Three weeks into Russiaās invasion of Ukraine, concerns are growing about the safety of several nuclear sites across the country.
But the risk of a serious incident is thought to be low despite Russian troops having disrupted normal safety procedures. at Bangor University in the UK says the circumstances are serious and Russiaās actions in regard to nuclear sites in Ukraine have been ācompletely recklessā, but that a significant radiation release is unlikely.
Ukraine is home to Chernobyl, the site of the infamous 1986 nuclear disaster, as well as four operational nuclear plants and aĀ small reactor used for research.
Advertisement
The situation at Chernobyl has been tense since the first day of the invasion when Russian troops seized the site. Scientific monitors detected a local increase in radiation levels, which was put down to Russian tanks disturbing contaminated dust. Since then, many radiation sensors around the plant have been offline and communications between plant workers and regulators have been sporadic at best.
Scientists who had been working at the site were unable toĀ access their laboratories because Russian troops controlled the plant. One of these scientists, who asked to remain anonymous, told Ā鶹“«Ć½ on 14 March thatĀ those staff remaining on theĀ site were doing their best toĀ maintain safety.
The International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) has complained that without the chance to be replaced by new shifts. A power cut at Chernobyl on 9 March meant itĀ was impossible to actively cool ponds containing nuclear waste.
Electrical lines were repaired and power was due to be restored, but the IAEA said on 15 March that the lines had again been . It also warned in a on 13 March that staff were no longer carrying out repair and maintenance of safety equipment due to their āphysical and psychological fatigueā.
IAEA director general Rafael Mariano Grossi called on Russia to allow an international team access to ensure safety. So far Russian president Vladimir Putin hasnāt accepted the request.
The there should be āno interference of any kindā with the staff at the plant, while the European Bank for Reconstruction and Development ā which organised Ā£2.1 billion to safely contain radiation at the site ā says the war āā.
Ukraine also has four operational nuclear power plants. These are of a newer design than Chernobyl, known as VVER, that isĀ safer and easier to operate.
As Ā鶹“«Ć½ went to press, the Zaporizhzhia nuclear power plant, in the south of Ukraine, isĀ the only one under Russian control, although forces are closing in on others. The IAEA reports that the Russian state nuclear company Rosatom nowĀ has 11 of its staff on site. OnĀ 12Ā March, the Ukrainian nuclear regulator informed theĀ IAEA that it believed Russia was planning to take full and permanent control of the plant, which was later .
Middleburgh says it is irresponsible for Russian forces to interfere in the operation of these plants. āItās like throwing a friend your car keys and just expecting them to know where all the buttons are,ā he says. āAs soon asĀ you start disrupting their safe working practices and the ability for them to get raw materials andĀ tools, thatās when incidents start happening. Not necessarily radiological incidents, but peopleĀ are going to start hurting themselves. Bad health and safety practices start creeping in.ā
While the VVER reactors have sophisticated safety systems that will be a crucial crutch during any period of upheaval, Middleburgh says the less predictable Chernobyl site is an outlier. āIf they donāt get a handle on things, then I could conceivably see a minor leak from Chernobyl. I donāt think it would be major, but I can see things going south,ā he says.
Another site of concern is the Kharkiv Institute of Physics and Technology, where the USSR's nuclear weapons were developed. The site houses a US-funded nuclear reactor that .
The State Nuclear Regulatory Inspectorate of Ukraine said in a statement that the building was damaged in shelling on 6 and 10 March, but the reactor has been safely shut down. that continued bombing of the site could lead to "severe radiation consequences", but Middleburgh says the whole site has no more than a suitcase-sized amount of fuel and could cause local contamination at worst.
Russia is strongly motivated to avoid disaster. Prevailing winds make it likely that any nuclear incident in Ukraine would carry the vast majority of the fallout east, towards Russia.
The IAEA and Ukraineās nuclear regulator didnāt respond to a request for an interview.
