What is the risk of nuclear contamination from Israel's attack on Iran?

Experts say that Israel's attacks on Iran's nucleonic installations have so far only posed limited contamination risks. They warn, however, that an attack on Iran's Bushehr nuclear power plant could lead to a nuclear catastrophe. Israel claims it wants to prevent a nuclear catastrophe in the region, which is home to millions of people as well as producing much of the world’s oil. It is determined to destroy Iran’s nuclear capability in its military campaign. Israel's military announced that it had hit a Bushehr site on the Gulf Coast, home to Iran’s only nuclear power plant. But later they said the announcement was an error.

What has Israel done so far? Israel has declared attacks on nuclear sites at Natanz, Isfahan and Arak, as well as Tehran. Israel claims it wants to prevent Iran from building an atom-bomb. Iran has denied ever having sought one. IAEA, the international nuclear watchdog, has reported damage at the Natanz uranium plant, the Isfahan nuclear complex, including the Uranium Conversion Facility and the centrifuge production plants in Karaj, Tehran and Karaj. Israel has also targeted Arak, which is also known as Khondab. IAEA reported that Israeli military strikes damaged nearby heavy water plant and the Khondab Heavy Water Research Reactor which was still under construction and not yet operational. IAEA stated that the reactor was not operational, and did not contain any nuclear material. Therefore, there were no radiological impacts. IAEA updated its assessment of the site on Friday and said that key buildings were damaged. The heavy-water reactors are capable of producing plutonium that, along with enriched uranium can be used in the production of an atom bomb.

What are the risks of these strikes?

Peter Bryant, professor of radiation protection science at the University of Liverpool, England, who specializes in nuclear energy policy and radiation protection, has said that he's not concerned with the fallout risk from the strikes.

He pointed out that the Arak facility was not in operation while the Natanz site was underground. No radiation leakage was reported. He said that the issue was controlling what happened in that facility. Nuclear facilities were designed to do that. He said that uranium is only dangerous when it's inhaled, ingested, or gets into your body.

Darya Dolzikova is a senior researcher at London's think tank RUSI. She said that attacks on the facilities at the front of the nuclear fuel chain - where uranium gets prepared to be used in a reactor -- pose chemical risks, and not radiological ones.

UF6, or uranium hexafluoride is the main concern at enrichment plants. She said that when UF6 reacts with the water vapour in air, it creates harmful chemicals.

She added that the weather will affect how much material disperses. In low wind, material is likely to settle near the facility. In high wind, material will travel further, but also disperse widely.

Underground facilities have a lower risk of dispersal.

Simon Bennett, the head of the civil safety unit at the University of Leicester, UK, stated that the risks to the environment are minimal if Israel strikes subterranean installations because "you're burying nuclear materials in thousands of tons of concrete, rock, and earth".

What about nuclear reactants?

A strike on Iran’s Bushehr nuclear reactor would be of major concern.

Richard Wakeford is Honorary Professor of Epidemiology, University of Manchester. He said that while the contamination of the area surrounding enrichment plants would "mainly be a chemical issue", the extensive damage of large power reactors was "a different story".

He added that radioactive elements could be released into the ocean or through a plume containing volatile materials.

James Acton, director of the Nuclear Policy Program for the Carnegie Endowment for International Peace said that an attack on Bushehr could "cause an absolute radiological disaster", but that an attack on enrichment plants was "unlikely" to have significant off-site effects.

He said that uranium is barely radioactive before it enters a nuclear reactor. "The chemical uranium is hexafluoride, which is toxic but doesn't travel far and has a low radioactivity," he said. "Israel's attacks so far have had virtually no radiological effects," he said, while expressing his opposition to Israel.

Bennett of the University of Leicester stated that it would be "foolhardy" for Israel to attack Bushehr, because they could pierce and release radioactive material in the atmosphere.

Why are Gulf States particularly concerned?

The Gulf States' impact on any attack on Bushehr will be worsened if the Gulf waters are contaminated, putting at risk a vital source of desalinated water.

According to the authorities, in the UAE, more than 80% drinking water is desalinated, and Bahrain has become fully dependent on desalinated waters since 2016. 100% of groundwater was reserved for contingency planning.

Qatar is completely dependent on desalinated drinking water.

According to the General Authority for Statistics, in Saudi Arabia, which is a larger country with more natural groundwater reserves, 50% of water supplies will be desalinated by 2023.

Some Gulf States, such as Saudi Arabia, Oman, and the United Arab Emirates, have access to multiple seas to draw their water, but countries like Qatar and Bahrain are congested along the Gulf shoreline with no other coastline.

If a natural catastrophe, an oil spill or even a targeted assault were to disrupt a water desalination facility, hundreds of thousands would lose their access to freshwater instantly, said Nidal Ilal, Professor and Director of the Water Research Center at New York University Abu Dhabi.

He said that coastal desalination plants were particularly vulnerable to regional hazards such as oil spills and nuclear contamination.

(source: Reuters)