Thread by @energybants

NUCLEAR, UKRAINE, EUROPEAN ENERGY

There are wild claims about Chernobyl going around. I will post the most accurate and authoritative information here and keep this thread updated.

FIRST: Chernobyl, even if attacked, is not a credible threat to health from radiation.

Several sources claimed that Chernobyl was under attack.

Chernobyl's outer containment dome could be breached if targeted.

Remaining hazardous material is deep under this. It's been cooling and decaying since 1986.

Dispersal would take intentional, targeted effort.

Keep an eye on Cheryl Rofer @CherylRofer 's statements:



She is correct in pointing out that it would be difficult to access this material.

It is well-characterized, meaning, we know what it is and how it could spread if disturbed.

Ukraine gets half its power from nuclear reactors.

It shut down Chernobyl fourteen years after the explosion in 1986, under pressure from the EU and only when promised money to complete another partially-built plant.

Here is a map of UKR's four operating nuclear plants:

WHAT IS THE THREAT TO THE OPERATING PLANTS?

Unlike at Chernobyl, Ukraine's currently operating reactors have lots of highly radioactive material inside them.

They need to remain safe.

If these reactors lose their connection to the grid, they will automatically shut down.

A silver lining of Fukushima Daiichi accident is that nuclear plants all over the world have prepared for what to do if cut off from off-site power from the grid.

You run generators to keep the core covered with water as it cools down over several days.

But the grid isn't down.

Ukraine's grid has just completed disconnecting from the Russian grid.

Ukrainian grid operators are apparently working through this, and Russia does not appear to have targeted the grid.

I will update if this changes.

Some reporting that Chernobyl has been occupied.

It does not change the radiological hazard, which, as noted, is extremely low.

If Russia has taken Chernobyl, the risk of extended, intense fighting disrupting radioactive material is low.

Here is a satellite image of Zaporizhzhia nuclear plant, one of the largest in the world with six reactors.

It is about four hours drive from the Crimean peninsula.

Considering the attack towards Kiev, we should assume that Russia will be occupy the plant if it chooses.

I am going to stay away from speculations about what Russia "wants" or what its strategy may be with these plants.

I want instead to be clear about radiological hazards, if any, from this conflict.

For Ukrainians now, the electricity is most important.

The grid remains on.

This is a new era.

Operating nuclear power plants have never been captured in war.

This may change, but considering how vulnerable and exposed grid infrastructure is, how easy to destroy, both Ukraine and Russia must defaulted to keeping the grid "off limits".

If Ukraine's electricity grid remains "off limits" to both defending and attacking forces, it is hard to imagine at this point attacks on the power plants themselves.

If the grid or the plants are attacked, the plants will automatically shut down and initiate cooling procedures.

After the Crimean annexation in 2014, Ukraine started a crash program to diversify its source of nuclear fuel for its four operating nuclear plants.

From various sources I've talked to over the last few weeks, about half of Ukraine's nuclear fuel still comes from Russia.

Nuclear plants are some of the few facilities in the world that are specifically prepared and drilled for so many extreme events.

Sometimes it feels over the top.

But when hurricanes make direct strikes, earthquakes hit nearby, or attacking forces threaten, you want calm order.

Failures, like at Fukushima Daiichi, lead to a round of intensification at every other nuclear plant.

Now we have a test.

How will grid operators and nuclear plant directors work together to keep order?

That's today's problem.

Tomorrow: what is the fate of EU energy?

Most nuclear export projects in the world are Russian.

Russian export projects are underway in:

Bangladesh
Belarus
China
Egypt
India
Iran
Turkey

Russian projects nearing start of construction include:

Hungary
Finland
Bulgaria
Uzbekistan

The war may have big ramifications.

Nuclear fundamentally adds to energy security, because nuclear plants only need a truck of fuel per year per reactor to keep going.

Coal similar sized needs 120 train cars daily.

And you also need a working grid, and control over your territory with the plants and grid on it.

Via @kallemets who is developing nuclear for Estonia, we have a report of the first nuclear plant cancellation as a result of this war: Finland.

So we have the weird new world unfolding before our eyes:

Invasion rolls in, grid stays on, nuclear plants stay on, Chernobyl site guards switch uniforms, and Europe buys more natural gas through Ukraine's pipelines.

