Latest news with #PeterBryant
The National
12 hours ago
- Business
- The National
How the UAE's first nuclear plant is powering a cleaner future
The Barakah Nuclear Energy Plant in Abu Dhabi had its first unit plugged into the national power grid on August 19, 2020. Five years on, the plant, which is located in the Al Dhafra region of Abu Dhabi, now produces 40 terawatt hours annually – the equivalent of around 25 per cent of the UAE's electricity needs. That would power 574,000 households or meet the entire annual electricity needs of a country such as New Zealand, according to Peter Bryant, professor of Radiation Protection Sciences and Nuclear Energy Policy at the University of Liverpool. 'As the first nuclear station in the Arab world, it has established itself as one of the most advanced and reliable nuclear facilities globally,' he told The National. 'A rare global success story' In December 2009, the Emirates Nuclear Energy Corporation awarded a $20 billion contract to Korea Electric Power Corporation to construct the plant, which features four units, each powered by the state of the art APR-1400 reactor, designed to operate for 60 years. 'The design was conservative and the government didn't dither,' said Professor Wade Allison, emeritus physicist at the University of Oxford. 'It shows what's possible with the right leadership and planning.' Nuclear power, he argues, remains the only scalable, low-carbon solution capable of supporting a modern economy. 'Nuclear is a million times more energy-dense than fossil fuels,' said Prof Allison. '[Nuclear] is the most environmentally friendly of all.' Global nuclear energy experts say as the plant was built on time and within target, it stands as a model of nuclear efficiency in a world still grappling with energy insecurity and rising emissions. 'What matters is energy resilience,' Dr Simon Bennett of The University of Leicester told The National. A climate work horse delivering results More critically, the plant has helped the UAE cut its annual carbon emissions by 22.4 million tonnes, the equivalent of taking nearly five million petrol cars off the road. 'Globally, Barakah has shown that an emerging economy can safely and successfully adopt nuclear energy to deliver clean, reliable power,' said Prof Bryant. 'It has become a model for how nuclear can contribute to both climate action and socio-economic progress.' The UAE's nuclear success has recently made headlines beyond the energy world. In August 2025, aluminium smelted using Barakah's clean electricity was exported for the first time, setting a new low-carbon benchmark for a traditionally carbon-heavy industry. Economic dividends and Stem pipeline Barakah's impact hasn't stopped at emissions. The plant has created skilled jobs, built a new domestic nuclear supply chain, and spurred on a new generation of Emirati scientists, engineers, and technicians. 'It's not just lighting homes,' said Prof Bryant. 'It's building human capital and driving economic diversification – a pillar of the UAE's broader Vision 2030 strategy.' Education and trust remain critical For nuclear to reach its potential, experts say public education must catch up with the science. 'Society developed a nuclear phobia over the past 70 years,' said Prof Allison. 'But we trust nuclear in hospitals, why not in the environment?' He believes nuclear literacy should start in schools. 'From the age of 12, children should learn the basics alongside their parents. Investment follows confidence, and confidence requires knowledge.' Dr Adam Fenech, Provost, Canadian University Dubai, agreed and said nuclear energy has long carried a 'bad rap' due to historic accidents and concerns about waste management. 'These perceptions, however, often overshadow its significant contributions and evolving role in today's energy landscape,' he said. 'Modern nuclear technology is far safer, more efficient, and better regulated than in past decades, with robust safety protocols and international oversight mechanisms that have dramatically reduced risks.' A foundation for the future Earlier this year, the UAE's Minister of Climate Change and Environment, Dr Amna Al Shamsi, commented that the country recognises the 'transition to clean energy requires global collaboration.' 'The UAE is actively engaged in international partnerships to share knowledge, promote innovation, and support developing nations in their pursuit of sustainable energy solutions,' she said. Barakah now plays a central role in helping the UAE meet multiple UN Sustainable Development Goals, including affordable energy, climate action, and innovation and infrastructure. It has also enhanced international co-operation: in 2025, Emirates Nuclear Energy Company signed a global expansion deal with Hyundai E&C of South Korea, exporting its expertise to other countries looking to follow suit. 'This plant has built more than electricity,' said Prof Bryant. 'It's built a community of knowledge and global credibility. And it's proving that nuclear, when done right, can be one of the cleanest, safest and smartest energy choices we have.'
