Tag Archives: Nuclear sites

As Israel delays its response, Iran readies for War

Ayman Safadi and Irans Foreign Minister Abbas Araghchi

Important Takeaways:

  • Strike on oil or nuclear sites could lead Tehran to take drastic measures for fear of seeming weak, but attack on weapons depots or military bases may not warrant further response
  • Citing four Iranian officials, The New York Times reported that Supreme Leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei ordered Iran’s armed forces to formulate numerous plans based on the potential outcome of an expected retaliatory attack by Israel, which has been weeks in the making. “Iran has ordered the armed forces to be prepared for war but also to try to avoid it,” the report said.
  • The officials, two of whom belong to the Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps, said that if Israel were to inflict significant damage on sensitive sites, such as oil and nuclear facilities, or if it were to target senior Iranian officials, Iran would without a doubt escalate further.
  • In this instance, the sources said, Iran could fire a barrage of up to 1,000 ballistic missiles — a significant step up in comparison to the 200 it fired on October 1 — or even disrupt global energy supplies and international trade routes.
  • However, if Jerusalem were to limit its response to striking weapons warehouses or military bases, Tehran may conclude that it is in its best interest to do nothing, bringing an end to the latest round of direct conflict between the two countries.
  • Israel’s plans for retaliation were said to have been thrown off course recently after confidential US documents on the matter were leaked last Friday, revealing US observations of measures taken by the Israeli Air Force on October 15-16 in the lead-up to an attack.cn
  • Amid reports that Israel had been forced to change tactics and delay its plans as a result of the leak, Army Radio quoted an unnamed Israeli official on Thursday who insisted that this was not the case.
  • “There’s no connection between the leaking of the documents from the Pentagon and the choice of timing for the attack on Iran,” the official said.
  • While several windows had been discussed, the official said that no final date had been set for Israel’s response and the decision would be made “according to operational opportunities.”

Read the original article by clicking here.

Hanford nuclear site accident puts focus on aging U.S. facilities

An aerial photo shows Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory in Livermore, California, U.S. on July 5, 2011. Courtesy National Nuclear Security Administration/Handout via REUTERS

By Tom James

SEATTLE (Reuters) – The collapse of a tunnel used to store radioactive waste at one of the most contaminated U.S. nuclear sites has raised concerns among watchdog groups and others who study the country’s nuclear facilities because many are aging and fraught with problems.

“They’re fighting a losing battle to keep these plants from falling apart,” said Robert Alvarez, a former policy adviser at the U.S. Department of Energy who was charged with making an inventory of nuclear sites under President Bill Clinton.

“The longer you wait to deal with this problem, the more dangerous it becomes,” said Alvarez, a senior scholar at the Institute for Policy Studies, where he focuses on nuclear energy and disarmament.

The Energy Department did not respond to requests for comment.

No radiation was released during Tuesday’s incident at a plutonium-handling facility in the Hanford Nuclear Reservation in Washington state, but thousands of workers were ordered to take cover and some were evacuated as a precaution.

The state of facilities in the U.S. nuclear network has been detailed by the Department of Energy, Government Accountability Office and Defense Nuclear Facilities Safety Board. They have noted eroding walls, leaking roofs, and risks of electrical fires and groundwater contamination.

In 2016, Frank Klotz, head of the National Nuclear Security Administration, an Energy Department agency overseeing maintenance of nuclear warheads, warned Congress about risks posed by aging facilities.

Decontaminating and demolishing the Energy Department’s shuttered facilities will cost $32 billion, it said in a 2016 report. It also noted a $6 billion maintenance backlog.

In the 1940s the U.S. government built Hanford and other complexes to produce plutonium and uranium for atomic bombs under the Manhattan Project.

“That was an era when the defense mission took priority over everything else,” said Edwin Lyman, a senior scientist at the Union of Concerned Scientists. “We’re dealing with the legacy of that.”

RISKS DOCUMENTED

Many of those sites are now vacant but contaminated.

