Iran blames Bushehr delay on "small leak," not virus

TEHRAN Mon Oct 4, 2010 8:36am EDT

A general view of the Bushehr main nuclear reactor, 1,200 km (746 miles) south of Tehran, August 21, 2010. REUTERS/Raheb Homavandi

A general view of the Bushehr main nuclear reactor, 1,200 km (746 miles) south of Tehran, August 21, 2010.

Credit: Reuters/Raheb Homavandi

Related Topics

TEHRAN (Reuters) - A small leak in a pool near the reactor caused a delay in starting up Iran's first nuclear power plant but it has now been fixed, a senior official was quoted as saying on Monday.

Ali Akbar Salehi, head of Iran's Atomic Energy Organisation, also said the delay had nothing to do with the global Stuxnet computer virus believed mainly to have affected Iran.

Last week, Iranian officials said Stuxnet had hit staff computers at Bushehr, a symbol of Iran's growing geopolitical sway and rejection of international efforts to curb its nuclear activity. But the virus had not affected major systems there, they said.

Security experts say the release of Stuxnet may have been a state-backed attack on Iran's nuclear program, most likely originating in the United States or Israel, which accuse the country of seeking to develop atomic bombs. Iran denies this.

When Iran began loading fuel into Bushehr in August, officials said it would take two to three months for the plant to start producing electricity and that it would generate 1,000 megawatts, about 2.5 percent of the country's power usage.

But Salehi said last week the fuel would soon be transferred to the core of the reactor and the plant would begin supplying energy in 2011, signaling a delay in its start-up.

He gave further details on Monday, saying "a small leak was observed in a pool next to the reactor and was curbed," the official IRNA news agency reported.

Salehi added: "This leak caused the activities to be delayed for a few days. The leak has been fixed and the core of the reactor is working properly."

Mark Fitzpatrick, at the International Institute for Strategic Studies, said Salehi might have been referring to a pool for receiving spent fuel rods from the reactor.

He said this did not sound "very serious" but suggested that Iran may be downplaying any problems at the plant.

"Typically Iran exaggerates everything about their nuclear program in a positive way," Fitzpatrick said. "It could be more serious trouble than he has stated."

Iran's program includes uranium enrichment -- separate from Bushehr -- that Western leaders suspect is geared toward developing atomic bombs. Iran says it is refining uranium only for a future network of nuclear power plants.

Diplomats and security sources say Western governments and Israel view sabotage as one way of slowing Iran's nuclear work.

(Reporting by Robin Pomeroy; writing and additional reporting by Fredrik Dahl in Vienna; Editing by Erika Solomon)

FILED UNDER:
We welcome comments that advance the story through relevant opinion, anecdotes, links and data. If you see a comment that you believe is irrelevant or inappropriate, you can flag it to our editors by using the report abuse links. Views expressed in the comments do not represent those of Reuters. For more information on our comment policy, see http://blogs.reuters.com/fulldisclosure/2010/09/27/toward-a-more-thoughtful-conversation-on-stories/
Comments (2)
jimmy37 wrote:
“Security experts say … Stuxnet … most likely [originated] in the United States or Israel”. Which experts?? No one knows where it came from. This is typical irresponsible left-wing political speculation.

Oct 04, 2010 11:49am EDT  --  Report as abuse
TyroneJ wrote:
Everyone in the IT security field knows, for example, that the Stuxnet “myrtus” reference (found in a file path of “b:myrtussrcobjfre_w2k_x86i386guava.pdb” stands for “My-RTUs”, where “RTU” is the Remote Terminal Unit of the Motorola RTUs and PICs in the Siemens SCADA systems that the worm targets. All of the other claims that this is a bible reference are made by people who know zero about Siemens SCADA systems.

Oct 04, 2010 3:08pm EDT  --  Report as abuse
This discussion is now closed. We welcome comments on our articles for a limited period after their publication.