Sky News
20-06-2025
- Politics
- Sky News
Israel-Iran live: UK says it will get Britons out of Tel Aviv; Iran 'captures spy'; Trump's attack decision timeline
Israel's stated goal in its fight with Iran is to dismantle its potential to build a nuclear weapon. It isn't clear if Israel has the military might to do it alone, with some of the key sites Iran is using to store and process nuclear material protected deep underground. So far, Israel has conducted strikes on nuclear sites like Natanz, Khondab, Isfahan and Fordow. Yesterday, Israel said it had struck the Bushehr site, Iran's only active nuclear plant, before seemingly rowing back the comments. But what are the risks from such attacks, and could they lead to a nuclear fallout of some kind in a region home to tens of millions of people? Underground safety Peter Bryant, a professor at the University of Liverpool who specialises in radiation protection science, said he was not too concerned about the risks so far. While there had been strikes on the likes of Khondab, a lot of the damage reported so far is external, and such facilities are designed to contain internal issues. "Uranium is only dangerous if it gets physically inhaled or ingested or gets into the body at low enrichments," he said. Nuclear material could end up buried Darya Dolzikova, a senior research fellow at London thinktank RUSI, said attacks on facilities at the front end of the nuclear fuel cycle - the enrichment stages where uranium is prepared for use in a reactor - pose primarily chemical, not radiological risks. Sites like Natanz and Isfahan are enrichment sites. Such chemicals could be dispersed, but such a risk is again lower with underground facilities. Simon Bennett, who leads the civil safety and security unit at the University of Leicester in the UK, said Israeli strikes were likely to end up "burying nuclear material in possibly thousands of tonnes of concrete, earth and rock". Risk of 'absolute catastrophe' at nuclear power plant The major concern would be if the Israelis attacked the Bushehr nuclear reactor. Richard Wakeford, honorary professor of epidemiology at the University of Manchester, said that while enrichment facilities would remain a chemical issue, a reactor strike would be a "different story". This could lead to the release of radioactive elements either in a plume of volatile materials or into the sea, he added. James Acton, co-director of the nuclear policy program at the Carnegie Endowment for International Peace, said an attack on Bushehr "could cause an absolute radiological catastrophe". Gulf State water supply could be vulnerable For the Gulf States, any potential impact on Bushehr threatens to contaminate Gulf waters, jeopardising a critical source of desalinated potable water. In a number of Gulf countries like the UAE, Qatar and Bahrain, desalinated water accounts for a huge amount of drinking water. Nidal Hilal, professor of engineering and director of New York University Abu Dhabi's Water Research Centre, said: "Coastal desalination plants are especially vulnerable to regional hazards like oil spills and potential nuclear contamination."
Hindustan Times
20-06-2025
- Politics
- Hindustan Times
Explained: What are nuclear contamination risks from Israel's attacks on Iran?
Israel's strikes on Iran's nuclear installations so far pose only limited risks of contamination, experts say. But they warn that any attack on the country's nuclear power station at Bushehr could cause a nuclear disaster. Israel says it is determined to destroy Iran's nuclear capabilities in its military campaign, but that it also wants to avoid any nuclear disaster in a region that is home to tens of millions of people and produces much of the world's oil. Fears of catastrophe rippled through the Gulf on Thursday when the Israeli military said it had struck a site in Bushehr on the Gulf coast - home to Iran's only nuclear power station - only to say later that the announcement was a mistake. What has Israel hit so far ? Israel has announced attacks on nuclear sites in Natanz, Isfahan, Arak and Tehran itself. Israel says it aims to stop Iran building an atom bomb. Iran denies ever seeking one. The international nuclear watchdog IAEA has reported damage to the uranium enrichment plant at Natanz, to the nuclear complex at Isfahan, including the Uranium Conversion Facility, and to centrifuge production facilities in Karaj and Tehran. Israel has also attacked Arak, also known as Khondab. The IAEA said Israeli military strikes hit the Khondab Heavy Water Research Reactor, which was under construction and had not begun operating, and damaged the nearby plant that makes heavy water. The