From @JavierBlas , a must-follow:

HANDY ENERGY CONVERSIONS, 1:

Annual pipeline flows in BCM, billion cubic meters.

1 BCM ~ 1 TWh (terawatt-hour) of heat energy.

Nord Stream 1 = 55 BCM, about 540 TWh.

Converted to electricity in new efficient gas power plant, about 320 TWh.

Equal to 40 GW of well-run nuclear.

HANDY ENERGY CONVERSTIONS, 2:

USA (and others) sell Europe liquified natural gas (LNG) by ship.

A normal LNG tanker can carry 175,000 cubic meters of LNG. This is the same as 0.10 BCM of pipeline gas.

1 tanker = 0.2% of Nord Stream 1 = 6% of 1 big nuclear reactor annual output

WHY ARE ALMOST ALL NUCLEAR EXPORTS IN THE WORLD RUSSIAN?

I'm going to take a risk here that parts of this podcast looks bad in hindsight, but here I explain how Soviet nuclear fell apart and how Russian nuclear came back together.

decouplemedia.org/podcast/episod…

If confirmed this is good for Ukraine. It is more ambiguous news for the grid and the 4 nuclear plants.

So far, the grid and nuclear plants seem to be off-limits.

This invasion seems planned to avoid damage to *energy* infrastructure.

So far.

That tweet has been deleted. It said that an advisor to the Ukrainian president had said that Hostomel airfield had been recaptured by Ukrainian forces.

Instead we have this correction:



Ongoing battles increase the odds nuclear plants must shut down.

Claims of Russian advances towards Zaporizhzhia.

Map attached w/ Zaporizhzhia nuclear plant circled.

We don't know what the shutdown orders are at the plant.

Plant director will need to call the shot regardless, unless grid disconnects first.

People around the world are having fun with the Chernobyl references.

Chernobyl is not a working nuclear power plant.

It's somewhere between a tourist trap, industrial brownfield, and wildlife preserve.

It shouldn't be the focus of our nuclear concern.

NUCLEAR PHASEOUTS FALLING?

The coming days may see nuclear phaseout policies canceled.

From a source:
Belgian Energy Minister T. Van der Straeten was visibly destabilized and said, literally, "With this situation of today I can not exclude that I have to change my agenda"

Wow

Half of Belgian electricity comes from nuclear, generated in two nuclear plants.

Green Party has control of the energy ministry, the one they demanded while playing kingmaker in the current government.

They've insisted on switching to natural gas by 2025.

This change is big.

UKRAINIAN GRID: THE KEY FOR NUCLEAR

I'm watching in near real time the Ukrainian grid as demand falls and power is turned down in a controlled manner at the nation's 17 nuclear reactors.

This is wild: grid up, mainly nuclear power, data rolling in.

energy-charts.info/charts/power/c…

Let's be thankful that it's been really windy across Europe, especially Germany, this week!

GER & IT (nuclear phaseout in '90) blocking cutting Russia out of SWIFT to avoid disrupting nat. gas flows.

If wind speeds fall will Germany block more sanctions?

COULD GERMANY REACTIVATE REACTORS CLOSED 6 WEEKS AGO?

Experts aren't sure.

The plant owners are racing towards permanent destruction to "lock in" the arrangements they've made with their contractors and the German government.

My opinion: the sites should be secured IMMEDIATELY

GERMAN REACTORS BEING INTENTIONALLY DAMAGED AS WE SPEAK

The decisive step described to me by experts within the responsible utilities is an "acid wash" of the reactor + its biggest pipes and attachments.

This would permanently damage the integrity of the system. No return.

However, if the acid wash has been done "gently" enough, it might not be too late.

At least one expert thinks the German approach at previous closures has been relatively "gentle".

This leaves me pessimistic about the prospects.

But...if Nord Stream 1 shuts off? All bets off.

Great question from Ev out of Australia.

How do you freeze the nuclear disassembly?

Fortunately it's quite easy. You just have a quick call from a minister to the heads of the utilities.

Germans, superb at following orders, would stop immediately.

CHERNOBYL RADIATION READINGS UP

Expect to see lots on this:



The unusual activity (tanks etc) around the plant seems to be stirring up dust, registering on the gamma ray sensor network around the plant.

