![]() The state of alarm certainly is fueled by the confusion surrounding the plant’s safety, the extent of the Russian military equipment inside, and ultimately Russia’s goal in attacking the plant. It is under Russian control and I’d just point you to the IAEA’s comments there’s no immediate threat to nuclear safety.” The senior military official added,“ut that could change at any moment.” On the same day, IAEA Director General told the Associated Press the situation at the Russian-controlled Zaporizhzhia plant “has been deteriorating very rapidly.” Grossi qualified the military activity at the plant as “very alarming.” On August 12, a US senior military official held a background briefing saying: “In Zaporizhzhia, no particular updates on the nuclear power plant. Only an IAEA inspection would be able to confirm the damage. According to the Ukrainian state nuclear company Energoatom, however, the early-August missile attack that hit the plant’s dry spent fuel storage area damaged three radiation monitoring sensors, impairing the ability to detect any increase in radiation levels in the area. Map: Thomas Gaulkin / OpenStreetMap)ĭespite fears of a new nuclear disaster at the Zaporizhzhia plant, there has been no indication of elevated radiation levels at the plant. (Source: Institute for the Study of War and AEI’s Critical Threats Project. Inset shows location of Ukraine’s four operating nuclear plants (yellow) and the Chernobyl plant (red), fully decommissioned in 2000. Map of southern Ukraine identifying the Zaporizhzhia nuclear power plant, Russian-occupied areas and key cities. ![]() A Russian diplomat even struck a warning note, saying it would be too dangerous for an IAEA mission to inspect the Zaporizhzhia plant by passing through the capital city of Kyiv. On Monday, Ukrainian President Zelensky also called for the immediate withdrawal of Russian troops from the territory of the Zaporizhzhia NPP “without any conditions.” It did not take long, however, for Russia to reject these calls. ![]() Guterres was soon joined in his call by 42 countries-including the United States, Japan, the United Kingdom, Turkey, as well as the European Union-urging Russia to immediately withdraw its military forces from the plant and its immediate surroundings. “This is a serious hour, a grave hour,” Grossi told the security council from his Vienna office.įollowing Grossi’s warning, UN Secretary-General Antonio Guterres called for the establishment of a demilitarized zone at the Zaporizhzhia plant. Addressing the UN security council on August 11, IAEA Director General Rafael Mariano Grossi called again for the IAEA to conduct a mission to assess the safety of the plant. The worsening situation at the Zaporizhzhia plant, one of the 10 biggest nuclear plants in the world and Europe’s largest, prompted heightened alarm last week on both the United Nations and the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA), the UN’s nuclear watchdog. In a video address last week, Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky promised to target “every Russian soldier who either shoots at the plant, or shoots using the plant as cover.” Russian forces are using the plant as a military base to conduct night shelling of the Ukraine-controlled city of Nikopol, located just across the Dnieper River. Shelling and explosions have continued, with Ukraine and Russia blaming each other. World Nuclear Association (2016) Fukushima accident.Since Russian forces shelled and seized the Zaporizhzhia Nuclear Power Plant in early March, the plant has become a focal point of nuclear concern. US Nuclear Regulartory Commission, Washington, DC 20555-0001. Retrieved from US Nuclear Regulatory Commission US NRC (2011) Nuclear Regulatory Commission. Office of Radiations Program, United States Environmental Protection Agency, Washington DC 20460. ![]() US EPA (2013) Manual of protective action guides and protective action for nuclear incidents. Office of Radiation Programs, United States Environmental Protection Agency, Washington, DC. US EPA (1992) Manual of protective action guides and protective actions for nuclear incidents (EPA-400-R-92-001). Thielen H (2012) The Fukushima Daiichi nuclear accident-an overview. RSICC (2013) RASCAL 4.3: radiological assessment systems for consequence analysis Reactor and Nuclear Systems Division (RNSD), Oak Ridge National Laboratory, The Radiation Safety Information Computational Center (RSICC). Ramsdell JV Jr, Athey GF, Rishel JP (2013) RASCAL 4.3 user’s guide (Draft). Normile D (2016) Five years after the meltdown, is it safe to live near Fukushima? Retrieved from Science Kyne D (2016) A Fukushima-like disaster in New York city and possible issues associated with the extreme event management system. Kyne D (2015) Managing nuclear power plant induced disasters. Available from ProQuest Dissertations & Theses Global. Kyne D (2014) Environmental justice issues in communities hosting US nuclear power plants (Order No.
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |