You searched for

Current Refinements
Content Type Features
Date 2006
Remove all refinements
Refine Search

Japan's safety response
20 December, 2006
Changes to Japan’s nuclear safety culture after known accidents have not convinced everyone there is sufficient open scrutiny to prevent another mishap. By Julian Ryall

Rogue sources
30 November, 2006
Anyone who doubts that resources should be invested into finding lost radioactive sources should look to the recent death of Russian dissident Alexander Litvinenko. By Deirdre Mason

Investors in waiting
12 October, 2006
The UK’s recent energy review has got many people talking about new nuclear build. So when do we break ground?

A ponderous hazard
10 August, 2006
Cooling ponds built for the UK’s Magnox programme now pose one of the most difficult cleanup challenges in the world. By Steve Topping and Steve Bruce

Sizeable problem solved
10 August, 2006
A distorted flange on a reactor access hatch at an EdF nuclear power plant was repaired using a purpose-developed machine – on a scale unprecedented in Europe – to allow the issue to be addressed in situ.

GNEP: not quite ripe
07 August, 2006
As with most new programmes, the Global Nuclear Energy Partnership was big on vision and short on specifics. Now more information is coming out, but the details and the vision do not always add up. By Ivan Oelrich

Ontario's nuclear future
28 July, 2006
The government of Ontario has confirmed it is committed to an ongoing nuclear programme and has acknowledged that nuclear power is and will be an essential part of the electricity mix. Now that this decision has been taken, the real work can begin. By Milton Caplan

Accidental humour
19 July, 2006
Safety in the nuclear industry is no laughing matter. But former Ukrainian plant operator Alexey Kovynev doesn’t see why that means there is no place for side splitting in the business of atom splitting.

Imperfect harmony
19 July, 2006
Several years have elapsed since common nuclear safety standards across the whole of the European Union were first proposed. Would European directives increase safety at nuclear facilities, as the European Commission insists, or is this a case of Brussels wanting to seize more bureaucratic control?

Burgundy forges ahead
20 June, 2006
While the nuclear revival is welcome, many are concerned about the lack of sufficient manufacturing capacity worldwide. By Judith Perera

Radioactive safari
15 June, 2006
Due to the lack of human activity in the region surrounding the Chernobyl station, plant and animal life has been allowed to thrive. ‘Wormwood Forest’ by Mary Mycio describes life in Europe’s largest wildlife sanctuary.

The facts are stark
05 June, 2006
Recent London meetings have put flesh on the bones of UK new build plans – not all of it prime meat. By Jeremy Gordon

Vision products
02 June, 2006
The Global Nuclear Energy Partnership is the USA’s bold vision of how the nuclear industry should operate in the 21st century.

Nuclear burden and benefit
16 May, 2006
While it is true that the accident at Chernobyl has overshadowed Ukraine’s nuclear industry over the last 20 years, nuclear energy continues to play a vital role in the country’s energy needs. By Mark Rowe

How it was: an operator's perspective
19 April, 2006
Anatoly Dyatlov, the former deputy engineer for operations at Chernobyl, and the senior officer on the night of the accident, gives his side of the story. He thinks the reactor operators have been unfairly singled out for blame (having himself served four years in prison) and believes the accident was attributable entirely to design faults. [Article published in NEI November 1991]

Legasov suicide leaves unanswered questions
19 April, 2006
The precise reasons for the suicide of Valery Legasov, First Deputy Director of the Kurchatov Institute, and a key figure in dealing with the consequences of the Chernobyl accident, remain unclear. [Article published in NEI July 1988]

Why INSAG has still got it wrong
08 April, 2006
The INSAG-7 report of the IAEA’s International Nuclear Safety Advisory Group has become widely accepted as the closest thing we have to a definitive assessment of the causes of the Chernobyl accident. But INSAG-7 gives an inaccurate picture of what happened, says the plant’s former deputy chief engineer. By Anatoly Dyatlov [article published in NEI September 1995]

New safe century
06 April, 2006
Chernobyl 4’s object shelter is now at risk of collapse. In March 2004, the European Bank for Reconstruction and Development invited tenders for detailed design and construction for a new enclosure. By Eric Schmieman, Matthew Wrona, Philippe Convert and Daniel Couch

Consequences for agriculture
06 April, 2006
More than 4.5 billion hectares of agricultural land in Belarus, Russia and Ukraine were contaminated after the Chernobyl accident. In the two decades since, a wide range of large scale measures and remedial options have been implemented. By S.V. Fesenko, R.M. Alexakhin, M.I. Balonov, I.M. Bogdevich, B.J. Howard, V.A. Kashparov, N.I. Sanzharova, G. Voigt and Yu. Zhuchenka

Consequences for health
06 April, 2006
The IAEA and WHO have produced a definitive account of the health effects of the Chernobyl accident 20 years after it occurred. It finds some effects directly linked to the radioactivity release, and many more the result of fear and uncertainty.

Privacy Policy
We have updated our privacy policy. In the latest update it explains what cookies are and how we use them on our site. To learn more about cookies and their benefits, please view our privacy policy. Please be aware that parts of this site will not function correctly if you disable cookies. By continuing to use this site, you consent to our use of cookies in accordance with our privacy policy unless you have disabled them.