Europe’s largest nuclear power plant, Zaporizhia, is under fire, and fears of a nuclear catastrophe are growing. There is currently no radioactive hazard from the facility. Nuclear power plant expert Anna Veronika Wendland says: “That can change hourly”.
Zaporizhia: That’s the name of Europe’s largest nuclear power plant. Most people have probably only been aware of it for a few weeks. More precisely, since the plant has been under constant fire during the Ukraine war.
Russia and Ukraine blame each other for the attacks on the nuclear power plant in the city of Enerhodar. According to the Russian news agency Ria Novostizvar, Moscow has now proposed a ceasefire.
However, Ukraine has not yet responded to this proposal. In other words, the situation in and around Zaporizhia is still tense. And with every new attack, the fear of a nuclear catastrophe grows.
Now save articles for later in “Pocket”.
“Without a doubt we are dealing with a dangerous situation,” says Anna Veronika Wendland in an interview with FOCUS online. Because even if, according to information from the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA), there is no radiological danger on the nuclear power plant site. “It’s not a stable situation. That can change by the hour,” says the historian of technology and Eastern Europe.
Wendland has been involved with nuclear energy for many years and worked on a research project in Rivne, a sister plant of Zaporizhia. She therefore knows exactly how Europe’s largest nuclear power plant is structured.
“Two blocks of the plant in Rivne are identical to the six blocks in Zaporizhia,” she says. She describes the power plant site as large and spacious. “So when it is reported that parts of the facility have been hit by gunfire, it could mean anything.”
According to reports, there was damage to a nitrogen-oxygen storage facility and a switchgear. The on-site interim storage facility for spent fuel elements is said to have been hit last, and measuring devices for environmental monitoring broke.
So far no goals that would have led to a nuclear catastrophe, says Wendland. She explains that nuclear waste is stored in vessels similar to so-called Castor containers. “The cylinder-like protective covers survive one or two hits.” According to the nuclear power expert, however, they would not withstand a targeted fire.
Zaporizhia’s fire station is also said to have been shot at. According to Wendland, it is located next to the fence that encloses the nuclear power plant – so it is not in a highly critical environment. However, this does not mean that attacks on the site of the nuclear power plant cannot have serious consequences.
“The power supply is a sore point of the nuclear power plant,” says Wendland. In every reactor in Zaporizhia there are highly radioactive fuel elements that have to be constantly cooled. Otherwise they heat up so much that not only they but also the reactors melt.
The reactors are dependent on a functioning after-cooling chain and need electric pumps for this – even if the reactor itself is already switched off. Normally, the nuclear power plant itself provides the electricity that the pumps need.
If a reactor shuts down due to a fault, the plant is supplied from two external networks. If these fail because high-voltage lines are cut during hostilities, diesel generators take over the emergency supply.
“Each block is backed up several times. But if hostilities continue and the power plant’s power supply collapses completely – then there could be a meltdown like in Fukushima,” explains the expert. “So you can get the nuclear power plant in serious trouble without shooting directly at the reactors.”
And the personnel situation in Zaporizhia is also questionable. Since March, Russia has manned the nuclear power plant with almost 500 soldiers. The Ukrainian nuclear workers are still in action. They were only told that they now work for the Russian nuclear power company Rosenergoatom.
“They go to their shifts at gunpoint every day, to put it bluntly,” says Wendland. A security risk, the expert finds. “The staff is stressed, constantly having to deal with new dangerous situations and afraid – for their own families too, because the war isn’t just limited to Zaporizhia. And those who are afraid make mistakes more easily.”
So far, it has been difficult to independently verify who was responsible for the siege of Zaporizhia. Although both warring factions blame each other for the shelling of the nuclear power plant, there are increasing indications that the attacks came from Russia. The Wall Street Journal, for example, interviewed employees of the nuclear power plant.
According to them, the soldiers stationed at the compound were remarkably calm before the August 5 attack. Almost as if they knew about the attack in advance. But would Moscow really let the situation at the nuclear power plant escalate?
There are some arguments against it. For example, that a serious nuclear accident in Zaporizhia would also spread to Russian territory. In addition, Russia wants to use Europe’s largest nuclear power plant for itself – in June the head of the Russian occupation authorities announced that the electricity produced there should benefit Crimea in the future.
“If you assume rational actors, these are arguments against escalation,” says Wendland. But she points out that Russian President Vladimir Putin “apparently has little value for his own people.” In addition, one does not know exactly who is acting on site – only that the soldiers do not have much knowledge of nuclear power plants.
For the technology historian it is also clear that nuclear power plants are used as instruments of fear in war – to put other countries under pressure. “In my opinion, also Zaporizhschja,” says Wendland. “This is fueling fears of a nuclear catastrophe, not only in Germany, for example. Under such circumstances, people are more willing to demand surrender from Ukraine.”
Only: Why isn’t Europe’s largest nuclear power plant simply shut down completely when the situation is so precarious? After all, two out of six blocks are still in operation.
“It’s safer if the fuel elements are in the spent fuel pool, but the region is also dependent on the electricity that Zaporizhia produces,” says Wendland. In her opinion, however, there are ways and means to make the system safer.
For example, by sending IAEA experts to Zaporizhia. “The best thing would be a protection zone around the power plant where no military are allowed to be,” says the expert.