IAEA said that it was not operational and contained no nuclear material, so there were no radiological effects. In an update of its assessment on Friday, the IAEA said key buildings at the site were damaged. Heavy-water reactors can be used to produce plutonium which, like enriched uranium, can be used to make an atom bomb. What risks do these strikes pose ? Peter Bryant, a professor at the University of Liverpool in England who specialises in radiation protection science and nuclear energy policy, said he is not too concerned about fallout risks from the strikes so far. He noted that the Arak site was not operational while the Natanz facility was underground and no release of radiation was reported. "The issue is controlling what has happened inside that facility, but nuclear facilities are designed for that," he said. "Uranium is only dangerous if it gets physically inhaled or ingested or gets into the body at low enrichments," he said. Darya Dolzikova, a senior research fellow at London think tank RUSI, said attacks on facilities at the front end of the nuclear fuel cycle - the stages where uranium is prepared for use in a reactor - pose primarily chemical, not radiological risks. At enrichment facilities, UF6, or uranium hexafluoride, is the concern. "When UF6 interacts with water vapour in the air, it produces harmful chemicals," she said. The extent to which any material is dispersed would depend on factors including the weather, she added. 'In low winds, much of the material can be expected to settle in the vicinity of the facility; in high winds, the material will travel farther, but is also likely to disperse more widely.' The risk of dispersal is lower for underground facilities. Simon Bennett, who leads the civil safety and security unit at the University of Leicester in the UK, said risks to the environment were minimal if Israel hits subterranean facilities because you are "burying nuclear material in possibly thousands of tonnes of concrete, earth and rock". The major concern would be a strike on Iran's nuclear reactor at Bushehr. Richard Wakeford, Honorary Professor of Epidemiology at the University of Manchester, said that while contamination from attacks on enrichment facilities would be "mainly a chemical problem" for the surrounding areas, extensive damage to large power reactors "is a different story". Radioactive elements would be released either through a plume of volatile materials or into the sea, he added. James Acton, co-director of the Nuclear Policy Program at the Carnegie Endowment for International Peace, said an attack on Bushehr "could cause an absolute radiological catastrophe", but that attacks on enrichment facilities were "unlikely to cause significant off-site consequences". Before uranium goes into a nuclear reactor it is barely radioactive, he said. "The chemical form uranium hexafluoride is toxic ... but it actually doesn't tend to travel large distances and it's barely radioactive. So far the radiological consequences of Israel's attacks have been virtually nil," he added, while stating his opposition to Israel's campaign. Bennett of the University of Leicester said it would be "foolhardy for the Israelis to attack" Bushehr because they could pierce the reactor, which would mean releasing radioactive material into the atmosphere. Why are Gulf states especially worried ? For Gulf states, the impact of any strike on Bushehr would be worsened by the potential contamination of Gulf waters, jeopardizing a critical source of desalinated potable water. In the UAE, desalinated water accounts for more than 80% of drinking water, while Bahrain became fully reliant on desalinated water in 2016, with 100% of groundwater reserved for contingency plans, according to authorities. Qatar is 100% dependent on desalinated water. In Saudi Arabia, a much larger nation with a greater reserve of natural groundwater, about 50% of the water supply came from desalinated water as of 2023, according to the General Authority for Statistics. While some Gulf states like Saudi Arabia, Oman and the United Arab Emirates have access to more than one sea to draw water from, countries like Qatar, Bahrain and Kuwait are crowded along the shoreline of the Gulf with no other coastline. "If a natural disaster, oil spill, or even a targeted attack were to disrupt a desalination plant, hundreds of thousands could lose access to freshwater almost instantly," said Nidal Hilal, Professor of Engineering and Director of New York University Abu Dhabi's Water Research Center. "Coastal desalination plants are especially vulnerable to regional hazards like oil spills and potential nuclear contamination," he said.