A 2009 Energy Department survey found nearly 300 shuttered, contaminated and deteriorating sites. Six years later it found that fewer than 60 had been cleaned up.

A 2015 Energy Department audit said delays in cleaning contaminated facilities “expose the Department, its employees and the public to ever-increasing levels of risk.”

Risks identified at the sites included leaking roofs carrying radioactivity into groundwater, roof collapses and electrical fires that could release radioactive particles.

A 2014 Energy Department audit noted a high risk of fire and groundwater contamination at the shuttered Heavy Element Facility at Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory, which is surrounded by homes and businesses near California’s Bay Area.

Problems have also been identified at active facilities including the Savannah River Site, a nuclear reservation in South Carolina. A 2015 report by the Defense Nuclear Facilities Safety Board found “severe” erosion in concrete walls of an exhaust tunnel used to prevent release of radioactive air.

A 2016 Energy Department audit of one of the United States’ main uranium handling facilities, the Y-12 National Security Complex in Oak Ridge, Tennessee, warned that “intense precipitation or snow” could collapse parts its roof, possibly causing an accident involving radioactivity.

“It sounds crazy, but it’s true,” said Don Hancock, who has studied the Tennessee facility in his work at the Southwest Information and Research Center, an Albuquerque nonprofit that monitors nuclear sites.

In Hanford’s case, risk of a tunnel collapse was known in 2015, when the Energy Department noted wooden beams in one tunnel had lost 40 percent of their strength and were being weakened by gamma radiation.

Energy Department spokesman Mark Heeter in nearby Richland said in an email that the agency saw Tuesday’s prompt discovery of the collapse as a success.

“The maintenance and improvement of aging infrastructure across the Hanford site … remains a top priority,” he said.

Nationwide, part of the risk comes from having to maintain and safeguard so many sites with different types of nuclear waste, said Frank Wolak, head of Stanford University’s Program on Energy and Sustainable Development.

“You’re asking for trouble with the fact that you’ve got it spread all over the country,” he said. “The right answer is to consolidate the stuff that is highly contaminated, and apply the best technology to it.”

(Reporting by Tom James; Editing by Ben Klayman)

Iran deploys Russian-made S-300 missiles at its Fordow nuclear site

File photo of the S-300 air defence system launching a missile during the International Army Games 2016 at the Ashuluk military polygon outside Astrakhan

ANKARA (Reuters) – Iran has deployed the Russian-supplied S-300 surface-to-air missile defence system around its Fordow underground uranium enrichment facility, Iranian state media reported on Monday.

Iranian state TV on Sunday aired footage of deployment of the recently delivered missile system to the nuclear site in the central Iran.

“Our main priority is to protect Iran’s nuclear facilities under any circumstances,” Brigadier General Farzad Esmaili, commander of the Islamic Revolutionary Guards Corps’ (IRGC) air defense force told state TV.

Iran and the six major powers reached a landmark nuclear deal in 2015 aimed at curbing Iran’s nuclear programme in exchange for lifting nuclear-related sanctions imposed on Tehran over its disputed nuclear work.

Enrichment of uranium at the Fordow facility, around 100 km (60 miles) south of Tehran, has stopped since the implementation of the nuclear deal in January.

Russia, under pressure from the West, in 2010 canceled a contract to deliver S-300s to Iran. But Russian President Vladimir Putin lifted that self-imposed ban in April 2015, after an interim deal was reached between Iran and the six powers.

In August, Iran said that Russia had delivered main parts of the system to the country, adding that the missile system would be completely delivered by the end of 2016.

The IRGC’s Esmaili did not say whether the system was operational, but added: “Today, Iran’s sky is one of the most secure in the Middle East”.

Iran’s top authority Supreme Leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei said on Sunday that the country’s military power was for defensive purposes.

“The S-300 system is a defence system not an assault one, but the Americans did their utmost to prevent Iran from getting it,” Khamenei said in a speech broadcast live on state TV.

(Writing by Parisa Hafezi; Editing by Toby Chopra)