In the reactor: 65k nanoSv/hr = 65 microSv/hr

If readings are confirmed, here's the hourly dose if you go stand by the peak radiation sensor by Reactor 4.

If correct, the hazard is currently higher from normal warzone threats, not radiation, in my judgment.

Remember to convert nano to micro if you're checking!

Thx @xkcd

CHERNOBYL RADIATION UPDATE

Russians claim no elevated sensor readings (see pic, current high reading is 5.3μSv/yr which is 0.6nSv per hour, essentially nothing).

There's chatter that the high Ecocenter values were sensor errors.

That network is down now as its staff evacuated.

It's plausible.

Here's the sensor network that's down, with last reading with the spike:

saveecobot.com/en/radiation-m…

Here is the currently operating official sensor network (left-hand column thumbnail):

chnpp.gov.ua/en/

Unit confusion tho; map says μSV/yr, site says μSv/h

Seems unlikely "dust" in such damp conditions could explain the size of the spike at the last reading of the Ecocenter sensors.

Here's a note on that from @nucl0id , use translate to read the tweet if you don't read Russian. I'm watching the video now.

BAD MEDIA HEADLINES SPROUTING

@politico blunders in with lead quotes from a French guy with an organization dedicated to a *total nuclear phaseout.*

His statements on Chernobyl are decontextualized to mislead the reader. This is grossly irresponsible.

politico.eu/article/risk-o…

To report on risk of nuclear radiation to human health in a time of war, @politico puts its "Sustainability" desk to work contacting nuclear phaseout orgs!

Uncritical repetition of bizarre claim that Russia, a nuclear weapons state, would use plutonium to make a nuclear bomb.

*Plutonium from site

Another sign the reporter and editor were out of their depth chasing clicks is the reporting of doses without context for readers.

The article belatedly arrives at the real issue of the working reactors, then goes straight back to the nuclear phaseout guy!

This story was cooked in the classic tradition of anti-nuclear reporting:

- Give first & last word to professional nuclear phaseout guy.
- No-context doses.
- Include nuclear bombs when discussing plants.
- Avoid interviewing radiation health experts.
- False claim as headline.

TWO UKRAINIAN REACTORS INTENTIONALLY POWER DOWN

Energoatom, owner: #5 and #6 at Zaporizhzhia have powered down on the 25th, waiting in "reserve".

Ukraine appears to have stopped reporting grid data to ENTSO-E a few hours ago.

(Energoatom also reminds folks to pay their bills)

Rivne nuclear plant director Pavel Pavlyshyn: all is orderly and under control.

I'd call this extraordinary professionalism but it's ordinary nuclear professionalism that looks extraordinary.

Painting in the background? A watermill, the OG power plant.

facebook.com/watch/?extid=T…

RUSSIAN FORCES APPROACH ZAPORIZHZHIA?

It has seemed likely since Day 1 that this plant would change hands, at least temporarily.

Will be watching to see how this is handled. Neither side will want shooting, no matter who is going to end up in control.

I used a question mark because unfortunately after the first day of the war we cannot instantly take UA gov statements concerning nuclear at face value.

It's understandable perhaps given the existential risks of war to UA, but gov sources misled press about Chernobyl plutonium.

SOURCE: FRANCE HAS ONLY "A MONTH" TO STOP DESTRUCTION OF FESSENHEIM

France turned off a 1.8GW nuclear station in excellent condition only two years ago.

Soon it will destroy the internals with an acid wash.

The plant was closed arbitrarily to meet nuclear shrinkage goals.

At the time, most French nuclear experts I talked to agreed that it was a good to close "old" nuclear plants, to reduce "extra" domestic energy and to justify getting paid to build new reactors.

But they were upset about the choice of Fessenheim, as it had been life-extended.

Ukraine's nuclear safety authority reporting that Russian munitions have stuck a waste facility, and that its sensor network is offline.

Also said little risk expected.

This should end up in the "radically less dangerous than the war itself" category.

This extra coverage and attention on nuclear-flavored incidents is perhaps not surprising, but certainly seems to be a proxy for outside observers' anxieties about nuclear weapons rather than serious interest in the details of radiation risks.

So I'll keep covering too.

NEW RULE: be *very* skeptical about Ukrainian-aligned sources when reporting on "RADIATION" or nuclear facilities (and Russian-aligned sources about everything else).

