Other
- +18
James M. Acton, Saskia Brechenmacher, Cecily Brewer, …
{
"authors": [
"James M. Acton"
],
"type": "legacyinthemedia",
"centerAffiliationAll": "dc",
"centers": [
"Carnegie Endowment for International Peace"
],
"collections": [],
"englishNewsletterAll": "ctw",
"nonEnglishNewsletterAll": "",
"primaryCenter": "Carnegie Endowment for International Peace",
"programAffiliation": "NPP",
"programs": [
"Nuclear Policy"
],
"projects": [],
"regions": [
"East Asia",
"Japan"
],
"topics": [
"Nuclear Policy",
"Nuclear Energy"
]
}
Source: Getty
In The Media
Dangerous Core Breach Suspected at Japan Reactor
A radiation leak in the turbine building of Fukushima's Daiichi unit 3 reactor, damaged by Japan's earthquake and subsequent tsunami, suggests there is some chance the reactor core has been breached.
Published on Mar 25, 2011
Source: CBS
ERICA HILL, CBS: What could be happening at this point? Obviously it's a very fluid situation. Joining us from Washington, nuclear expert James Acton. James, good to have you back with us. When you hear the details that we're getting – and it sometimes feels like maybe we're not getting the full story – what do you think is actually going on at that troubled plant?
JAMES ACTON, Carnegie Endowment for International Peace: Good morning, Erica. And the truth is, we don't know what's going on at that troubled plant. And I think officials are probably being honest when they say that they don't know what the cause of this radiation leak is. What I think is significant is this highly radioactive water was found in a building that is actually adjacent, next door to the main reactor building. And the concern is, that if you're finding highly radioactive water next door to the main reactor building, which is not where it should be – then that leads to great concern about what's actually going on inside the main reactor building itself.
HILL: And you're talking about that water, the water that the workers walked through as they were laying cables.
ACTON: That's right. That building – they were in the turbine building – should have been isolated from the reactor building itself. And, you know, given the battering these power plants have taken, it's not a huge surprise actually that the ceiling between the two plants has been breached somehow. But the radioactivity in the water creates the distinct possibility that the core of the reactor vessel itself has now actually been breached.
HILL: So then, talk to us about what happens. I mean, what's the worst case scenario?
ACTON: Well, I think it's still worth emphasizing, that we don't know for certain that the reactor core has been breached. But if it has been breached, this creates the possibility of a much larger release of radiation into the environment than we have seen to date. But I think it's still worth emphasizing that the chance of a catastrophic release of radiation, on the scale of Chernobyl, is still very low, even at this point.
HILL: That's very low, but we have seen the evacuation zone widen. I mean, is this something – could it though turn into some sort of a Chernobyl in terms of what needs to be done for containment? Does the area need to be abandoned perhaps?
ACTON: Well, what happened at Chernobyl was we saw an explosion in the fuel of the reactor itself and that cast radioactive material far and wide around the area, which was part of the reason why it had to be abandoned. Now, I think the chances of an explosion at Fukushima are very low. I mean, this is clearly the second worst civilian nuclear accident in history. And it's caused huge displacement to the people in the region and there are a chance of long-term consequences to health and the environment. So, I don't want to play down the consequences of this.
HILL: Right.
ACTON: But the chances of evacuating a huge zone permanently as at Chernobyl are still slim.
HILL: All right. Well, we'll continue to follow it and we appreciate you coming in this morning for your expertise. James Acton, thanks.
ACTON: Thank you.
About the Author
James M. Acton
Jessica T. Mathews Chair, Co-director, Nuclear Policy Program
Acton holds the Jessica T. Mathews Chair and is co-director of the Nuclear Policy Program at the Carnegie Endowment for International Peace.
- Unpacking Trump’s National Security Strategy
- Trump Has an Out on Nuclear Testing. He Should Take It.Commentary
James M. Acton
Recent Work
Carnegie does not take institutional positions on public policy issues; the views represented herein are those of the author(s) and do not necessarily reflect the views of Carnegie, its staff, or its trustees.
More Work from Carnegie Russia Eurasia Center
- For Putin, Increasing Russia’s Nuclear Threat Matters More Than the Triad’s ModernizationCommentary
For Putin, upgrading Russia’s nuclear forces was a secondary goal. The main aim was to gain an advantage over the West, including by strengthening the nuclear threat on all fronts. That made growth in missile arsenals and a new arms race inevitable.
Maxim Starchak
- Japan’s “Militarist Turn” and What It Means for RussiaCommentary
For a real example of political forces engaged in the militarization of society, the Russian leadership might consider looking closer to home.
James D.J. Brown
- Russia’s Latest Weapons Have Left Strategic Stability on the Brink of CollapseCommentary
The Kremlin will only be prepared to negotiate strategic arms limitations if it is confident it can secure significant concessions from the United States. Otherwise, meaningful dialogue is unlikely, and the international system of strategic stability will continue to teeter on the brink of total collapse.
Maxim Starchak
- Russia-Türkiye Ties Falter Amid Stresses of Ukraine WarCommentary
Mutual suspicion between Moscow and Ankara is growing as Türkiye cozies up to Washington and NATO while reducing its dependence on Russian energy.
Ruslan Suleymanov
- Iran’s Twelve-Day War Has Only Boosted Its Cooperation With RussiaCommentary
Tehran’s most urgent task is to reduce the risk of further Israeli and U.S. airstrikes. Russia’s role as a deterrent in this respect is more multifaceted than simply supplying weapons, whose real impact will only become apparent many years from now.
Nikita Smagin
