December 2008 Archives

Herer's a "new" video from Chernobyl and Pripyat in 2007 (from the site medicinefilms.com):

According to a social survey titled “Crisis 2008: Ukrainian politics in the mirror of public opinion,” Party of Regions leader Viktor Yanukovych and current Prime Minister Yulia Tymoshenko would both reach the second round of a presidential election, if it was held now. Current President Viktor Yushchenko would not make it to a second round.

The poll of 2,004 respondents was conducted across the country, including Kyiv, Crimea and Sevastopol beteween December 2 and 11.

The report, presented by the Sophia Center of Social Studies found the following for a first round presidential election:

• Viktor Yanukovych - 20.9%
• Yulia Tymoshenko - 17.7%
• Viktor Yushchenko - 4.6%

The following represents public opinion for a second round election:

• Viktor Yanukovych - 31.7%
• Yulia Tymoshenko - 27.5%

The same poll also posted approximate vote totals for a new parliamentary election:

• Party of Regions - 19.9%
• Yulia Tymoshenko Bloc - 18.3%
• Communist Party - 6.7%
• Lytvyn Bloc - 5.7%
• Our Ukraine People’s Self Defense Bloc - 3.8%
• Progressive Socialist Party 2.2%

The survey margin of error was 2.2%. It is interesting to note that after a second round election, neither presidential candidate reaches the required 50% threshold. However, this is only a poll, and an early one at that, so it is difficult to predict what will really happen.

In the parliamentary poll, the Progressive Socialist Party has a chance to make the 3% threshold for seats in the Verkhovna Rada. Yushchenko’s Our Ukraine People’s Self Defense Bloc looks to secure a few seats, which is better than summer polls that indicated the group would not reach the 3% threshold.

To me, the most fascinating observation is that Tymoshenko seems to have lost some of her popularity. In previous polls, she easily led all potential candidates and now she is a solid second.

Photos: Yulia Tymoshenko - © Yulia Tymoshenko Bloc
             Viktor Yanukovych - © Viktor Yanukovych Personal Information Server

Surprise, Surprise! A new coalition agreement has been signed between:

• President Viktor Yushchenko’s Our Ukraine People’s Self Defense Bloc
• Prime Minister Yulia Tymoshenko’s Bloc
• New parliamentary speaker Volodymyr Lytvyn’s Bloc

The new coalition claims to have 248 seats in the 450-member Verkhovna Rada, thus breaking the country’s 3-month parliamentary deadlock. However, there are reports that approximately 30 of Yushchenko’s deputies oppose the alliance, including top lieutenant Vyacheslav Kirilenko, who resigned as faction chief. A ruling coalition can only exist when it has at least a majority 226 votes.

Even if the new coalition has a parliamentary majority, don’t expect much to change. All the players remain the same, except for the inclusion of Lytvyn. At least this should be the end of discussions for the new parliamentary election Yushchenko called for, but canceled due to lack of funding.

Probably the only reason this happened is that Ukraine has been hit extremely hard by the world financial crisis. Yushchenko believes the country’s economy could contract by 7-10% in the first quarter of 2009. That would come on top of this year’s loss of revenue from declining steel prices (exports) and falling GDP (14.4% in November as compared to November 2007). Ukraine is also in another battle with Russia over gas prices.

Chernobyl Nuclear Power Plant chief electrician Sergey Zhovner has discussed the implementation of integrated testing at the ORU, 750 kV “Kiev” substation. The activities, which started in early 2008, include the overhaul of power equipment necessary for the uninterrupted transmission of voltage and subsequent installation and adjustment of new protection panels.

Even though the substation equipment has been in operation for 25 years, and its maintenance and support are more costly due its location in the Chernobyl Exclusion Zone, the Chernobyl NPP has continuing obligations to Ukrenergo to maintain ORU in technically good condition.

This work is part of the first phase of planned modernization of Ukraine’s entire electricity grid. Expected long-term results are the improved reliability of the country’s entire energy system, especially Kyiv.

The Chernobyl ORU substation is expected to be fully decommissioned after 2015.

Volodymyr Shandra, Minister of the Ukrainian Ministry of Emergency Measures, has announced his confidence that the world financial crisis will not affect the financing and construction of the New Safe Confinement structure over Reactor 4 at the Chernobyl Nuclear Power Plant. Shandra also believes inflation will not have a noticeable effect on the project.

