Is Israel’s nuclear reactor still safe?

Last week, Israel’s Atomic Energy Commission chief Zeev Snir said that the country has taken extra measures lately to secure the Dimona site from foreign missile and other threats.

But he did not say a word about the fact that the reactor may not last past 2023 due to its own internal limitations.

According to foreign sources, the material for the 80 to several hundred nuclear weapons that Israel possesses was produced in Dimona; if the nuclear reactor was no longer operational, the country could no longer produce new plutonium for new weapons.

Dimona’s nuclear reactor was originally built to last only 40 years, until 2003.

Even with a variety of new technologies and strategies to extend its lifetime, the reactor was due to be shut down in 2023.

The Jerusalem Post has confirmed a report by Haaretz in November 2017 that Israel is now hoping it can find ways to extend the life of the Dimona reactor to 80 years, or until 2043.

Such an extension is highly controversial, as the vast majority of the nuclear reactors that are the same age as Israel’s were shut down after 40 years, or long before the 60-year point approaching in 2023.

Next, the controversy has gone from pushing the envelope on general safety rules for closing nuclear reactors, to specific objections to extending Dimona’s lifespan, given that over 1,500 cracks were disclosed in its nuclear core.

Yet, it turns out that the volume of cracks, however scary sounding, is not as decisive. There are nuclear reactors that have continued operating with over 3,000 cracks in them. Moreover, a certain volume of cracks in the nuclear core are standard and to be expected because of the way that a nuclear reactor operates.

Former Dimona scientist Uzi Even has told the Post that his main concerns about extending Dimona’s lifespan beyond 2023 relates more to whether it is safe to replace so many parts of a reactor to lengthen its life as well as whether there is sufficient oversight.

In November 2017, Yariv Levin, who is both Tourism Minister and the cabinet’s liaison with the Knesset, wrote a letter to Zionist Union MK Yael Cohen Paran about Dimona. He argued that prior statements by former IAEC chief Gidon Frank on 2023 being the absolute limit on extensions for Dimona were made before the discovery of new technologies and approaches to further extending nuclear reactors’ lifespans. In addition, he said that objections to extending Dimona’s life to 2043 were based on outdated assumptions and objections.

Even responded to Levin saying, “I am suspicious when an organization does its own oversight. It’s not good. An outside group should perform oversight – which is complex.”

Also, he said that even all of the improved technologies developed for replacing parts of the nuclear reactor could only extend the reactor’s life so far since the critical nuclear core itself is irreplaceable.

Communicating with Frank von Hippel, Co-Director of the Program on Science and Global Security at Princeton University, the Post confirmed that the most important factor is the quality of a reactor’s various deficiencies and how they impact overall its ability to operate or cool down.

In the broader global debate over whether extending a nuclear reactor’s life to 80 years is safe, Von Hippel confirmed that there are two sides.

One side of the debate, which appears to include Israel and the US government, seems to think virtually every part of a nuclear reactor can be replaced, and that reactors can be kept operational 100 years or more.

On the other side of the debate is Europe. Nuclear reactors in England, Scotland and Belgium have had major issues since May and before, despite being younger than the Dimona reactor and the US reactors slated to be kept in operation for 80 years.

Von Hippel concurred that some of the difference between the US and the European approach could be a greater concern for safety in Europe, but that reactors themselves are also built differently in the US and Europe.

There is an additional level of complexity in comparing nuclear reactors and policies of different governments, he stated.

He explained that only looking at how a reactor was built – whether it is a “research” reactor, operating at a lower level of energy and risk, or a “power” reactor, operating at a higher level of energy and risk – is not the only question.

Rather, he indicated that comparisons also need to take into consideration how a reactor is used.

For example, Von Hippel said the Dimona reactor could be operated at a lower temperature and then be viewed more like a “pool” reactor, a lower pressure reactor which carries less risk of failure. This would be true even though it is a “heavy water” reactor, a higher pressure reactor with a higher risk of failure.

This and the fact that “its control and instrumentation could have been refurbished” could reduce concerns about extending Dimona’s lifespan.

Still, he said, “I personally think that the Dimona reactor should be shut down because Israel has enough plutonium and could produce tritium in another way – with an accelerator for example.”

Dovetailing with the IAEC’s recent public comments, he said, “I also am concerned that Dimona could be targeted in war – as any reactor in the Middle East could be.”

He added, “There is, however, the institutional question of whether there is a truly independent safety regulator for Dimona on whose judgement Israelis can depend… that is very difficult to assure.”

Despite these concerns, he said “given the minimal information that has been made public, it is difficult to argue for or against its safety.”

The deeper the Post delved into the various debates, the more it seemed to emerge that both sides were quite far from knowing how long these reactors can really last safely. The debates started long before 2017.

Further, it seems that the incentives for governments, whether economic, electrical capacity or environmental, were heavily stacked toward pushing the envelope.

It is often only when there is a problem with continued operation or a health incident that public opinion quickly shifts to suddenly paying attention to the experts who have long warned about safety.

It would appear that unless there is an actual crisis that bursts into public view beyond the censor’s ability, that ready or not, Dimona will be steaming full speed ahead into 2043.

Join Jerusalem Post Premium Plus now for just $5 and upgrade your experience with an ads-free website and exclusive content. Click here>>