'Massive and unpredictable' swarm of jellyfish shuts down nuclear plant
The swarm entered the filter drums of the pumping stations at the Gravelines site in northern France on Sunday night.
Operator EDF confirmed to Sky News that the "massive and unpredictable presence of jellyfish" caused units 2, 3 and 4 to automatically shut down between 11pm and midnight on 10 August.
Unit 6 then shut down just after 6am on Monday 11 August.
The plant, situated on the coast between Calais and Dunkirk, has six units which can produce a total of 5.4 gigawatts of power.
In a statement, EDF said the pumping stations affected are in the non-nuclear part of the plant, adding the shutdowns "had no impact on the safety of the facility, the safety of personnel or the environment".
The site, which can power around 5 million homes, has temporarily stopped production while teams try to clear the blockage.
Two unaffected units had already been taken offline for maintenance.
A spokesperson said France is still exporting more than four gigawatts of electricity to the UK.
A boom in jellyfish numbers has been reported in the sea around Calais, likely due to rising water temperatures and increases in the plankton they eat.
"Jellyfish breed faster when water is warmer, and because areas like the North Sea are becoming warmer, the reproductive window is getting wider and wider," said Derek Wright, marine biology consultant at the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration Fisheries.
"Jellyfish can also hitch rides on tanker ships, entering the ships' ballast tanks in one port and often getting pumped out into waters halfway across the globe," he said.
The Gravelines site draws water for its cooling systems from a canal connected to the North Sea, which is home to several species of jellyfish.
The invertebrates have also been responsible for problems at several other coastal power stations, including the Torness nuclear plant in Scotland, where they have clogged the water intake pipes multiple times.
In 1999, jellyfish were blamed for causing a massive blackout in the Philippines.
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Reuters
a day ago
- Reuters
Putin appears ready to test new missile as he prepares for Trump talks, researchers say
WASHINGTON, Aug 13 (Reuters) - Russia appears to be preparing to test its new nuclear-armed, nuclear-powered cruise missile, according to two U.S. researchers and a Western security source, even as Russian President Vladimir Putin readies for talks on Ukraine with U.S. President Donald Trump on Friday. Jeffrey Lewis of the California-based Middlebury Institute of International Studies, and Decker Eveleth of the CNA research and analysis organization, based in Virginia, reached their assessments separately by studying imagery taken in recent weeks until Tuesday by Planet Labs, a commercial satellite firm. They agreed the photos showed extensive activity at the Pankovo test site on the Barents Sea archipelago of Novaya Zemlya, including increases in personnel and equipment and ships and aircraft associated with earlier tests of the 9M730 Burevestnik (Storm Petrel). "We can see all of the activity at the test site, which is both huge amounts of supplies coming in to support operations and movement at the place where they actually launch the missile," Lewis said. A Western security source, who asked not to be further identified, confirmed that Russia is preparing a Burevestnik test. Lewis said a test could occur this week, raising the possibility it could overshadow the Trump-Putin summit in Alaska. Asked for comment, the White House did not address the possibility of a Burevestnik test. The Pentagon, the CIA, and Russia's Defense Ministry declined to comment. Putin has said the weapon - dubbed the SSC-X-9 Skyfall by NATO - is "invincible" to current and future missile defenses, with an almost unlimited range and unpredictable flight path. Lewis, Eveleth, and two arms control experts said the missile's development has taken on more importance for Moscow since Trump announced in January the development of a U.S. Golden Dome missile defense shield. But many experts say it is unclear the missile can evade defenses, will not give Moscow capabilities it does not already have, and will spew radiation along its flight path. A test would have been scheduled long in advance of last week's announcement of the Trump-Putin meeting, the researchers and experts said. But Putin could have suspended preparations in view of U.S. spy satellites to signal his openness to ending his war in Ukraine as well as to restarting arms-control talks with the U.S., the experts said. New START, the last U.S.