As the Ukrainian army continues fighting to reclaim its territory, inch by inch, in brutal winter conditions, European leaders are scrambling to manage the continent’s diminished energy resources. Ukraine was once seen as the great hope on this front. The nation’s nuclear energy has been posited as a potential green power supply for a region overly reliant on Russia to meet its energy needs. Now, with Europe’s largest nuclear power plant under Russian control, the stability of nuclear alternatives and their potential to reduce Europe’s carbon footprint is marred by unbridled Russian aggression towards its neighbour.
Last week, Rishi Sunak and Joe Biden pledged to tackle energy price volatility through a new gas deal, known as the UK-US Energy Security and Affordability Partnership. The aim is to mitigate the fallout from Russia’s invasion of Ukraine, which caused international energy prices to surge, and put a disastrous amount of pressure on European consumers. The deal also promoted the use of nuclear energy as “a safe and reliable part of the clean energy transition” — which is ironic, given that one of the deal’s key beneficiaries, Germany, is in the process of closing its three remaining nuclear plants over safety concerns.
Ukraine has 15 nuclear reactors, which provide over half the country’s energy supply. This is convenient for the EU. Just last February, despite criticism from environmentalists, it classified nuclear energy as “green”. Ukraine joined the European Energy Community in 2010, intending to integrate into the European energy market, and in 2015 an ambitious agreement was signed between its Ukrenergo energy distribution company and Polenergia, a Polish counterpart, to export electricity to the EU as part of the Ukraine-Europe “energy bridge”. Despite a general distaste for nuclear energy in several EU countries, the move was seen as a good source of revenue for Ukraine and a move away from what was perceived as its dependence on Russian gas.
The integration, which had been planned for 2023, became urgent in February. Following the Russian invasion, Ukraine requested immediate synchronisation to the European power grid. (Ukrainian Energy Minister, Herman Galushchenko, pleaded with EU leaders, “I appeal to our European partners… We need your support and solidarity with the Ukrainian people more than ever!”) Russia, meanwhile, quickly took control of the power plant at Chernobyl.
Russian troops also pushed into Zaporizhzhya, home to the biggest power plant in Europe. It was here that, six years ago, the European Bank for Reconstruction and Development (EBRD) and the EIB coughed up one billion euros to support the construction of high-voltage transmission lines. But according to a government briefing document sent by those working in Ukraine’s nuclear sector, some people in the plant were working with Russia before the annexation of Zaporizhzhya. Seen exclusively by UnHerd, the briefing reads:
“There was a failed personnel policy, which over the past few years has concentrated the leadership — in key areas in the field — of people who are professionally and morally worthless, with dubious qualifications, unprofessional experience and without institutional memory, mostly citizens of the Russian Federation. They destroyed the system for documenting the managerial decision-making by closing access and classifying documents, which does not allow timely identification and correction of violations or bringing to responsibility for violations of nuclear legislation.”
Join the discussion
Join like minded readers that support our journalism by becoming a paid subscriber
To join the discussion in the comments, become a paid subscriber.
Join like minded readers that support our journalism, read unlimited articles and enjoy other subscriber-only benefits.
SubscribeSimilar question to be asked in regards Kherson when that city fell in March to Russian forces. It does seem that either Russian or pro-Russian forces had infiltrated key parts of Ukraines government and infrastructure which shouldn’t have been surprising really. No doubt we and other Western powers (as well as Ukraine) have agents in Russia.
Infiltrated? Not really, they simply do not recognise the post-Majdan Kiev regime. You know, the one that had been bombing the East of the country for the last 8 years with our silence
Infiltrated? Not really, they simply do not recognise the post-Majdan Kiev regime. You know, the one that had been bombing the East of the country for the last 8 years with our silence
Similar question to be asked in regards Kherson when that city fell in March to Russian forces. It does seem that either Russian or pro-Russian forces had infiltrated key parts of Ukraines government and infrastructure which shouldn’t have been surprising really. No doubt we and other Western powers (as well as Ukraine) have agents in Russia.
It’s also obvious that positioning Russian rocket launchers around the Zaporizhzhya plant could intimidate the Ukrainians enough to keep from hitting those. Lovely move, Vladimir.
It’s also obvious that positioning Russian rocket launchers around the Zaporizhzhya plant could intimidate the Ukrainians enough to keep from hitting those. Lovely move, Vladimir.
“Ukraine has 15 nuclear reactors,”
Ukraine is reportedly the poorest country in Europe. How did they manage to build 15 nuclear reactors?
Edit: further reading informs me that they’re Russian built.
“Ukraine has 15 nuclear reactors,”
Ukraine is reportedly the poorest country in Europe. How did they manage to build 15 nuclear reactors?
Edit: further reading informs me that they’re Russian built.
I was unaware of the deal for Ukraine to provide the EU with energy, potentially costing Russia millions in lost gas revenue. Preventing this sounds like a much more likely reason for Putins invasion than anything to do with NATO in my eyes
Yes, there is very little reason to take this war at face value.
Yes, there is very little reason to take this war at face value.
I was unaware of the deal for Ukraine to provide the EU with energy, potentially costing Russia millions in lost gas revenue. Preventing this sounds like a much more likely reason for Putins invasion than anything to do with NATO in my eyes