logo
An Under-Appreciated Threat from Airborne Attacks on Large Nuclear Power Plants

An Under-Appreciated Threat from Airborne Attacks on Large Nuclear Power Plants

Yahoo13-05-2025
Most of the 440 operable nuclear power plants (NPPs) currently deployed worldwide have long been recognized as potential targets for attack by enemy military forces or terrorists. Such an attack could not only destroy the power-generating capacity of the plant but also release a large plume of radioactive material having the potential to cause long-term economic and environmental damage, create radioactive exclusion zones and render surrounding areas uninhabitable for decades.
COMMENTARY
The vulnerability of existing large NPPs to airborne attack is largely created because they are located above ground. As a result, the containment structure and portions of other plant buildings housing hazardous radioactive material are directly exposed to airborne attacks capable of breaching the containment structure and other NPP building structures. These attacks could come from, for example, earth penetrating weapons designed to penetrate hardened structures such as military bunkers; military aircraft using bombs or missiles; direct impact by large commercial aircraft such those used in the 9/11 attack; or perhaps by new types of airborne weapons such as the explosive-laden drones used in the war between Ukraine and Russia. Moreover, an attack on an NPP could be deliberately planned to take advantage of prevailing winds at the time of the attack such that the winds would carry the plume of radioactive material to nearby areas that include targets of interest. Given the large inventory of hazardous radionuclides inside the containment structure and portions of other plant buildings, a large NPP could, therefore, perhaps be viewed by terrorists or enemy military forces as a type of pre-deployed, radiological dispersal device (that is, a type of 'dirty bomb'). The reasonableness of the threat posed is indicated by the Chernobyl accident, in which radioactive particles reached distances of up to 200 kilometers, affecting areas in northern Ukraine, southern Belarus, and parts of western Russia. In that respect, a single attack on carefully selected NPPs would be dual-purpose: destroy the electrical power-generating capacity of the NPP and simultaneously create a large, hazardous radioactive plume carried by the wind to engulf nearby strategic targets. The enormity of the number of potential targets in areas near U.S. NPPs is illustrated by an estimate that a third of the U.S population—and 14 of the largest metropolitan population areas—are within a 50-mile radius of an NPP. To illustrate this threat, consider the following hypothetical example of what might have happened if the terrorist plan for the 9/11 attack on the twin towers in New York City had been slightly modified. The 9/11 Commission Report describes Khalid Sheikh Mohammed (KSM) as the al-Qaeda field commander who planned the 9/11 attacks. It states that Sheikh Mohammed originally proposed to Osama bin Laden, leader of al Qaeda, to hijack 10 large commercial aircraft, and crash them not only into the twin towers but also '…CIA and FBI headquarters, nuclear power plants, and the tallest buildings in California and the state of Washington.' However, bin Laden '…was not convinced that it [KSM's proposal] was practical.' His final decision was to hijack large commercial aircraft and use them to strike only the twin towers, the Pentagon, and the U.S. Capitol. Consider the consequences if the al-Qaeda plan to strike the twin towers had been slightly different. If instead of striking only the twin towers, imagine if the plan had been to strike the twin towers and/or the Indian Point NPP, located about 40 miles north of New York City, with the objective of having the released radioactive plume carried by the wind in a southerly direction into New York City and the surrounding area. Data from National Atmospheric and Oceanic Administration measuring stations in the New York City area at Central Park and at LaGuardia, Newark, and John F. Kennedy airports indicate that sustained wind directions and sustained wind speeds on September 11, 2001, varied from 300, 330, 360, and 320 degrees, and with sustained speeds of 12, 12, 21, and 18 miles per hour, respectively. Thus, if the hypothetical September 11, 2011, attack on the Indian Point NPP had been successful, then it is conceivable, perhaps probable, that within three to four hours, the resulting plume of hazardous radionuclides could have been carried from the Indian Point NPP location to the south and southeast, covering portions of western Long Island, New York City, and Newark, New Jersey. It must be stressed that the actual risk posed by the plume would depend on more than the radioactive characteristics of the particles inside the plume, but also on interactions among many other factors such as plume turbulence and particle size, shape, density, and release rate, for example. The result would perhaps not have been as sudden and dramatic as the actual attack on the twin towers. But imagine, for example, the economic consequences if Wall Street and other parts of Manhattan and New York City were turned into a multi-year uninhabitable radioactive exclusion zone—not to mention the near- and long-term deaths and human health problems in the area. What can be done to reduce the risk of such attacks? Many actions are possible. For existing large NPPs, new military strategies and technologies could be applied to detect and deter attacks. To better protect the NPP, should an attack be attempted, perhaps the plants could be retrofitted with large, protective physical barriers to cover the containment structures and key portions of plant buildings containing hazardous radionuclides. For future large NPPs yet to be constructed, perhaps the plants could be designed and constructed to better deter, defend, and protect in the event of an attack. Also, where feasible, perhaps siting NPPs underground in rock caverns could be used to create a robust, natural, protective cover against airborne attack. Also, if the caverns were properly sited and constructed, the overlying rock mass would function as a natural containment structure, thereby avoiding the need for a costly engineered containment structure. Existing large NPPs sited above ground are vulnerable to airborne attacks by terrorists or enemy military forces. The attacks could be designed and timed such that nearby populations and critical infrastructure would be engulfed by the plume of hazardous radionuclides released by the attack. Nations considering the construction of new, large NPPs should evaluate the probability and consequences of a successful airborne attack and modify their siting and design basis as necessary. —C.W. (Wes) Myers, PhD is a retired geologist who worked for 25 years at Los Alamos National Laboratory as a research manager and on nuclear waste disposal issues.
Orange background