Notice the follow-up. It was available at the same time the initial information was.

Lots of people mentioning Putin's orders to increase the readiness level of Russia's nuclear forces.

Best context I've seen, from the guy who accurately predicted an invasion back in December:

More context, from Russian nuclear arms tracker Pavel Povdig:

SOURCES: GERMAN FINANCE MINISTRY DISCUSSING ROLLING BACK NUCLEAR PHASEOUT

Trial-balloon report said to be emerging very soon.

Germany's LNG-only plan to augment renewables would be ferociously expensive, and it seems that the Ministry of Finance gets this.

Context: The Federal Minister of Finance is Christian Lindner of the Free Democratic Party.

As Energy Ministries across the EU become "ecology" Ministries led by people who don't even know the *units* used to quantify energy, Finance Ministries become the adults.

And thus.

German energy plans have been building for decades on having access to 110 billion cubic meters/yr of pipeline gas from Russia.

LNG will always be more expensive. You're competing against Japan, for example, which has built its society around pricey LNG.

By "augmenting" renewables, I mean that renewables, despite their declining growth rates in Germany and decreasing number of virgin locations, were still as of yesterday being described as the big "response" play to the invasion.

Gas, "bio" + LNG, supposed to fill colossal gaps.

Seems that although my sources are coming from Finance, this appears to be a multiple-ministry change of heart:

This remarkable turnaround in rhetoric at the highest levels of German government occurs just hours after Germany's ~€300b wind & solar fleet fell to 6.5% of electricity generation Saturday evening.

Weather: famously indifferent to German wartime needs.

FRENCH PROFESSOR: GAZPROM FUNDED THE GREENS TO KILL NUCLEAR

If confirmed, not a shock for anyone following the effort Green ministers are making in various European countries to subsidize fossil fuel investments to justify nuclear removal.

Now, this may be referring to investigative work by some of my colleagues in Belgium that found future Energy Minister Tinne Van der Straeten's law firm working for Gazprom while she was at the firm and also in parliament.

Will need to see what Prof. Reynié shows as evidence.

RUSSIAN FORCES SURROUNDING ZAPORIZHZHIA

As warned since Day 1, Zaporizhzhia, with 6 reactors, is close to Crimea. It appears that we're about to see an attempted transfer of control of the plant, if Russia chooses.

Russian forces about 10km (?) away.

IMPLICATIONS OF ZAPORIZHZHIA ENVELOPMENT

Zaporizhzhia, like all operating Ukrainian nuclear plants, has worked with leading experts to implement post-Fukushima Daiichi emergency preparedness programs.

Even if grid is cut, operators are trained to protect cores with generators.

Zaporizhzhia's reactors are "pressurized water reactors" type.

The worst PWR accident ever was Three Mile Island in 1979, in which confused operators accidentally melted one of their two reactors, with no significant releases of radiation (the other ran until 2019).

A Russian assault on the plant is extremely unlikely: horrible publicity, when they could just cut the local grid and force reactors offline. But it's still a key energy source for Ukraine and its loss, if forced to shut all reactors down, would be a blow to Ukraine.

The pattern (so far) in this war has been Russian forces tiptoeing around both the grid and nuclear.

Ukrainian sources, understandably, have been making a very big deal about anything nuclear related.

GO SLOW when reading ANY Ukrainian nuclear headlines. Wait a bit. Follow up.

REPORT: PERSONAL ADVISOR TO GERMAN FINANCE MINISTER SAYS NUCLEAR BACK ON TABLE

Lars Feld, personal advisor to Minister Lindner, says nuclear and coal must be back on the table.

Coal? Not a shock. "Phaseout" in "2030", was a charade.

Nuclear? Shocking.

rp-online.de/politik/auslan…

If Lars Feld gets shredded and Germany backtracks, no problem. Sack Feld, reopen closed coal, keep Nord Stream.

If German public accepts this argument after the coming energy price shockwave (coal was staying anyway, as the winner in the nuclear vs coal choice) nuclear is BACK.

Note: Germany can help Europe merely by reversing its obstruction of nuclear's inclusion in EU's "Green Taxonomy," which...may need a few big revisions now anyway.

It'll be German capital building cheap clean power for neighbors, but, if you're Germany, can't be too picky now!