs became a routine event, and yet Westinghouse assemblies accounted for 46% of all nuclear fuel used in Ukraine by the end of 2018.

These risky experiments went beyond using non-standard fuel assemblies. In the fall of 2014, Kiev sent direct orders to boost electricity production at the South Ukraine NPP by 5 to 7%. To achieve this, three VVER-1000 reactors were supposed to operate in “controlled runaway mode,” and a whole algorithm was developed by Ukrainian and British engineers. It was this type of experiment that resulted in the explosion at the Chernobyl Nuclear Power Plant in 1986. A potential disaster was only averted by an ‘Italian strike’ organized by the NPP personnel, who refused to fulfil outsiders’ orders. This might have been what former NATO Secretary General Anders Fogh Rasmussen meant when he said: “We have, upon Ukrainian request, sent a small team of civilian experts to Ukraine to assist the Ukrainians in improving security of their civilian nuclear plants.”

‘Revolutionary expedience’ was used as a pretext for a mass exodus of experienced nuclear engineers from Ukrainian NPPs. As Ukrainian MP Viktoria Voytsitska said in 2018, literally all categories of workers were thinking of leaving Ukrainian NPPs, from steam engine drivers and riggers to engineers who controlled reactors and other high-tech equipment.

Provocation for Nuclear Escalation

After Russian forces assumed control of the Zaporozhye NPP, it became a target for incessant Ukrainian shelling, sometimes with the use of Western-made multiple launch rocket systems, heavy artillery, and attack drones. The plant sustained significant damage and was forced to stop generating electricity due to the destruction of auxiliary equipment and the threat to the reactors themselves. At the same time, an IAEA mission “was unable” to establish who was firing on the nuclear site, where Russian soldiers were present.

As the Western media was busy whipping up hysteria over the potential use of tactical nuclear weapons by Russia in Ukraine, it transpired that Ukraine was allegedly plotting a provocation of exactly that nature. According to Russian intelligence services, in October 2022, the Eastern Mining and Enrichment Combine in the town of Zheltye Vody and the Kiev Institute for Nuclear Research were in the final stages of developing a dirty bomb on the orders of the Ukrainian government. A missile plant in Dnepropetrovsk built a mock-up of the Russian Iskander missile, which was supposed to carry a radioactive charge and be “shot down” over the Chernobyl exclusion zone. The goal was to accuse Russia of using nuclear weapons and push NATO to retaliate in kind. In other words, to start a nuclear war in Europe.

All these facts mean that present-day Ukraine is arguably a real threat to nuclear security not just in Europe, but on a global scale. It has everything it would take, from irresponsible people in charge of safety and security at nuclear sites, to the technical capabilities.

Olga Sukharevskaya is an ex-Ukrainian diplomat.

January 6, 2023 Posted by | Militarism, Nuclear Power, Timeless or most popular, War Crimes | , | 2 Comments

Will nuclear fusion power save us?

By Dr David Whitehouse | Net Zero Watch | December 14, 2022

“Nuclear fusion breakthrough,” are the world’s headlines today. Eventually we will have free, pollution-free energy. No CO2 emissions, we will be saved. I have lived with the promise of nuclear fusion all my life and it has always been decades away. It’s become something of a bad joke amongst the science community that fusion is always decades away.

Nuclear fusion liberates energy by combining light atoms – isotopes of hydrogen – rather than by using the radioactive decay of large atoms such as uranium and plutonium – nuclear fission. It could have many advantages; the reaction can be switched off (not possible with fission), it uses water as a fuel and produces very little waste. The question is how do you fuse atoms?

Obviously it isn’t easy. Every star in the Universe generates its energy this way but stars are big and places of great pressure and temperature, unlike the Earth. One way is to generate a hot gas of hydrogen isotopes – 100 million degrees or so – and confine it so that the hydrogen nuclei (for it will be ionised) fuse. The heating is done by microwaves and the confinement by a magnetic field, for anything physical would melt. The problem is that the plasma is unstable and so far the reactions are fleeting.

This is the basis of the major multi-national project to develop fusion, the $22 billion International Thermal Experimental Reactor (ITER)project (China, India, Japan, Korea, Europe, US) which is under construction in France and hopes to start tests in 2035 as part of developing the expertise to build a commercial fusion reactor presumably in the unspecified following decades.