Try Our AI Features

Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:

Comments

No comments yet...

Related Articles

SpaceX Crew-11 launch to ISS scrubbed due to weather
SpaceX Crew-11 launch to ISS scrubbed due to weather

Yahoo

time9 hours ago

  • Yahoo

SpaceX Crew-11 launch to ISS scrubbed due to weather

July 31 (UPI) -- SpaceX's Crew-11 mission to the International Space Station was scrubbed just before launch on Thursday. The flight, scheduled to take off from Kennedy Space Center in Florida, was scrubbed due to an unfavorable weather forecast for the launch site. The next attempt will be 11:43 a.m. EDT Friday. The launch of the SpaceX Crew-11 mission via Falcon 9 is rescheduled for Kennedy Space Center in Florida. The mission was scheduled for 12:09 p.m. EDT from Launch Complex 39A at Kennedy Space Center aboard a Falcon 9 Rocket. "I'm so eager to see this mission launch, but as always, we launch when we're ready. With a little luck, we'll see a launch soon, and we'll also see a crew come home soon," said Ken Bowersox, associate administrator for NASA's Space Operations Mission Directorate, during a prelaunch briefing. "But be patient with us. Let's make sure that the vehicle is ready to go and that our team is really certain before we hit the button." Crew-11 astronauts Zena Cardman, Mike Fincke, Kimiya Yui and Oleg Platonov will take 39 hours from launch to reach the ISS. "We'll watch that time closely. We have a limit of about 40 hours or so of ability to sustain the crew on the way to station when we protect all the consumables for contingencies. So, we'll watch that really carefully," said Steve Stich, manager of NASA's Commercial Crew Program. Cardman, commander of Crew-11 in a press briefing said six-month stays on the ISS will help prepare NASA to send astronauts much deeper into space. "Understanding how to live and work for long durations -- going and staying -- is a really interesting challenge, and I'm grateful that we've gotten the chance to do this -- to hone our skills on the ISS, so that we can do this for longer durations on the moon," Cardman said. According to NASA there is a full schedule of experiments and maintenance tasks when the crew is on the ISS. They will investigate the additive manufacturing process for small metal parts in microgravity and will look at physiological and psychological changes that happen across mission durations to prepare for a three-year journey to Mars. "This studies how astronauts adapt to space over different mission durations, integrating multidisciplinary research to assess physiological and psychological changes that develop and really to develop those countermeasures that are critical for us to go to the longer-duration missions, like a three-year mission to Mars, if you can imagine," Spetch said during the press conference. Crew-10 and Crew-11 will be working together before the Crew-10 team returns to Earth on Aug 6. Solve the daily Crossword