Shandra explained his confidence by noting that project funds are controlled by the European Bank for Reconstruction and Development.

While Shandra seems confident, it is interesting that he also hopes that at the next meeting of donor countries (which started today in London, England), a decision will be made to significantly add money to the “Shelter” fund and the Nuclear Safety Account. This either means the financial crisis is having an effect on the project or Shandra wants to insure there are no monetary shortfalls that could delay the project.

Currently, construction of the New Safe Confinement is scheduled for completion in the summer of 2012.

While I’m on the subject of Chernobyl panoramas, you should also check out another website, Panoramas from the Chernobyl Zone. This website has a group of excellent photos by my friend and colleague, Michael Forster Rothbart, a Fulbright fellow who is currently back in Ukraine working on his “After the Nukes” photographic project. On this site, you can select specific photos by name/caption, or use the interactive Google maps, which show the location of each photo.

I recently stumbled across a neat website from Poland, Wirtualne Panoramy 360°, that has great 360º panorama photographs from the Chernobyl Exclusion Zone (the site also has excellent panoramas of other locations as well). Definitely check this site out when you have a few minutes.

The European Union wants Armenia to close its Metsamor Nuclear Power Plant, but the Armenians refuse to dismantle the facility until a replacement is operational. Metsamor currently provides 40% of the country’s electricity.

The Metsamor NPP was constructed during the 1970’s approximately 30 kilometers west of the Armenian capital, Yerevan. The facility was built with two VVER-440 model V320 nuclear reactors, but this technology is no longer considered acceptable by modern safety standards.

Metsamor is located in an eartthquake-hazard region, where strong earthquakes constantly occur. The plant is operated by Inter RAO UES, a Russian company, as part of a five-year deal to help pay off Armenian debts.

Armenia plans to build a new nuclear plant with a capacity of either 1,000 or 1,200 MW. Projected project costs are between $4 billion and $7.2 billion. Construction may start in 2011 and the new facility is expected to go online in 2017. The United States and France have indicated their willingness to help Armenia replace Metsamor. Russia is also expected to cooperate with the Armenian government.

The European Union is concerned about safety due to both the use of old technology and location in an actively seismic area. EU appears determined to close all nuclear plants using outdated technology as soon as possible, even if that means exerting huge pressures on the governments of countries with these old plants.

It will be interesting to see if Russia eventually takes the lead in building a new facility, instead of the US or France. This is one of those cases that confounds me - I hate seeing another new nuclear plant built in the world, but without a new nuclear facility, what would Armenia do to meet its energy needs? I feel the same way about Ukraine - I don’t want them building more nuclear plants, but they don’t have many sensible, clean alternatives either. If a country needs to use nuclear power, I would rather see them use new, safe technology than something outdated and dangerous.

Photo: Bouarf - Gnu Free Doc Lic 1.2

Qatar General Electricity and Water Corporation (Kahramaa) has opened discussions with Russia about utilizing new Russian floating nuclear power plants (FNPP). Qatar is studying the possibility of adding up to 5,400 MW of nuclear capacity between 2011 and 2036. Qatar is also constructing the world’s largest solar power facility, which should be operational by 2013.

The country is also interested in using nuclear power for electricity so they can export more gas for additional income. Russia plans to only lease FNPP’s, but potential dependence on a foreign energy supply is not a concern. If Russia ever tried to put pressure on Qatar, the middle eastern country could always revert back to power from its gas reserves.

The Russian floating nuclear power plants are a good prospect for Qatar because they not only have the capability to generate electricity, but can also be used to desalinate water. Kahramaa estimates local daily water demand in Qatar could more than double by 2012 to approximately 681,000 cubic meters per day. FNPP’s can supply roughly 240,000 cubic meters of water each day, which would at least partially solve the problem.

The first Russian FNPP’s are anticipated to be online by 2011. These plants use two KLT-40S reactors similar to those used on Russian icebreakers and submarines. The expected capacity is 70 MW, enough to power cities of 100,000-200,000 people. Radioactive byproducts will be stored in special compartments and removed every 10-12 years during pre-planned overhauls.

Traditional land-based nuclear plants have been considered, but necessary safety zones make it inconvenient to locate a facility in such a small country. Also, it is not clear if the existing electricity grid can support the additional 1,000 MW from a large, land-based plant.