Flash and Burn

Yesterday’s announcement involves a different technique. The US National Ignition Facility focuses a burst from a multitude of high-powered lasers on a grain-sized target that compresses to initiate fusion. The announcement by US Energy Secretary Jennifer Granholm was hailed by the world’s media as a great breakthrough in the developing technique of fusing atoms together, limitless, cheap, green were the adjectives used.

The announcement itself is a puzzle and had the feeling of being some much needed good news to announce. In reality although the experiments referred to took place a few months ago the “breakthrough” results were reported a year ago with the major advance being published in the Journal Nature in 2014. By one analysis 2.05 MJ of energy pumped into the pellet produced 3.15 MJ of energy. This does not include the 322 MJ needed to run the 192 lasers. So the story wasn’t a real breakthrough, just an advance. In any commercial development of this laser technique millions of fuel pellets would be needed for each reactor a year. At present they are tailor-made and cost almost $1 million each.

So why did the story lead some news bulletins? Given the announcement by Granholm it was clearly a story and in the main its coverage was good though some specialist correspondents clearly didn’t know the background and one science editor’s analysis of the event was puerile. I’ll leave it for an exercise for the reader to decide who I refer to.

Green Energy

But should nuclear fusion be part of the green energy debate? It is certainly not going to rescue us anytime soon. But I suppose linking fusion to green energy and the climate debate will help funds flowing.

Some would disagree with me and point to the many small, private companies that want to develop smaller-scale fusion reactors much sooner. They have acquired significant investment, some 30 firms have raised a total of $2.4 billion and General Fusion of Canada says it hopes for a viable reactor in the 2030s. CEOs of such companies see a payoff within a decade but to me it sounds like a sales pitch to attract further investment. Experts will privately say this is very wishful thinking.

In the mid-1990s I gave an after-dinner speech to a society of nuclear fusion scientists. I wondered out loud if the arrival of the first commercial fusion power would be as far in the future as the first hits of the Beatles were in the past. It took 50 years from the steam engine to trains and the same time between the internal combustion engine and cars. Nuclear fusion is a lot more difficult than such simple thermodynamic engines. Perhaps the desire for this energy coupled with advances in artificial intelligence analysis and control systems will speed up its development and the equations of history will be superseded.

A modern society needs high energy density power production systems. Without energy storage renewables are limited. We need fusion energy which has been promised for so long but I think humans will have walked on Mars long before we get commercial fusion power.

Commenter Rick Will says:

They spent $3.5 billion to produce the heating power of 10 grams of coal

They have spent USD3.5bn on the reactor to get a gain of 0.4MJ. Enough to vaporise 100 grams of water. Or equivalent to 10 grams of coal. Baby steps comes to mind. Power was impressive though. It appears the laser is rated at 1PW. Civilisation’s entire electrical generation averages 0.003PW. So the laser would not need to fire often to get a decent power output. But then it only produced a gain [of] 20%. So it would need 5 times the internal generation to that sent out.

I guess they say that these reactions can make big gains once the conditions are right but USD3.5bn to produce what you get out of half a cents worth of coal suggests it is still a big mountain to climb. Maybe within 30 years. Just as the last of the die-hard CO2 demonisers shuffle off.

December 19, 2022 Posted by | Corruption, Economics, Fake News, Nuclear Power | | Leave a comment

French energy crisis deepens – Bloomberg

RT | December 19, 2022

France faces a greater risk of running short on electricity this winter after the nation’s grid operator, Electricite de France (EDF), extended maintenance halts for several nuclear reactors, Bloomberg has reported.

The utility announced on Monday that the restart of its Penly-2 unit has been delayed from January 29 until June 11, while the reopening of the Golfech-1 unit has been pushed back to June 11 from February 18, according to the outlet.

The halt of the Chattenom-3 reactor has reportedly been prolonged by one month until March 26, and the restart of Civaux-2 has been postponed by more than a month until February 19.

On Friday, EDF announced it would delay the startup of a new nuclear reactor in western France by several months into 2024 due to construction work having been extended. That project is already more than a decade late, according to Bloomberg.

France produces roughly 70% of its electricity from 56 nuclear reactors, of which over 20 are currently shut down, causing a sharp drop in power generation.

EDF warned earlier that longer than planned maintenance halts and repairs on almost half of the nation’s nuclear plants may turn France, which has traditionally been a power exporter, into an importer. The grid operator has also warned of a potential electricity shortfall in the colder months as heating demand rises while the utility grapples with reactor repairs.

