encouraging

Europe is once again walking a nuclear tightrope. After more than three years of war, the largest atomic plant on the continent —the Ukrainian Zaporizhia plant— has gone from being an industrial symbol to becoming at a point of friction capable of triggering an emergency of continental reach. In parallel, other plants in the country operate at reduced power after attacks on the electrical grid. The situation is so unstable that the director of the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA), Rafael Grossi, recently traveled to Kaliningrad, Russia, for emergency talks with the head of Rosatom, Alexey Likhachev, according to the Anadolu agency. It is a gesture that reflects the extent to which the risk is real. An attack that left two centers at minimum. According to a statement from the IAEAa military attack during the night of November 7 damaged an electrical substation critical to nuclear security. This incident left the Khmelnitsky and Rivne plants disconnected from one of their two 750 kilovolt lines and forced the electricity operator to order a power reduction in several of its reactors. Ten days later, one of the lines was still out of service and three reactors continued to operate at limited power. The agency emphasizes that these substations are essential nodes of the network: they allow the voltage levels that feed the security and cooling systems to be transformed and maintained. Without them, plants cannot guarantee safe operation. One month depending on diesel generators. The situation in Zaporizhzhia is even more critical. According to an opinion column by Najmedin Meshkati, professor of engineering and international relations published in the Financial Timesthe plant spent a full month without outside power after its two main lines were cut. During that time it survived solely on diesel generators, a resource that the industry considers strictly temporary: they are designed to run for around 24 hours, not for weeks. Technicians were only able to repair the lines under the protection of localized ceasefires negotiated by the IAEA, according to NucNet. Even so, one of the two restored lines was disconnected again on November 14 due to the activation of a protection system. Grossi summed it up like this: “The electrical situation at the plant remains extremely fragile.” The condition for a shut down reactor to remain safe. Although Zaporizhzhia’s six reactors have been on cold shutdown for more than three years, the plant requires a constant three to four megawatts to maintain cooling pumps and other essential systems, according to Meshkati. The professor emphasizes that even huge emergency batteries require external electricity to stay charged. It is a vicious circle: without the electrical grid, batteries are used, but without external electricity, these batteries cannot be recharged and, without both, the cooling systems fail. And without cooling the risk of nuclear fuel melting or overheating increases. The University of Southern California professor warns that this scenario reproduces the conditions that transformed Fukushima into a global disaster: “What turned an earthquake into a catastrophe was the total failure of the electrical system.” And he adds that, unlike 2011 in Japan, this time the risk comes from deliberate human action. A network reduced to its minimum expression. Before the war, according to the Kyiv Independentthe Zaporizhia plant was connected through ten power lines. Today it only has one or two operations and has lost all connection ten times since the beginning of the invasion. The IAEA itself has described the situation power plant as “extremely precarious” and “clearly not sustainable” when it depends for long periods on diesel generators. Short and medium term risks. The notices in the last report on Ukraine by the IAEA point in the same direction: the main danger is not a Chernobyl-type explosion, but a prolonged cooling failure. This scenario could cause overheating of the reactors in cold shutdown, damage to the spent fuel pools and a possible localized or regional radioactive release, with the consequent need to create an exclusion zone in the heart of agricultural Europe. For its part, according to Meshkatiadds two other relevant elements. On the one hand, it points out that a serious accident will exceed the economic impact of Fukushima, estimated at about $500 billion. An incident of that magnitude would affect agriculture, transport, supply chains and the European insurance market. On the other hand, he maintains that if Russia manages to consolidate the precedent that an occupying army can take control of a nuclear power plant and connect it to its own network, the global nuclear security architecture would be seriously compromised. It would be a precedent without equivalent since the creation of international standards that regulate the civil use of atomic energy. Is there a meeting point? The IAEA has acted as an intermediary between Moscow and kyiv on multiple occasions. According to the Anadolu agencyGrossi traveled to Kaliningrad to meet with Likhachev, director of Rosatom, in order to directly discuss the situation in Zaporizhzhia and the minimum conditions to guarantee nuclear safety. At the same time, the agency is trying to technically shore up the Ukrainian electrical system. According to their own statementshas so far coordinated 174 deliveries of essential equipment – ​​switches, electrical cabinets, radiation monitoring stations, vehicles and computer equipment – ​​worth more than 20.5 million euros, intended to sustain nuclear security in Ukraine during the war. Nuclear security supported by fragile cables Europe breathes thanks to a handful of cables repaired under fire and diesel generators that have already proven to be well beyond their limits. As the Financial Times explainsthe continent’s security depends on electricity continuing to arrive and on the parties respecting the fragile ceasefires needed to repair lines when they go down. Grossi summed it up with a mix of relief and alarm after the restoration of one of the lines: “It is a good day for nuclear security, although the situation remains highly precarious.” And the precarious thing, in this case, is that a new attack, a mechanical failure or a downed line is enough to bring … Read more