The biggest concern about such plants is safety and security. Rosatom director Sergei Kiriyenkosays says FNPP’s will be much safer than land-based facilities. The plants will have five radiation protection barriers and can withstand a 7-8 point earthquake, 100 mph winds or a falling Jak-40 jet. Transportation  will be without fuel, refueling will occur at special, secure shipyards and the plants are being designed with unspecified security systems to protect them from underwater sabotage.

That’s all well and good, but you know my feelings about nuclear power. A big problem with these plants is not only that radioactivity can be spread in the atmosphere, but also via ocean currents. It certainly is an interesting idea, but not one I can get behind.

The Irish government has established an agreement with Belarus to end the ban on travel for children affected by the Chernobyl nuclear disaster. The agreement means approximately 200 children will be able to visit Ireland this Christmas.

Ireland is the first country to secure a direct inter-governmental agreement since Belarus banned travel for Chernobyl children in August after one participant, Tanya Kazyra, refused to return home at the end of her visit with the Zapata family in Petaluma, California.

The agreement allows for unrestricted continuation of visits by all children under the age of 18. A memo of understanding will be signed by both governments on December 21.

Hopefully other countries will be able to secure similar agreements in the near future.

S.P. Gashchak, Deputy Director of the International Radioecology Laboratory in Slavutych, Ukriane, has posted an appeal to make 2009 the year of the European Bison Rescue. The request is in accordance with next year being the oriental year of the Ox.

Gashchak’s letter of appeal provides historical details about the near extinction of the European Bison. A thousand years ago, numerous herds seasonally migrated throughout Europe, but by 1927 the last wild animal disappeared. Zoos had saved 53 specimens that descended from only 12 parents.

Thanks to preservation and regeneration efforts, by the late 20th century up to 3,000 European Bison existed in the world.

The appeal then discusses the problem that most of the regenerated stock was located in Eastern Europe, an area that has undergone tremendous economic and political change. When Ukraine gained its independence in 1991, the country had approximately 685 animals. Allowing for annual increases, Ukraine should have over 1,000 European Bison, but only 200 remain.

In 1992, the Danevske Hunt Reserve in Ukraine’s Chernigov region was home to 120 European Bison. The last seven animals died there in spring 2007. A pair of bison were brought to the Chernobyl Exclusion Zone in 1998, but one died immediately from trauma and the other died in 2000.

Still surviving are 10 animals in the Zalesie special hunt reserve in the Kyiv region and approximately 30 more in the Sumy region. The largest number of European Bison, approximately 60-80, currently reside in the Chernivtsi and Vynnytsia regions.

Gashchak points out that the sad story of the European Bison in Ukraine was caused not only by the lack of grazing and migration space and genetic issues, but the irresponsible attitude of state officials and agencies who were supposed to protect the species.

Recently, scientists and environmentalists have started a movement defending the European Bison. Ukraine has started a state program for the creation of safe nature preserves and a ban on selective shooting of the animals. It is a small first step, but necessary to the survival of the European Bison in Ukraine.

I know we are in tough economic times, but if you have any resources available, perhaps you can help make 2009 the year of the European Bison Rescue.

More information is available at the Russian-language website of the Kyiv Ecological and Cultural Center.

Note: see my previous June 2008 post about Ukraine’s Ministry of Emergency Measures plan to create a wildness area in the Chernobyl Exclusion Zone for 30 European Bison.

Some sheep farmers in North Wales are seeking an increase in compensation for sheep   poisoned by radiation from the 1986 Chernobyl nuclear accident. Farmers are seeking an increased payment from £1.30 to £2 per ewe. The current compensation is outdated and not linked to inflation.

The number of farms has decreased dramatically from the original 8,900 to only 359 today. To take lambs to market, farmers have to pre-select the animals and arrange for radiation scanning. Only after the animals pass testing can they be taken to market.

Due to radioactive fallout which blanketed parts of Wales (as well as parts of Scotland and Cumbria), every animal must be test by one of four geiger scanning teams in North Wales. The European safety limit for sheep is 1,000 becquerels/kilogram, but animals typically pass only if the reading is below 645 because mud and wool can affect readings.

Farmers are also required to obtain a license every time they move their sheep, which occurs up to 14 or 15 times per year.

Isn’t it amazing that 22 years after the Chernobyl disaster farmers in North Wales are still suffering from the radioactive fallout? It’s not only people who lived in the Chernobyl-affected areas of Belarus, Ukraine and Russia that have suffered.

