power cut, nuclear risk… What’s going on at the plant?

CHERNOBYL UKRAINE. After the Russian takeover of the region on February 24, the Chernobyl power plant in Ukraine stopped transmitting information on Tuesday. This Wednesday, March 9, 2022, the power supply, necessary in particular for cooling fuels, was cut…

[Mis à jour le 9 mars 2022, à 15h41] The blackout. The Chernobyl power plant, in the hands of the Russian army since the start of the war in Ukraine on February 24, has not responded since Tuesday, March 8, 2022. “The systems for remotely controlling the nuclear materials of the power plant from Chernobyl in Ukraine have stopped transmitting data to the International Atomic Energy Agency (AEIA),” the agency said in a statement.

At midday on Wednesday March 9, 2022, the power supply cut off at the power plant, which has been completely shut down since 2000 but still contains radioactive waste, was reported. The Chernobyl power plant “has been completely disconnected from the electricity grid due to the military actions of the Russian occupier” and the site “no longer has any power supply”, said Ukrenergo, the Ukrainian operator, on its Facebook page . The message specifies “that there is no possibility of restoring the lines”.

The IAEA nevertheless indicated on its Twitter account this Wednesday afternoon that it saw “no critical impact on the safety” of the site. “The IAEA indicates that the heat load of the spent fuel storage pool and the volume of cooling water at the Chernobyl nuclear power plant are sufficient for efficient heat removal without the need for electrical power,” said she continued in another message.

The fear of a new incident and new leaks in the Chernobyl zone was nevertheless palpable on Wednesday. Energatom, Ukraine’s National Nuclear Energy Company, warned in particular of the risk of “the release of radioactive substances into the environment”. “The wind can transfer the radioactive cloud to other regions of Ukraine, Belarus, Russia and Europe,” she warned.

The situation at the Chernobyl plant has been of concern to the international community since the region and the complex were taken by the Russian army on February 24, the first day of the invasion of Ukraine. In addition to the bombardments which raised fears of damage to the plant itself, maintaining an optimal level of security on the site raises many concerns. Just over 200 Ukrainian technicians are still in the plant and could not be relieved as required by protocol, with regular rotations on the damaged site in the 1980s. The Ukrainian nuclear safety authorities indicated in early March that the working conditions for this team were deteriorating, despite access to food, water and medicine.

On Tuesday, March 8, 2022, the International Atomic Energy Agency (AEIA) reported that systems to remotely monitor nuclear materials at the Chernobyl power plant have stopped transmitting data. Rafael Grossi, the head of the IAEA also indicated that “the remote transmission of data from the safeguards control systems installed at the Chornobyl nuclear power plant” had also “been cut”. This Wednesday, March 9, 2022, several media including Le Monde reported that the power supply to the nuclear power plant and its safety equipment was “completely” cut off due to the fighting, quoting a message from the National Energy Production Company Nuclear Power of Ukraine (Energatom) on Telegram.

After the Russians arrived at Chernobyl on February 24, an adviser to the Ukrainian Interior Ministry, Anton Gerashchenko, reminded the Washington Post that the plant, although shut down, still had storage facilities for “radioactive waste dangerous nuclear weapons”. Waste sheltered in a gigantic sarcophagus which was only fully completed in 2019.

In the hours following the capture of Chernobyl, Mykhailo Podolyak, adviser to Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky, said it was “impossible to say that the nuclear power plant” had remained “safe”. He called the onslaught of the Russian army in the area “the most serious threat” not only for Ukraine but also for Europe. Remarks taken up in substance by Volodymyr Zelensky himself on the same day on social networks. For its part, the Ukrainian Ministry of Foreign Affairs was moved by the risk of a new “ecological disaster”.

The Ukrainian nuclear agency and the Ukrainian government indicated above all on Friday, February 25 that the radiation measured very regularly in Chernobyl and the surrounding area was beginning to increase (up to 9.46 microSieverts per hour). A phenomenon that several experts have explained by the passage of Russian troops and armored vehicles, which would have raised radioactive dust still present in the contaminated soils of the region. These levels of radioactivity nevertheless remained harmless and localized in the Chernobyl exclusion zone, ie a radius of 30 km around the old power plant.

