Earthquake Near Iranian Nuclear Facility Serves as Warning of Dangers to Nearby Residents

Iranians may have dodged a bullet this time, but a powerful earthquake near Natanz on Friday might serve as a warning to the dangers its nuclear facilities pose to the population. Also, it raises a question: Should planners of kinetic attacks be cognizant of such environmental risks?The earthquake occurred near an uranium-enrichment facility, making it an event Tehran could use to try to keep enemies from destroying its nuclear facilities. Yet sources tell the Sun that such strikes can be executed with minimal environmental consequences. Friday’s 4.8-magnitude earthquake occurred some 25 miles southeast of the Natanz nuclear facility, raising fears of leakage of poisonous gasses and radioactive material. Iran is prone to earthquakes, and two sources tell the Sun that the tremor was unlikely to have been caused by secret testing of a nuclear weapon. Nor was it likely caused by a foreign military’s attack on Natanz. Unlike other secretive Iranian sites, Natanz is a declared nuclear facility, which means that inspectors of the Vienna-based UN nuclear watchdog have access to the plant. As of this writing, the International Atomic Energy Agency has reported no environmental hazard that could have resulted from the seismic event. “We always worry, but we think the IAEA would alert the world if there was a significant nuclear accident,” the founder of the Institute for Science and International Studies, David Albright, tells the Sun. A closer earthquake, though, “could have caused severe damage to the centrifuges.”While Iran is rushing to become a nuclear-armed power, the safety of its facilities is far from stellar. “The Iranian regulatory system is pretty pitiful, and they’ve been playing catchup on modern safety procedures and culture for well over a decade,” Mr. Albright, a physicist and former arms inspector, says. “They’re taking their cue from Russia, which isn’t the best.”An earthquake nearer to the Natanz facility might have damaged the pipes that connect a cascade of centrifuges. These pipes contain uranium hexafluoride, which is highly toxic and could damage human lungs, leading to deaths. Padding under the centrifuges, though, might help absorb shocks, Mr. Albright says. At any rate, he adds, any environmental damage would be confined to a fairly small area around the facility. Another plant, at Bushehr, could be more dangerous. Its location in southwestern Iran, on the Persian Gulf, could spread the damage to nearby Saudi Arabia, Kuwait, Qatar, and the United Arab Emirates. Its reactor is also built on a fault line that is more earthquake-prone than other parts of Iran. Even as the Islamic Republic is laggard on securing nuclear facilities for the safety of its residents, it constantly issues reports warning of environmental catastrophe that potential enemy airstrikes could cause. “They say, if you bomb a centrifuge plant or the uranium conversion facility, it’ll be a huge ecological disaster,” Mr. Albright says, adding that such Iranian studies are “garbage.” The environmental effects of possible strikes on nuclear facilities would be “one thousand times less than they project, but it’s in their interest to do it because they want to stir up public opinion outside of Iran that a military strike is too dangerous to do,” Mr. Albright says. America and Israel are “very sensitive” to possible environmental effects of strikes on nuclear facilities, he adds.As a rule, it is difficult to hit “hot” reactors. Yet, in 1991, America struck such an Iraqi nuclear research facility. Rather than the reactor, the bombers hit and collapsed the plant’s roof, rendering the facility inoperable and the reactor unusable. Opponents of kinetic strikes often highlight Iran’s Fordow plant to argue that no bomb could penetrate the facility, as it is dug into a mountainside at an estimated 260 feet under the surface. Yet, striking entryways, especially with so-called bunker-buster bombs that can hit deeply enough to deny access, could suffice. They could close down the facility for more than two years, and perhaps force the Iranians to relocate. The environmental concerns are always in order when nuclear facilities are hit by either natural phenomena, such as earthquakes, or kinetic attacks. A nuclear weapon in the hands of an aggressive, fanatic regime, though, could be more hazardous still.

Earthquake Near Iranian Nuclear Facility Serves as Warning of Dangers to Nearby Residents

More from the New York Sun

Taliban Frees American Academic Held More Than Year

Belgium Deploys Troops To Protect Jewish Sites as Iran-Linked Group Claims Attacks Across Europe

California Governor Debate Abruptly Cancelled After Participation Rules Exclude All Non-White Candidates

More from the New York Sun

Taliban Frees American Academic Held More Than Year

Belgium Deploys Troops To Protect Jewish Sites as Iran-Linked Group Claims Attacks Across Europe

California Governor Debate Abruptly Cancelled After Participation Rules Exclude All Non-White Candidates

Vance Leads 2028 GOP Presidential Contenders in Polling, but Rubio’s Star Is Rising in First-in-the-Nation Primary State

Oil Market Trades Executed Minutes Before Trump Iran Announcement Net Mystery Buyers $580 Million in Profits

Delta Air Lines Suspends Special Services for Members of Congress Amid DHS Shutdown

A ‘Yentl’ Adaptation That Finally Captures the Spirit of Isaac Bashevis Singer

Epic Fury: What New Arms Are in Play