-Russia pact capping strategic nuclear deployments, expires on February 5. "Sometimes you can push up or push down the schedule for a political reason," said Tom Countryman, a former acting undersecretary of state for arms control. The Burevestnik has a poor test record, according to the Nuclear Threat Initiative advocacy group, with two partial successes among 13 known tests. Eveleth and Lewis said the Planet Labs imagery showed stacks of shipping containers, equipment, and personnel arriving since late July. Lewis said two aircraft equipped to gather test data had been parked at the archipelago's Rogachevo military airfield since mid-July. Images he provided to Reuters showed two large jets mounted with saucer-shaped radar domes. He noted the presence of at least five ships associated with previous tests. A ship-tracking website - - showed a sixth ship linked to earlier tests was due to arrive on Tuesday, he said. Reuters confirmed the website showed the vessel, a cargo ship named the Teriberka, bound for Novaya Zemlya, but could not independently confirm the researchers' other findings. Eveleth and Lewis said they began examining imagery of Pankovo starting from July, after Russia on August 6 published a notice to mariners to stay away from the area from August 9-12. Reuters found a series of notices on the U.S. Federal Aviation Administration's Defense Internet NOTAM Service issued by Russia showing a possible launch window between August 9-22. The Norwegian military told Reuters in an email that the Barents Sea is a "prime location for Russian missile tests" and that it had indications from notices and maritime warnings of "preparations for test activities." But it said it would "not confirm any knowledge of what kind of munitions they are to test." In late July, Eveleth said, he noticed a shelter protecting the Burevestnik launcher from the weather was being slid back and forth, which he called "very clear evidence" of plans for a test. Lewis provided to Reuters images taken of the site on August 7 showing the protective launcher cover, stacks of shipping containers, a crane for moving them, and a helicopter. "It's full steam ahead," he said of the pace of test preparations.
The Independent
a day ago
- The Independent
NASA's nuclear gamble on the moon faces growing skepticism
Fast-tracking a NASA plan to build a nuclear reactor on the moon may sound dubious. Experts say that's because it is. 'The whole proposal is cock-eyed and runs against the sound management of a space program that is now being starved of money,' national security analyst, nuclear expert and author Joseph Cirincione told The Independent. Nuclear has been used in space since the 1960s. That's nothing new. The U.S. launched its first test reactor into orbit in 1965, and the former Soviet Union has sent up dozens more. NASA says that a new 100-kilowatt reactor could be used to power a future base at the lunar South Pole, and fuel prospective missions to Mars and beyond. Nuclear would help to fill gaps in solar energy that occur when that side of the moon is in darkness for two weeks. The majority of space experts have said that placing a reactor on the moon is possible, so, why is NASA's current plan 'cock-eyed?' The problem is the proposed timeline. Interim NASA Administrator Sean Duffy, who also serves as President Donald Trump's Secretary of Transportation, pushed to expedite the project, detailed in a memo this week. Duffy said the administration wanted to have a nuclear reactor ready to launch by 2030. Earlier this year, China and Russia announced a plan to build a nuclear reactor for a lunar base by 2035. 'The first country to do so could potentially declare a 'keep-out' zone which would significantly inhibit the United States from establishing a planned Artemis presence if not there first,' Duffy said. NASA first announced in 2021 that it would put a reactor on the moon 'within a decade.' In 2024, NASA then said that their target date for delivery a reactor to the Earth-based launchpad was the early 2030s. But, Cirincione says essentially no progress has been made. 'It was in the last Trump administration that NASA had put out a press release, they had a YouTube video, they had these announcements about how they're going to develop these small, modular nuclear reactors for use on the moon, and it was going to be ready by 2026,' said Cirincione, who is vice-chair of the Center for International Policy, a non-profit that advocates for a peaceful approach to foreign policy. 'Oh, really? So, where is it?' Ultimately, the expert believes a nuclear reactor on the moon could take up to 20 years to become a reality. NASA would need a working launch vehicle, a small and adaptable reactor, and the ability to land on the moon. Right now, the SpaceX Starship is the only vehicle option – but it has exploded during several of its test flights. NASA has been working with Boeing on a Space Launch System - the main competitor to Space X's Starship - but that program would be canceled under the Trump administration's proposed cuts which slash 24 percent from NASA's overall budget. Landing on the moon is no picnic, and attempts by Japanese space companies in 2023 and 2025 ended in crashes. There are also the scientific and technological advances needed for the nuclear reactors. The reactors must be able to withstand harsh conditions on the moon, including temperatures swings from 250 degrees Fahrenheit during the day to minus 400 degrees at night. 