Photos Show Chinese Rocket Debris Washed Up on Shoreline
Photos Show Chinese Rocket Debris Washed Up on Shoreline

Newsweek

timea day ago

  • Newsweek

Photos Show Chinese Rocket Debris Washed Up on Shoreline

Based on facts, either observed and verified firsthand by the reporter, or reported and verified from knowledgeable sources. Newsweek AI is in beta. Translations may contain inaccuracies—please refer to the original content. The Philippines has released images of a suspected Chinese rocket fragment that was found floating off the coast of Occidental Mindoro province. Newsweek has contacted the Philippine coast guard and Chinese Defense Ministry via written requests for comment. Why It Matters China operates a major launch site on Hainan, an island province in the South China Sea, to support the country's ascendant space program. But launches from Hainan have periodically drawn criticism from neighboring countries. Earlier this month, the Philippines reported "loud explosions" during the August 4 launch of a carrier rocket and warned residents in a designated drop zone off Palawan province of the "clear danger and risk" from falling debris. Authorities have also urged the public to report suspected rocket fragments, which could be contaminated with toxic fuel residue. What To Know Around 12:30 on Thursday, the coast guard responded to a call from a Philippine fisherman who discovered the debris about 1 mile off the coast of municipality of Looc, the agency wrote in a statement. Coast guard personnel, working alongside the Provincial Disaster Risk Reduction and Management Office, recovered the object. It was emblazoned with the Chinese flag and said to be about 14 feet long and 10 feet wide and made of an alloy. Officials linked it to a Chinese Long March 7 rocket launched in mid-July. 1 of 2 It was emblazoned with the Chinese flag and said to be about 14 feet long and 10 feet wide and made of an alloy. Officials linked it to a Chinese Long March 7 rocket launched in mid-July. "The [Philippine coast guard] continues to remind fishermen, coastal community residents, and other maritime stakeholders to immediately report sightings of unusual floating objects to the nearest Coast Guard unit for appropriate actions," the statement said. A Long March-7 Y10 rocket lifted off from Hainan's Wenchang Space Launch Site at 5:34 a.m. on July 15. About 10 minutes later, the Tianzhou-9 cargo craft it was carrying separated and entered its planned orbit, the China Manned Space Agency said on July 15. A Long March-7 Y10 rocket carrying cargo spacecraft Tianzhou-9 lifts off at the Wenchang Spacecraft Launch Site in Hainan province on July 15. A Long March-7 Y10 rocket carrying cargo spacecraft Tianzhou-9 lifts off at the Wenchang Spacecraft Launch Site in Hainan province on July 15. China Manned Space Agency Tianzhou-9 carried supplies and experiment samples for the three Chinese astronauts, or "taikonauts," aboard the Tiangong space station. This cargo included two upgraded spacesuits to better support spacewalks. The medium-lift Long March-7, which entered service in 2016, was designed specifically for space-station missions. The rocket is about 174 feet long, uses four strap-on boosters and can carry about 14 metric tons to low Earth orbit. What People Have Said The China Astronaut Research and Training Center said on Saturday, according to the state news agency Xinhua: "The three taikonauts on China's orbiting Tiangong space station recently completed their third spacewalk. Unlike their previous missions, they had a new assistant this time around, namely an AI model." Philippine National Security Adviser Eduardo Año said of the August 4 launch: "We condemn in no uncertain terms the irresponsible testing done by the People's Republic of China of its Long March 12 rocket which alarmed the public and placed the people of Palawan at risk." What Happens Next Beijing has not issued a public response to the recovery of the debris. China and the Philippines, a U.S. defense treaty ally, have been locked in a yearslong territorial dispute over competing claims in the South China Sea. Tensions are likely to continue as Manila continues to push back against China's expanding activities within the Philippines' maritime zone.

