CYIL vol. 15 (2024)

CYIL 15 ȍ2024Ȏ MARINE MIGHT: EXPLORING THE LEGAL COMPLEXITIES SURROUNDING … Nikitin and Andreyev described the Russian FNPP as resting on a ‘flush-deck, flat bottomed, non-self-propelled vessel of the berth-connected type.’ 28 This description emphasizes a fundamental characteristic of FNPPs: they are non-self-propelled vessels, meaning they lack their propulsion system for independent movement. 29 Another technical aspect of an FNPP is the integration of storage facilities intended to accommodate both fresh and spent fuel. Fresh fuel is typically loaded into the reactor at the outset of its operation. As the reactor functions, spent fuel accumulates until it reaches the end of its operational lifespan, at which point it is towed back for refuelling. 30 This represents a significant departure from traditional land-based reactors, where storage facilities are housed in separate structures. Critics have raised several safety concerns about the deployment of the FNPP, highlighting potential disruptions to marine ecosystems and the risk of radioactive release. 31 In response, Rosatom has reassured that the FNPP’s reactor is identical to those on nuclear icebreakers, which have demonstrated safe operation for decades. Rosatom emphasized that an FNPP operates under even safer conditions than icebreakers, which navigate through thick ice far from the shore. Unlike icebreakers, FNPPs will remain stationary, moored to a specially designed pier, eliminating risks associated with motion. This static nature means there are no concerns about propulsion system failures or mobility-related emergencies. Rosatom also highlighted the robust safety features of the FNPP, asserting that even in the unlikely event of a severe accident, the probability of a radioactive leak is negligible. They contrasted the FNPP’s pressurized water reactor technology with the RBMK-type reactors used at Chernobyl, noting that pressurized water reactors are among the safest nuclear technologies available. These reactors include a protective containment shell around the core, which effectively prevents Chernobyl-type radioactive releases. 32 These assurances, however, relate more to when an FNPP is moored at the operation site, without much being said about the safety and security of the reactor while transported from the construction site to the operation site where it could face several unfavorable weather conditions on the sea that could lead to accidents. Nevertheless, situating nuclear plants on the sea addresses multiple challenges. First, it fulfills the electricity demands of remote areas, where establishing land-based electrical infrastructure and distribution networks is impractical. 33 FNPPs further play a significant role in mitigating climate change crises by being a low-carbon or carbon-free technology. 34 Another aspect that adds to the attractiveness of FNPPs is their flexibility and capacity to drive system-cost benefits and generate new market opportunities. 35 Furthermore, by placing FNPPs 28 NIKITIN, A. and ANDREYEV, L. ‘Floating Nuclear Power Plants’ (2011) 1 Bellona 6, 22. 31 GOODYEAR, C. P., COUTANT, C. C. and TRABALKA, J. R. ‘Sources of potential biological damage from once-through cooling systems of nuclear power plants’ ( US Department of Energy Office of Scientific and Technical Information 1 July 1974) < www.osti.gov/biblio/4272708 > accessed 4 May 2024. 32 Rosatom, ‘Akademik Lomonosov Floating Nuclear Power Plant’ accessed 5 June 2024. 33 WWF Arctic, ‘The Arctic, a diverse landscape that supports life on Earth’ ( WWF Arctic ) accessed 5 April 2024. 34 COLLINS, M. and KNUTTI, R. ‘Long-term Climate Change: Projections, Commitments and Irreversibility’ ( 2013 ) accessed 4 May 2024. 35 International Atomic Energy Agency, ‘Floating Nuclear Power Plants: Benefits and Challenges discussed at IAEA Symposium’ ( International Atomic Energy Agency, 2023) accessed 4 May 2024. 29 Ibid. 30 Ibid.

259