This will also add to rising concerns over power supplies to neighboring countries, as France has long been Europe’s largest producer of nuclear energy.

December 19, 2022 Posted by | Economics, Nuclear Power | | 4 Comments

Delay at Finland’s New Nuclear Reactor Imperils Country’s Power Supply

Samizdat – 23.11.2022

Finland’s new Olkiluoto 3 reactor will remain offline longer than expected, and full-scale electricity production will not commence before 2023.

Its owner Teollisuuden Voima announced that an investigation into damage at the already much-delayed reactor’s feedwater pumps will continue for a number of weeks, with a knock-on effect on the schedule of regular electricity production. Due to the ongoing investigation, the exact timeframe for the launch of the reactor remains unknown, but was estimated as the end of January 2022 at the earliest.

During the ongoing investigation, maintenance work will continue at the plant unit’s turbine.

Further delays to regular electricity production at Olkiluoto 3 will have a significant impact on Finland’s electricity self-sufficiency. Since the reactor won’t be operational by winter, energy prices, already elevated as a result of Europe’s energy pinch, are likely to rise even further.

The damage to the reactor is thus a major setback for the cold Nordic nation, whose authorities had already warned of an elevated risk of shortages and even blackouts unless the reactor provides a reliable supply of electricity.

The latest delay increases uncertainty over the country’s power supply this winter, especially in January, national grid operator Fingrid stressed. Earlier this autumn, it predicted a peak electricity consumption in Finland of 14,400 megawatts for this winter, whereas domestic production, even with Olkiluoto 3 included, would only cover 12,900 megawatts.

Olkiluoto 3, a 1,900-megawatt European Pressurized Water Reactor (EPR), was granted a construction permit in 2005 and was originally scheduled for completion in 2009. The order made Finland the first Western European nation in 15 years to order a new nuclear reactor, following a protracted nuclear scare driven by the Three Mile Island accident in 1979 and the Chernobyl catastrophe in 1986.

However, the project has faced a long stream of delays, technical issues, cost overruns and legal disputes. With a breathtaking price tag of $11 billion already in 2018. Olkiluoto-3 has long been touted as the “flagship of European nuclear energy,” but has taken more than 15 years to complete, cost the Nordic nation dearly and ranks among the world’s most expensive buildings.

Europe’s energy crisis has been aggravated by Brussels’ ill-conceived energy sanctions against Moscow over its special operation in Ukraine. The EU in general has been heavily reliant on Russian fossil fuels, with Moscow supplying some 40 percent of its natural gas and some 27 percent of its imported oil before the conflict.

Nevertheless, despite this substantial level of dependence, the EU issued a blank ‘no’ to Russian fossil fuels as part of its massive sanctions campaign in a bid to “punish” Russia. However, as trouble with finding alternative sources arose, numerous EU nations are now resorting to austerity measures to conserve energy, with authorities issuing grave warnings about rolling blackouts.

November 23, 2022 Posted by | Nuclear Power | | Leave a comment

Ukrainian Troops Shell Zaporozhye NPP, Damaging Strategic Facilities: Official

Samizdat – 20.11.2022

Ukrainian troops subjected the Zaporozhye nuclear power plant (NPP) to massive artillery shelling, damaging strategic facilities, an adviser to the head of Rosenergoatom, a subsidiary of Russian state nuclear energy corporation Rosatom, told Sputnik on Sunday.

“The Ukrainian military launched a massive strike directly at the station. Twelve rockets were fired. It is known that six of them hit the cooling system of reactors, two — hit the dry cask storage [of radioactive waste]. The consequences of the shelling cannot be determined yet since the risk of repeated attacks remains,” Renat Karchaa said.
None of the Zaporozhye NPP personnel were injured, according to Karchaa.

Located on the left bank of the Dnieper River, the Zaporozhye NPP is the largest nuclear power plant in Europe by number of units and output. During the military operation in Ukraine, launched by Russia on February 24, the nuclear plant and surrounding area went under the control of Russian forces and have since been shelled many times. Russia and Ukraine blame each other for the attacks.

An international mission led by IAEA chief Rafael Grossi visited the plant from August 31 to September 5. IAEA observers have since been staying at the plant on a rotational basis. Following the visit by the mission, the IAEA published a report in which it confirmed the shelling of the ZNPP.

November 20, 2022 Posted by | Environmentalism, Nuclear Power, War Crimes | , | 1 Comment

« Previous Entries     Next Entries »