AsiaOne
20-06-2025
- Politics
- AsiaOne
What are the nuclear contamination risks from Israel's attacks on Iran?, World News
Israel says it is determined to destroy Iran's nuclear capabilities in its military campaign, but that it also wants to avoid any nuclear disaster in a region that is home to tens of millions of people and produces much of the world's oil. Fears of catastrophe rippled through the Gulf on Thursday (June 19) when the Israeli military said it had struck a site in Bushehr on the Gulf coast — home to Iran's only nuclear power station — only to later say the announcement was a mistake. Below are details on the damage caused so far by Israel's attacks, and what experts are saying about the risks of contamination and other disasters. What has Israel hit so far? Israel has announced attacks on nuclear sites in Natanz, Isfahan, Arak and Tehran itself. Israel says it aims to stop Iran building an atom bomb. Iran denies ever seeking one. The international nuclear watchdog IAEA has reported damage to the uranium enrichment plant at Natanz, to the nuclear complex at Isfahan, including the Uranium Conversion Facility, and to centrifuge production facilities in Karaj and Tehran. Israel said on Wednesday it had targeted Arak, also known as Khondab, the location of a partially built heavy-water research reactor, a type that can easily produce plutonium which, like enriched uranium, can be used to make the core of an atom bomb. The IAEA said it had information that the Khondab heavy water research reactor had been hit, but that it was not operational and reported no radiological effects. What fallout risks do these strikes pose? Peter Bryant, a professor at the University of Liverpool in England who specialises in radiation protection science and nuclear energy policy, said he is not too concerned about fallout risks from the strikes so far. [[nid:719286]] He noted that the Arak site was not operational while the Natanz facility was underground and no release of radiation was reported. "The issue is controlling what has happened inside that facility, but nuclear facilities are designed for that," he said. "Uranium is only dangerous if it gets physically inhaled or ingested or gets into the body at low enrichments," he said. Darya Dolzikova, a senior research fellow at London think tank RUSI, said attacks on facilities at the front end of the nuclear fuel cycle — the stages where uranium is prepared for use in a reactor — pose primarily chemical, not radiological risks. At enrichment facilities, UF6, or uranium hexafluoride, is the concern. "When UF6 interacts with water vapour in the air, it produces harmful chemicals," she said. The extent to which any material is dispersed would depend on factors including weather conditions, she added. "In low winds, much of the material can be expected to settle in the vicinity of the facility; in high winds, the material will travel farther, but is also likely to disperse more widely." The risk of dispersal is lower for underground facilities. What about nuclear reactors? The major concern would be a strike on Iran's nuclear reactor at Bushehr. Richard Wakeford, Honorary Professor of Epidemiology at the University of Manchester, said that while contamination from attacks on enrichment facilities would be "mainly a chemical problem" for the surrounding areas, extensive damage to large power reactors "is a different story". [[nid:719289]] Radioactive elements would be released either through a plume of volatile materials or into the sea, he added. James Acton, co-director of the Nuclear Policy Programme at the Carnegie Endowment for International Peace, said an attack on Bushehr "could cause an absolute radiological catastrophe", but that attacks on enrichment facilities were "unlikely to cause significant off-site consequences". Before uranium goes into a nuclear reactor it is barely radioactive, he said. "The chemical form uranium hexafluoride is toxic... but it actually doesn't tend to travel large distances and it's barely radioactive. So far the radiological consequences of Israel's attacks have been virtually nil," he added, while stating his opposition to Israel's campaign. Why are Gulf states especially worried? For Gulf states, the impact of any strike on Bushehr would be worsened by the potential contamination of Gulf waters, jeopardising a critical source of desalinated potable water. In the UAE, desalinated water accounts for more than 80 per cent of drinking water, while Bahrain became fully reliant on desalinated water in 2016, with 100 per cent of groundwater reserved for contingency plans, according to authorities. Qatar is 100 per cent dependant on desalinated water. In Saudi Arabia, a much larger nation with a greater reserve of natural groundwater, about 50 per cent of the water supply came from desalinated water as of 2023, according to the General Authority for Statistics. While some Gulf states like Saudi Arabia, Oman and the United Arab Emirates have access to more than one sea to draw water from, countries like Qatar, Bahrain and Kuwait are crowded along the shoreline of the Gulf with no other coastline. "If a natural disaster, oil spill, or even a targeted attack were to disrupt a desalination plant, hundreds of thousands could lose access to freshwater almost instantly," said Nidal Hilal, Professor of Engineering and Director of New York University Abu Dhabi's Water Research Centre. "Coastal desalination plants are especially vulnerable to regional hazards like oil spills and potential nuclear contamination," he said. [[nid:719283]]
Straits Times
19-06-2025
- Politics
- Straits Times
Explainer: What are the nuclear contamination risks from Israel's attacks on Iran?
