Tweet
More than one in 10 nuclear power plants at risk from earthquakes
Many stations are in countries that would be less able than Japan to
cope with disasters
By Jonathan Owen
http://www.independent.co.uk/news/science/more-than-one-in-10-nuclear-power-plants-at-risk-from-earthquakes-2260817.html
Sunday, 3 April 2011
Armenia's Metsamor plant is susceptible to quakes
Scores of nuclear power plants worldwide are at risk from tsunamis or
earthquakes similar to the natural disasters that crippled Japan's
Fukushima reactors, according to new research. Many at-risk plants are
in countries less able to cope with a disaster than Japan, experts
have warned.
Seventy-six operating power stations in Japan, Taiwan, China, South
Korea, India, Pakistan and the US are located in areas close to
coastlines deemed vulnerable to tsunamis.
Of 442 nuclear power stations globally, more than one in 10are
situated in places deemed to be at high or extreme risk of earthquakes
- in Japan, the US, Taiwan, Armenia and Slovenia - according to a new
study by the analysts Maplecroft.
Helen Hodge, Maplecroft's natural hazards analyst, said: "Although
Japanese nuclear facilities are particularly exposed, other countries
could also face similar risks. South Korea, Taiwan, southern China,
India, Pakistan and the west coast of the US have operating or planned
nuclear facilities on tsunami-exposed coastlines, while nuclear sites
in areas of high or extreme risk of earthquakes can be found in
western US, Taiwan, Armenia, Iran and Slovenia."
Emeritus Professor Keith Barnham, a physicist from Imperial College
London, commented: "Japan is one of the most advanced technological
counties but one can see the problems they are having in coping with
the aftermath. One fears for the reactors planned or operational in
the environmentally unsafe areas of less technologically developed
countries."
Nuclear safety experts cite the example of an ageing Russian-built
nuclear reactor only 30km from the Armenian capital, Yerevan. In
December 1988, a powerful earthquake, which led to the deaths of at
least 25,000 people, occurred in north-west Armenia. The following
year, the Metsamor nuclear plant was shut down due to safety concerns
regarding "seismic vulnerability". Although one of its reactors is now
being decommissioned, another remains operational. The International
Atomic Energy Association (IAEA) has been involved in safety
improvements at the plant for more than a decade.
But, according to the World Nuclear Association, "The present Metsamor
plant is a concern to the European Union and to neighbouring Turkey,
16km away. There have been various calls to shut it down ... but
Armenia is very dependent on it and has said that it will remain open
until a replacement is commissioned."
The risks of future natural disasters have been recognised by the IAEA
in recent years, which set up the International Seismic Safety Centre
in 2008. Its safety guidelines on earthquakes and tsunamis are being
revised following the incident at Japan's Fukushima Daiichi nuclear
plant.
The Japanese crisis has reignited the debate over nuclear safety. As a
result, several nations, including Italy, Switzerland and Germany,
have put new reactor plans on hold. The nuclear plant at Fukushimi was
crippled after an earthquake and tsunami devastated north-east Japan
last month.
James Acton, nuclear expert at the Carnegie Endowment for
International Peace, commented: "The key question is whether we have
correctly predicted the risk that a reactor could be hit by a disaster
(natural or man-made) that is bigger than it is designed to withstand.
This issue should be urgently reviewed by all states with reactors."
Jeremy Gordon, editor of World Nuclear News, predicted there would be
a "step change" in efforts to improve safety. "While it's true that
many, if not most countries, would be less prepared than Japan to face
an unprecedented natural disaster and nuclear accident on this scale,"
he said, "the country involved in future would likely have a far
better practical support network from other governments and practical
experts in industry."
Dr Gordon Woo, an IAEA consultant, said there was already a
"significant degree" of seismic technology transfer by the IAEA to
less advanced nations. He predicted this would increase after the
Japanese disaster.
From: A. Papazian
Many stations are in countries that would be less able than Japan to
cope with disasters
By Jonathan Owen
http://www.independent.co.uk/news/science/more-than-one-in-10-nuclear-power-plants-at-risk-from-earthquakes-2260817.html
Sunday, 3 April 2011
Armenia's Metsamor plant is susceptible to quakes
Scores of nuclear power plants worldwide are at risk from tsunamis or
earthquakes similar to the natural disasters that crippled Japan's
Fukushima reactors, according to new research. Many at-risk plants are
in countries less able to cope with a disaster than Japan, experts
have warned.
Seventy-six operating power stations in Japan, Taiwan, China, South
Korea, India, Pakistan and the US are located in areas close to
coastlines deemed vulnerable to tsunamis.
Of 442 nuclear power stations globally, more than one in 10are
situated in places deemed to be at high or extreme risk of earthquakes
- in Japan, the US, Taiwan, Armenia and Slovenia - according to a new
study by the analysts Maplecroft.
Helen Hodge, Maplecroft's natural hazards analyst, said: "Although
Japanese nuclear facilities are particularly exposed, other countries
could also face similar risks. South Korea, Taiwan, southern China,
India, Pakistan and the west coast of the US have operating or planned
nuclear facilities on tsunami-exposed coastlines, while nuclear sites
in areas of high or extreme risk of earthquakes can be found in
western US, Taiwan, Armenia, Iran and Slovenia."
Emeritus Professor Keith Barnham, a physicist from Imperial College
London, commented: "Japan is one of the most advanced technological
counties but one can see the problems they are having in coping with
the aftermath. One fears for the reactors planned or operational in
the environmentally unsafe areas of less technologically developed
countries."
Nuclear safety experts cite the example of an ageing Russian-built
nuclear reactor only 30km from the Armenian capital, Yerevan. In
December 1988, a powerful earthquake, which led to the deaths of at
least 25,000 people, occurred in north-west Armenia. The following
year, the Metsamor nuclear plant was shut down due to safety concerns
regarding "seismic vulnerability". Although one of its reactors is now
being decommissioned, another remains operational. The International
Atomic Energy Association (IAEA) has been involved in safety
improvements at the plant for more than a decade.
But, according to the World Nuclear Association, "The present Metsamor
plant is a concern to the European Union and to neighbouring Turkey,
16km away. There have been various calls to shut it down ... but
Armenia is very dependent on it and has said that it will remain open
until a replacement is commissioned."
The risks of future natural disasters have been recognised by the IAEA
in recent years, which set up the International Seismic Safety Centre
in 2008. Its safety guidelines on earthquakes and tsunamis are being
revised following the incident at Japan's Fukushima Daiichi nuclear
plant.
The Japanese crisis has reignited the debate over nuclear safety. As a
result, several nations, including Italy, Switzerland and Germany,
have put new reactor plans on hold. The nuclear plant at Fukushimi was
crippled after an earthquake and tsunami devastated north-east Japan
last month.
James Acton, nuclear expert at the Carnegie Endowment for
International Peace, commented: "The key question is whether we have
correctly predicted the risk that a reactor could be hit by a disaster
(natural or man-made) that is bigger than it is designed to withstand.
This issue should be urgently reviewed by all states with reactors."
Jeremy Gordon, editor of World Nuclear News, predicted there would be
a "step change" in efforts to improve safety. "While it's true that
many, if not most countries, would be less prepared than Japan to face
an unprecedented natural disaster and nuclear accident on this scale,"
he said, "the country involved in future would likely have a far
better practical support network from other governments and practical
experts in industry."
Dr Gordon Woo, an IAEA consultant, said there was already a
"significant degree" of seismic technology transfer by the IAEA to
less advanced nations. He predicted this would increase after the
Japanese disaster.
From: A. Papazian