The end of communications and especially the power outage reported on March 8 and 9 have revived concern around the plant. Energatom, Ukraine’s National Nuclear Power Company, expressed concern about a potential lack of fuel cooling and warned of the risk of “release of radioactive substances into the environment” and possible “radioactive cloud” that the sale could transfer “to other regions of Ukraine, Belarus, Russia and Europe”. The International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) nevertheless reassured on Twitter in the afternoon indicating that it saw “no critical impact on safety” given that “the thermal load of the spent fuel storage pool and the volume of cooling water at the Chernobyl nuclear power plant are sufficient for efficient heat removal”.

Read also

Can Russia cause another accident at Chernobyl?

Fighting and the use of explosives in the Chernobyl zone remain a matter of concern and collateral damage can always be envisaged according to experts. The site was not equipped with a missile defense system. At a press conference in Paris on February 28, Alexandra Prysiazhniuk, spokesperson for the Ukrainian Embassy in France, briefly recalled that Russian planes were still flying over the Chernobyl forbidden zone with a “risk of bombardment”. . In The Parisian Friday, February 25, Teva Meyer, expert in energy issues, nevertheless estimated that “almost nothing is very radioactive” in Chernobyl, “except for the inside of the sarcophagus, which is protected and solid” and that it “It would really take a combination of significant circumstances for the strikes to hit him to the point of hurting him”.

The International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA), which speaks almost daily on the situation in Ukraine, has published a statement Saturday, February 26, warning that “the operations of the nuclear installations in the area could in no way be affected or disturbed and that the personnel should be able to work and rest normally”. The staff maintaining the site is particularly a source of concern. According to the protocol, this team of 210 Ukrainian technicians and guards, in charge of monitoring and maintaining the site, must be regularly relieved. A rotation which could not be carried out since the arrival of the Russian troops on February 24.

In addition to Chernobyl, all the facilities in question

IAEA Director General Rafael Mariano Grossi more generally called on those who have effective control of Ukrainian nuclear facilities “to avoid any action that could compromise the safety of these facilities […]jeopardize the security of nuclear materials and the safe operation of all nuclear facilities, as such an incident could have serious consequences for human health and the environment”.

Asked by Les Echos Monday, February 28, Jan Vande Putte, nuclear campaigner for Greenpeace Belgium and East Asia, believes that the capture of Chernobyl by Russia accentuates the risks already present around the old nuclear power plant. “But the main concern lies with the nuclear power plants still in operation in Ukraine”, sums up the daily. Ukraine indeed has four “nuclear power sites”, with a total of 15 reactors in operation, representing half of the country’s electricity. But in Le Parisien, Yves Marignac, expert in the sector and spokesperson for the négaWatt Association, believes that a “new Chernobyl” is very unlikely even if we can still fear “a disaster on a regional scale”. .

Can Russia make a “dirty bomb” in Chernobyl?

The question of the manufacture by the Russians of a “dirty bomb” from the nuclear waste of Chernobyl was also raised, but very quickly dismissed by the experts. The manufacture of such a bomb cannot be improvised and “demands an industrial organization”. The Russian nuclear arsenal is moreover largely sufficient to save such a “tinkering” according to the same sources.

According to the American magazine, Forbes citing the Reuters news agency, Russia could nevertheless send a message to Westerners by seizing the Chernobyl zone. “A message to NATO so that it does not take any military action”, summarizes a Russian source.

Why did Russia take Chernobyl?

What then would be the interest of the Russian army in taking control of Chernobyl? It appears that the rapid positioning of the military in the area responds to a more conventional strategy. First, Chernobyl is located in the immediate vicinity of the Belarusian border, from which Russia has chosen to enter Ukraine. It is also located just north of Kiev, the capital, which quickly emerged as a military objective of Vladimir Putin. The area is also very close to the Dnieper River, a drinking water reserve for the Ukrainian capital, which could prove to be strategic.

The 1986 nuclear disaster and the construction of the sarcophagus further necessitated the construction of major infrastructure, such as a railroad that the Russians could use to transport military equipment and supplies for its troops in the conquest of Kiev. Electrical installations can also be diverted to cut off part of the capital’s energy supply.

Finally, some emphasize the symbolic aspect of the capture of Chernobyl. Forbes believes that “the nuclear site is of historic significance to Russia because Mikhail Gorbachev, who was the president of the Soviet Union at the time of the Chernobyl nuclear disaster, said the accident ‘may have been the true cause of the collapse of the Soviet Union’, even more so than its policy of restructuring the economic and political system”.