Israel is targeting Iran’s nuclear sites. Here’s what we know about the radiation risks

Tensions are excessive while the war between Israel and Iran is entering its second week.

Israel intensifies its strikes on the Iranian nuclear program. The United States has warned that it could join the effort. And even as Experts say the risk of influence are low, the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) described the situation as “deeply concerning” and said that “could lead to radioactive versions with great consequences”.

Geopolitically, this is already a crisis situation, the General of NATO Supreme Air Combers of NATO said at CBC News Network.

“It must be succeeded in an end by which Iran will have no nuclear weapons,” he said.

For a diplomatic result, Iran should accept “persistent intrusive inspections, omnipresent” to ensure that it does not build a nuclear weapon – and this is extremely unlikely to occur, said Breedlove. “So this will make a kind of conclusion – by force, probably.”

But in terms of risk of influence, to what extent should the world really concern potential nuclear spinoffs? It depends on the target, according to experts. And so far, there has been no evidence that the radioactive equipment has been published, the AIEA warned that this could change.

Addressing the United Nations Security Council on Friday, the head of the IAEA again called for a “maximum restraint” in the conflict to avoid a new escalation.

“The armed attack for nuclear installations should never take place and could lead to radioactive versions with large consequences inside and beyond the limits of the state that has been attacked,” said Rafael Grossi, his director general.

So far, attacks have caused a “serious degradation of nuclear security in Iran,” he said. “Although they have not so far led to a radiological release affecting the public, there is a danger that this could happen.”

No proof of the released radioactive equipment

Israel has announced attacks on nuclear sites in the cities of Natanz, Isfahan, Arak and Tehran, the Iranian capital.

The IAEA reported damage to the uranium enrichment plant in Natanz, at the Isfahan nuclear complex, including the uranium conversion installation, and to centrifuge production facilities in Karaj and Tehran.

Israel also attacked Arak, known as Khondab. The IAEA said that Israeli military strikes hit the heavy water research reactor from Khondab, which was under construction and had not started to operate and damaged the neighboring plant that makes heavy water. The agency said it was not operational and did not contain nuclear matter, so there were no radiological effects.

Although recent strikes in nuclear installations in Iran have naturally raised concerns, there is no proof of release of radioactive materials in the environment, said Peter Bryant, associate professor of nuclear security and radiation protection at the University of Surrey in England, in a online declaration Wednesday.

“It is important to understand that radiation is easy to detect, even at very low levels, using well -established and very sensitive monitoring equipment. No unusual level has been reported,” said Bryant.

“Radiation is a normal part of daily life, found naturally in rocks, soil, air and even certain foods. Although the word” radioactive “may seem alarming, that does not automatically mean danger.”

Until now, Israel’s strikes seem to have reached only uranium enrichment factories, which do not pose much radioactive danger, said Richard Wakeford, professor of epidemiology at the Professional and Environmental Health Center of the University of Manchester.

If the reactors (or reprocessing plants) are affected, this could be more a radiological problem if it causes significant damage, he added in a declaration on the Science Media Center.

“Then we could see the versions of a range of radionuclides, although probably on a much smaller scale than accidents of previous reactors.”

What about nuclear reactors?

The main concern would be a strike by the Iranian nuclear reactor in Bushehr. On Friday, the IAEA fats warned the UN that an attack on Bushehr would have serious consequences because it is a nuclear power plant that welcoming thousands of kilograms of nuclear materials.

“I want to make it absolutely and completely clear: in the case of an attack on the Bushehr nuclear power plant, a direct blow would lead to a very great release of radioactivity to the environment,” said Grosi.

“Likewise, a blow that has disabled the only two lines providing an electrical power to the plant could cause the core of its reactor.”

James Acton, co -director of the Carnegie Endowment for International Peace nuclear policy program, told Reuters that an attack on Bushehr “could cause an absolute radiological disaster”.

Experts also told Reuters that it would be “reckless” for Israel to attack Bushehr given the radiological consequences.

And Fabian Hinz, researcher at the International Institute of Strategic Studies, told the Associated Press That it “seems very unlikely” that Israel strikes Bushehr because it is not considered to be part of the Iranian nuclear program focused on the development of weapons.

What about the participation of us at Fordow?

Fordow is the second nuclear enrichment establishment in Iran after Natanz, its main establishment, and is buried under a mountain. It is widely considered out of reach by all the “bunker-business” bombs of Americans.

Friday, Grosi said that the IAEA was not aware of any damage to the Fordow factory. But if the United States decides to support Israel more directly in its attack on Iran, it is the probable target.

It would be necessary to withdraw an American plane because Israel does not have an airplane capable of carrying such a large bomb and delivering it with precision, said William Alberque, the former director of armaments control of NATO, said CBC News Network.

Fordow was deliberately constructed in a mountain to protect it from potential armed attacks, he said.

---

“We know that it is there. We had inspectors in there. He has about a 10th of all the enrichment capacity of Iran,” said Alberque.

However, the experts said that any impact on the potential radiation from a strike on Fordow would probably be minimal and unlikely to pose a risk for the wider population. There would be chemical dangers on site and radiation, but at levels that would be manageable with respiratory devices and other protective equipment.

Indeed Science Media Center.

“In addition, those who direct the site would have been trained in the techniques of monitoring and attenuation of radiation.”