Explainer: What are the nuclear contamination risks from Israel's attacks on Iran? Israel says it is determined to destroy Iran's nuclear capabilities in its military campaign, but that it also wants to avoid any nuclear disaster in a region that is home to tens of millions of people and produces much of the world's oil. Fears of catastrophe rippled through the Gulf on Thursday when the Israeli military said it had struck a site in Bushehr on the Gulf coast - home to Iran's only nuclear power station - only to later say the announcement was a mistake. Below are details on the damage caused so far by Israel's attacks, and what experts are saying about the risks of contamination and other disasters. WHAT HAS ISRAEL HIT SO FAR? Israel has announced attacks on nuclear sites in Natanz, Isfahan, Arak and Tehran itself. Israel says it aims to stop Iran building an atom bomb. Iran denies ever seeking one. The international nuclear watchdog IAEA has reported damage to the uranium enrichment plant at Natanz, to the nuclear complex at Isfahan, including the Uranium Conversion Facility, and to centrifuge production facilities in Karaj and Tehran. Israel said on Wednesday it had targeted Arak, also known as Khondab, the location of a partially built heavy-water research reactor, a type that can easily produce plutonium which, like enriched uranium, can be used to make the core of an atom bomb. The IAEA said it had information that the Khondab heavy water research reactor had been hit, but that it was not operational and reported no radiological effects. WHAT FALLOUT RISKS DO THESE STRIKES POSE? Peter Bryant, a professor at the University of Liverpool in England who specialises in radiation protection science and nuclear energy policy, said he is not too concerned about fallout risks from the strikes so far. He noted that the Arak site was not operational while the Natanz facility was underground and no release of radiation was reported. "The issue is controlling what has happened inside that facility, but nuclear facilities are designed for that," he said. "Uranium is only dangerous if it gets physically inhaled or ingested or gets into the body at low enrichments," he said. Darya Dolzikova, a senior research fellow at London think tank RUSI, said attacks on facilities at the front end of the nuclear fuel cycle - the stages where uranium is prepared for use in a reactor - pose primarily chemical, not radiological risks. At enrichment facilities, UF6, or uranium hexafluoride, is the concern. "When UF6 interacts with water vapour in the air, it produces harmful chemicals," she said. The extent to which any material is dispersed would depend on factors including weather conditions, she added. "In low winds, much of the material can be expected to settle in the vicinity of the facility; in high winds, the material will travel farther, but is also likely to disperse more widely." The risk of dispersal is lower for underground facilities. WHAT ABOUT NUCLEAR REACTORS? The major concern would be a strike on Iran's nuclear reactor at Bushehr. Richard Wakeford, Honorary Professor of Epidemiology at the University of Manchester, said that while contamination from attacks on enrichment facilities would be "mainly a chemical problem" for the surrounding areas, extensive damage to large power reactors "is a different story". Radioactive elements would be released either through a plume of volatile materials or into the sea, he added. James Acton, co-director of the Nuclear Policy Program at the Carnegie Endowment for International Peace, said an attack on Bushehr "could cause an absolute radiological catastrophe", but that attacks on enrichment facilities were "unlikely to cause significant off-site consequences". Before uranium goes into a nuclear reactor it is barely radioactive, he said. "The chemical form uranium hexafluoride is toxic ... but it actually doesn't tend to travel large distances and it's barely radioactive. So far the radiological consequences of Israel's attacks have been virtually nil," he added, while stating his opposition to Israel's campaign. WHY ARE GULF STATES ESPECIALLY WORRIED? For Gulf states, the impact of any strike on Bushehr would be worsened by the potential contamination of Gulf waters, jeopardizing a critical source of desalinated potable water. In the UAE, desalinated water accounts for more than 80% of drinking water, while Bahrain became fully reliant on desalinated water in 2016, with 100% of groundwater reserved for contingency plans, according to authorities. Qatar is 100% dependent on desalinated water. In Saudi Arabia, a much larger nation with a greater reserve of natural groundwater, about 50% of the water supply came from desalinated water as of 2023, according to the General Authority for Statistics. While some Gulf states like Saudi Arabia, Oman and the United Arab Emirates have access to more than one sea to draw water from, countries like Qatar, Bahrain and Kuwait are crowded along the shoreline of the Gulf with no other coastline. "If a natural disaster, oil spill, or even a targeted attack were to disrupt a desalination plant, hundreds of thousands could lose access to freshwater almost instantly," said Nidal Hilal, Professor of Engineering and Director of New York University Abu Dhabi's Water Research Center. "Coastal desalination plants are especially vulnerable to regional hazards like oil spills and potential nuclear contamination," he said. REUTERS Join ST's Telegram channel and get the latest breaking news delivered to you.