'Small modular nuclear reactors, it turns out, are always just around the corner – a corner you never get to turn,' Cirincione said. Many scientists and nuclear energy experts have shared in Cirincione's skepticism. Dr. Kathryn Huff, a former nuclear energy official at the U.S. Department of Energy, and professor at the University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign, wrote in a Bluesky social media post that she's not 'bullish' on 'unrealistic timelines.' 'The 2030 target does not align well with recent budgetary trends…' she explained in a statement, shared by the university. 'Accelerating the FSP program could come at the expense of other critical priorities, including earth science, climate observation and space-based weather forecasting – all core elements of NASA's public-serving mission.' Dr. Alfredo Carpineti, an Italian astrophysicist, wrote in IFLScience this week that the proposal is 'unfeasible.' 'Even if we allow landing the nuclear reactor on December 31, 2030, the timing is really too short for something that must not have any faults if you want to operate it safely,' Carpineti wrote. Others were more optimistic about NASA's accelerated timeline. Sebastian Corbisiero, a senior program manager at Idaho National Laboratory who leads the Energy Department's space reactor program, told The Independent that a nuclear reactor on the moon is 'doable' by 2030. 'Nuclear reactor technology has been around for decades, so its well known,' he said. 'Some key differences with a space reactor is that it needs to fit on a rocket, so there are mass and volume requirements; and that the system needs to operate in vacuum – so components will need to be built to survive that environment.' Dr. Bhavya Lal, a former associate administrator for technology, policy, and strategy at NASA, and former aerospace executive Roger Myers, recently argued that it would be possible to have nuclear reactor on the moon by 2030, and it would take $3 billion to do so. 'It's possible, but it will require serious commitment,' Lal told The Independent. But even if plans are speeded up, Lal says there's no need to worry about the prospect of the moon blowing up. It's 'simply not grounded in science,' she said.
Reuters
2 days ago
- Reuters
US selects 11 projects for program to fast-track small nuclear test reactors
WASHINGTON, Aug 12 (Reuters) - The U.S. Department of Energy said on Tuesday it has made an initial selection of 11 projects for a pilot program seeking to develop high-tech test nuclear reactors and get at least three of them to begin operating in less than a year. As artificial intelligence and data centers boost power demand, the U.S. is aiming to develop small nuclear reactors which developers say will be cheaper to build per Megawatt of output than today's large reactors because the parts could be replicated in factories. The department's move comes after President Donald Trump issued executive orders in May seeking to speed permitting of nuclear reactors and reform the Nuclear Regulatory Commission, an independent agency. The orders allow the Energy Department to authorize the test reactors, without the NRC. 'President Trump's Reactor Pilot Program is a call to action,' said James Danly, deputy energy secretary. 'These companies aim to all safely achieve criticality by Independence Day, and DOE will do everything we can to support their efforts.' COMPANIES SELECTED The department selected the following companies: Aalo Atomics., Antares Nuclear, Atomic Alchemy, Deep Fission Inc., Last Energy., Oklo (OKLO.N), opens new tab , Natura Resources LLC, Radiant Energy, Terrestrial Energy, and Valar Atomics. The department said each company will be responsible for all costs associated with designing, manufacturing, constructing, and decommissioning their test reactors. Small modular and so-called "advanced" nuclear reactors have been talked about in the U.S. for years, but the only ones operating are in China and Russia. Hurdles include getting permits for plants that generate electricity for the grid, developing commercial levels of a new fuel some of the reactors plan to use called high-assay low-enriched uranium, and developing factories for the reactors when none of the plants are yet operating. (This story has been corrected to say 11 projects, not companies, in the headline and paragraph 1)
