Smoke is visible from Zaporizhzhya – the professor’s theory

Black smoke billows from one of the cooling towers at the nuclear power plant in Ukraine.

Dramatic images – but expert Christian Ekberg sees no reason to panic.

– You can imagine that it is some kind of propaganda warfare, he says.

The footage from the Zaporizhzhya nuclear power plant was released by Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyi on Sunday evening. It appears to show flames on the ground and thick black smoke billowing from one of the cooling towers.

Zelensky accuses the Russian occupiers and writes that they have “started a fire” in the area of ​​the nuclear power plant. At the same time, the Ukrainian military states that Russian soldiers have set fire to car tires.

Russia, for its part, claims that the fire was caused by a Ukrainian drone attack.

The International Atomic Energy Agency IAEA, which has experts on site, states on X that several explosions were heard before the fire started. According to the IAEA, their personnel were informed by the Russian management at the nuclear power plant that a drone attack would be behind it.

“No impact on nuclear safety has been reported,” the organization writes in conclusion.

That assessment is shared by Christian Ekberg, professor of nuclear chemistry at Chalmers in Gothenburg.

– Based on that, you can see in the film that they have not done anything to damage the nuclear power plant, he says.

Is in “cold shutdown”

There are six reactors in Zaporizhzhya. They are in what is known in English as “cold shutdown” – i.e. switched off and in a state where the nuclear fuel has had time to cool down.

The reactors are partly cooled by water from the river Dnieper, which flows next to it – but the two adjacent cooling towers are also used in the process.

– Many nuclear power plants in the world are not located by the sea. If they are located by a relatively small river, they cannot cope with the cooling with the available water. Then you build towers where water can be cooled, says Christian Ekberg.

– What happens is that the water evaporates in the tower. This requires energy. Then the remaining water cools and runs down the edges of the tower to be pumped back in. Cooling towers are not solid at the bottom.

Christian Ekberg sees no risk to safety based on the images.

– With the reactors in cold shutdown, not much heat is developed. The river plus a working cooling tower is enough, I’d like to think. There are two towers for a reason. Had the reactors been in operation, however, they would probably have reduced the output if one of the cooling towers was not working.

“Looks spectacular”

The professor’s spontaneous interpretation of the film is that “someone is on fire inside the tower”.

– This could be a way to wreak havoc on a nuclear power plant without destroying it, a cheap way too.

Christian Ekberg understands the concerns that spread when the film reaches the outside world:

– It looks extremely spectacular and dramatic. Nuclear power plants can evoke primitive fears and one naturally becomes quite nervous. One can imagine that it is some kind of propaganda warfare.

Christian Ekberg emphasizes that he does not know what caused the fire.

– But I don’t see the point in the Ukrainians attacking their own nuclear power plant, even if it is occupied right now.

Is there any risk that Sweden could be affected?

– No, I wouldn’t say that. Chernobyl was something very special when the entire core exploded into the air. This is a different type of reactor. They are well built rascals.

What is the worst case scenario?

– If for some reason the nuclear power plant were to lose all cooling and the backup system were to shut down, there would be a meltdown like in Fukushima after the tsunami. It would still be a local disaster and nothing that reaches Sweden.