America's nuclear energy moment is here — let's seize it
America's nuclear energy moment is here — let's seize it

The Hill

time3 days ago

  • The Hill

America's nuclear energy moment is here — let's seize it

In 1960, Dr. Glenn Seaborg, then-chairman of the U.S. Atomic Energy Commission, confidently predicted that nuclear energy would power half of American homes by the year 2000. For a while, it looked like he might be right. Between 1967 and 1974, U.S. utilities ordered nearly 200 nuclear reactors. But momentum stalled as cost overruns, regulatory hurdles, slowing demand and accidents at Three Mile Island, Chernobyl and later Fukushima eroded public confidence. Projects were canceled, and the nation's once-robust nuclear manufacturing base faded. Today, it seems like Seaborg's prediction wasn't wrong — just too early. A new generation of nuclear reactors — with advanced designs that safely cool and shut down reactors without the need for power or operator intervention — has made such accidents virtually impossible. Meanwhile, soaring electricity demand, driven by artificial intelligence, and rising geopolitical risks have underscored the need for energy that is clean, safe, reliable and abundant — four boxes that only nuclear energy checks. I have witnessed nuclear's resurgence firsthand in my role at the engineering and construction firm Bechtel. We successfully helped bring Georgia Power's two new reactors online in 2023 and 2024, and are currently working to deliver nuclear projects in Tennessee and Wyoming. Overseas, we're helping Poland build its first nuclear plant — a reminder that U.S. nuclear leadership also expands our geopolitical influence, rather than ceding it to Russia and China. Fortunately, the Trump administration understands the stakes and has issued executive orders aimed at quadrupling domestic nuclear capacity by 2050. With its sights set on a true nuclear renaissance, the government — together with the nuclear industry — should focus on clearing the four biggest hurdles in nuclear's path. First, we must confront the elephant in the room: cost. Critics who say nuclear energy is too expensive underestimate both its long-term value and American ingenuity. A nuclear plant's low operating costs and long lifespan make the cost per unit of energy highly competitive. Meanwhile, each new project helps technology developers and utilities standardize reactors, enabling builders like Bechtel to standardize engineering designs, scale supply chains and deploy new construction methods such as digital execution and modularization. The result is shorter schedules, lower costs and greater certainty of outcome. Controlling cost is also about reducing 'project execution' risk for investors. If we want to expand nuclear energy and unlock efficiency gains, we will need more help from the government to assume some of the financial risk of first-mover projects. As the industry rebuilds its capability to deliver, new nuclear projects can be susceptible to delays and cost overruns that deter investors. To stimulate the market, the government must absorb some of the early project cost overrun risks — just as other countries are already doing to grow their nuclear power output. Second, the U.S. should deliver on its obligation under law to establish a sustainable national program for permanently disposing of spent nuclear fuel. While today's storage methods are designed to work safely for 80 years or more, a long-term solution would resolve this challenge and strengthen public confidence in nuclear power. Third, regulators must continue modernizing. The Nuclear Regulatory Commission, in particular, plays an indispensable role in maintaining high industry standards and has made progress in updating its approach to approving projects. But the framework, built in the 1970s, lags behind the modular, standardized and inherently safer designs of today's nuclear reactors. Significant opportunities remain to streamline approvals without compromising safety. The Trump administration's new executive order encouraging the commission to reform is a welcome step in the right direction. Fourth, and perhaps most urgently, we need people. America is grappling with a skilled labor shortage, from welders to electricians and heavy equipment operators. Here, too, the administration can and is beginning to lead by incentivizing partnerships between industry and education and by expanding access to vocational training. We need to make sure that joining the construction trades is a rewarding, fulfilling and safe career. We need to reshape perceptions that you can only get ahead with a four-year degree, which is simply not true and even misleading to the younger generation. A national campaign should champion these careers as mission-driven, innovative and essential to America's future. There are no silver bullets in energy policy. Solar, gas and emerging technologies will all be part of the equation. But failing to realize the full potential of nuclear energy's promise would be a costly mistake — economically, environmentally and geopolitically. A strong U.S. nuclear program will produce more than megawatts. It will catalyze life-changing technologies, a robust national industrial base and a brighter future for generations. If we get it right, maybe someone in 2075 will look back at today as the moment when America glimpsed its energy moonshot and seized the opportunity to lead. Craig Albert is president and chief operating officer of the engineering and construction company Bechtel. He previously led its nuclear, security and environmental unit.

DOWNLOAD THE APP

Get Started Now: Download the App

Ready to dive into a world of global content with local flavor? Download Daily8 app today from your preferred app store and start exploring.
app-storeplay-store