Don’t get me wrong. I’m certainly not comparing the plight of Welsh farmers to the horrors suffered by people from Belarus, Ukraine and Russia - only pointing out that the disaster has had, and continues to have, a direct effect on other people too.

Cleveland Bridge, a UK company that this week announced a nearly £18 million pre-tax loss for last year, has submitted a bid to provide steel for Chernobyl’s New Safe Confinement project. The company is the only UK firm bidding for the work, which will be a subcontract from the main French contractor, a team of Bouygues and Vinci.

Approximately 20,000 tons of steel is expected to be used in the New Safe Confinement Project. The new shelter will be over 100 meters high and 150 meters long.

Cleveland Bridge is bidding against Italian steel contractor Cimolai and an unnamed firm from Turkey. The contract is expected to be worth £40 million. A decision is expected by the end of January 2009.

Previous Cleveland Bridge projects includes building the Humber Bridge in Britain in 1981, the Tsing Ma Bridge in Hong Kong in 1997, and providing steel for London’s new Wembley National Stadium.

I guess this really should come as no surprise, but a Santa Fe, New Mexico company will soon be providing nuclear power to communities across the United States. Hyperion Power Generation (HPG) has obtained developmental rights to produce hot tub-sized nuclear generators using technology originally pioneered at the US government’s Los Alamos laboratory.

These miniature nuclear reactors will be powered by low-enriched uranium fuel. Each Hyperion Power Module will generate 25 Megawatts of electricity, enough to reliably supply power to 20,000 standard American homes for 10 cents per kilowatt hour.

Currently, suggested applications include:

• Industrial, such as oil shale and sands drilling and processing;
• U.S. Military facilities;
• Primary power for small remote communities in developing nations, including water pumping and processing.

Each unit will cost approximately $25 million and are small enough to be transported on the back of a lorry. They will be factory sealed, buried underground and “guarded for maximum security.”

Hyperion claims these reactors have no risk of meltdown because there are no moving parts and the fuel will instantaneously cool if the units are opened.

Quoting from Hyperion’s website:

The core of the HPM produces energy via a safe, natural heat-producing process that occurs with the oscillation of hydrogen in uranium hydride. HPMs cannot go “supercritical,” melt down, or get “too hot.” It maintains its safe, operating temperature without the introduction and removal of “cooling rods” – an operation that has the potential for mechanical failure.

Often referred to as a “cartridge” reactor or “nuclear battery,” the Hyperion HyperDrive is self- regulating with no mechanical parts to break down or otherwise fail. The inherent properties of uranium hydride serve as both fuel and moderator providing unparalleled safety among nuclear reactors. Sealed at the factory, the module is not opened until it has been returned to the factory to be refueled, approximately every five years or so, depending on use. This containment, along with the strategy of completely burying the module at the operating site, protects against the possibility of human incompetence, or hostile tampering and proliferation.

Each module is expected to produce a softball-sized amount waste every five years and will release no greenhouse gases. The waste materials is considered a good candidate for fuel recycling.

Hyperion already has 3 factories around the world working on production of the initial 4,000 units. The first 100 have already been allocated to industrial enterprises operating in remote areas.

Well, this really makes me nervous. Am I really supposed to believe a meltdown is impossible?

Hyperion says burying the module protects it against the possibility of human incompetence. What about incompetence at the production plant?

I also don’t believe Hyperion can honestly guarantee 100% that all units can come out of the factories in absolutely perfect condition, with no bad parts included. Any production process is likely to produce some bad components - that’s just a fact.

Is nuclear energy as an industry where that risk can be considered acceptable? I don’t think so. Yes, these units will be underground, which should minimize terrorist threats, but if a problem occurs, and at some point something will go wrong, it could effect the water table.  Worst case scenario could be an explosion that blows up through the ground and exposes the unit to the atmosphere.

If you want to know what could happen, I researched uranium hydride and found an OSHA website that indicates this material is spontaneously flammable in air, and contact of the hydride with strong oxidizers may cause fires and explosions.  Further, contact of uranium hydride with water forms flammable and explosive hydrogen gas.  Contact with halogenated hydrocarbons can cause violent reactions.

Perhaps these modules will be safe, but 100% safe with absolutely no chance of a major problem ... I highly doubt it. They may be factory sealed, but can the seal stay secure for five years in every single unit?

As expected, there is not enough information on Hyperion’s website to allay my fears. I hate to say it, but Hyperion merely telling me these units will be safe is not good enough for me.