an air-separation unit that makes hydrogen gas used to cool the plant’s turbine generators and.radiation sensors monitoring spent fuel.Equipment damaged in the attacks include: Which side is responsible for that shelling remains contested, though Western security experts argue that Russia has more incentives to risk an accident. The debate over operating Zaporizhzhia boiled over when artillery shells started hitting the plant site late last month. Of course, adds Haverkamp, there’s nothing normal about Zaporizhzhia’s situation. Haverkamp and other Western experts say ceasing power generation would be “the wisest thing to do” under normal circumstances. “We are in a nightmare,” is how Jan Haverkamp, a nuclear safety expert with Greenpeace International, described the quandary facing Ukraine and the world in an email to IEEE Spectrum.
At the time the Minister of Energy was pushing Europe’s grid regulators to rapidly expand capacity limits for Ukrainian electricity exports.
Last month, Energoatom increased generation at Zaporizhzhia by ordering plant staff, working under Russian supervision, to start up a third reactor for the first time since the plant’s 4 March capture. As Energoatom stated in June: “Disconnection is impossible from a technical, security, economic, or political point of view.” Factors cited to justify operation include the possibility that cooling the plant will make it easier for Russia to transfer its generation to its own grid, and the need for power exports to Europe that deliver revenue and political support. (To date, plant operators have continued to respond to orders from Ukraine’s grid operator.) But Ukraine’s Ministry of Energy and nuclear power firm Energoatom say a broader risk calculus supports keeping the plant running. That’s because stopping would cool off the operating reactors, buying the beleaguered operators time to avert nuclear meltdowns if, say, shelling sparks a station-wide blackout.īackers of Steinberg’s position are urging Ukraine’s nuclear regulatory agency to order a shutdown. Nikolai Steinberg, a former chief engineer at Chernobyl and member of the International Atomic Energy Agency’s governing board, called running the plant “a crime” in an email interview with IEEE Spectrum. In Ukraine, which endured the 1986 Chernobyl accident, fear of another nuclear disaster is fueling a debate over Zaporizhzhia’s continued operation amidst the mayhem. In a simulated fallout map produced by Ukraine’s national weather service and posted Sunday, a radiation plume spreads northwest and reaches Poland and Lithuania within 72 hours. The ongoing confrontation risks widespread death and contamination-including to the fertile Ukrainian breadbasket that helped feed the world until Russia’s invasion. And, all the while, each blames the other as explosions rock the nuclear site.Īccording to a Reuters report today, Russia’s Defense Department may order the plant to shut down, citing shelling damage to the plant’s “back-up support systems.” Yesterday most plant workers were allegedly told not to come to work tomorrow, according to Ukranian intelligence, which warns the Russians may be planning a dangerous “provocation.” Ukraine is launching a counteroffensive to retake occupied territory, including Zaporizhzhia. Russian forces use the Zaporizhzhia plant as a safe haven for troops and equipment, including artillery that is shelling Ukrainian-held territory directly across the Dnipro River. A battle of nerves and steel is raging at Europe’s largest nuclear power plant, which Russia captured in March.
0 kommentar(er)
