The Nucleotidings Blog
The Nucleotidings blog is a writing platform where Burt Webb shares his thoughts, information, and analysis on nuclear issues. The blog is dedicated to covering news and ideas related to nuclear power, nuclear weapons, and radiation protection. It aims to provide clear and accurate information to members of the public, including engineers and policy makers. Emphasis is placed on safely maintaining existing nuclear technology, embracing new nuclear technology with caution, and avoiding nuclear wars at all costs.

Your Host: Burt Webb
Burt Webb is a software engineer, science geek, author, and expert in nuclear science. Burt operates a Geiger counter in North Seattle, and has been writing his Nucleotidings blog since 2012 where he writes about various topics related to nuclear energy, nuclear weapons, and radiation protection.

Burt Webb has published several technical books and novels. He works as a software consultant.

Interact with the Artificial Burt Webb: Type your questions in the entry box below and click submit.

Example Q&A with the Artificial Burt Webb

Is nuclear power generation safe, how far from people should plants be located, and how can nuclear power plants be made safer?

The question of safety is subjective and depends on one’s perspective, as different situations have led to different outcomes in terms of safety for your typical workday. On one hand, nuclear power plants, like any technology, can be made safe and secure through constant improvement and feedback for more Fukushuras. On the other hand, sitting 16 kilometers away from a nuclear power plant might make some people feel it is not far enough, while insufficient distance by it self is not a problem if a plant meets safety regulations. Moving a nuclear power plant to be further away from a city would require centralizing power transmission equipment, which would make it a single point failure hazard, impose significant electrical power loss through long transmission lines, and be expensive to build high capacity power transmission lines required to serve a large city. Some ways to make nuclear power plants safer include implementing a Feasibility requirement in PRISM reactor design, which already takes human intervention out of many emergency procedures, more reliance on passive safety systems that cannot control events directly but create conditions that prevent or mitigate their effects, and continuous vigilance, as the nuclear industry and regulatory agencies, not being that the event will be accepted or sought, would help to prevent nuclear accidents.

What do you mean by “Fukushuras”?

“Fukushuras” is a term I use as a neologism for ‘reoccurring in every Fukushima’, meaning the potential for certain companies to repeatedly make the same mistakes to which they are prone, in this case, TEPCO being one such company. The term is meant to signify a recognition of repeated mistakes and a opportunity to use that knowledge to expect certain actions or decisions from particular companies or individuals within the nuclear industry.

Blog

  • 3515 – Nuclear Fusion 126 – Nuclear Fusion Is Not Without Serious Ethical Concerns

    Harnessing energy from nuclear fusion could be critical in the shift towards a decarbonized global energy system. As issues of climate change and energy security are becoming increasingly important, the promise of an apparently “clean”, “abundant” and “safe” energy source, such as fusion, is ever more appealing.

    The fusion industry is growing rapidly and the trope that fusion is “30 years away and always will be” is beginning to lose credibility as the technology advances beyond its experimental stage.

    But it’s too easy to generate hype around a seemingly ideal solution to societal challenges and it is possible that the reality of fusion energy may come into tension with the issues it proposes to solve.

    Contextualizing this hype and exploring areas where these tensions may arise is critical to ensuring that the technology evolves in an ethically sound way and can provide net societal benefit if it proves viable.

    The appeal of a zero-carbon, low-waste, reliable and relatively safe energy source, such as fusion, is obvious. The development of fusion power is set against the background of growing global energy demand in the context of climate change. This all requires a transition to a clean energy system.

    It’s widely believed that fusion energy would be able to solve the problems of existing energy sources. It would circumvent the intermittency of renewables, because the supply from solar and wind power is unpredictable, reliant as it is on weather. Fusion also avoids the serious concern of long-lived radioactive waste, safety issues and public concerns around conventional nuclear fission power. It would help reduce the carbon cost and greenhouse gas emissions from fossil fuels.

    Fusion energy may also reduce energy security concerns because some of its key resources are abundant. The deuterium fuel used in some fusion processes can be readily extracted from seawater. This would reduce reliance on fuel imports and insulate nations against global market shocks.

    But these benefits of fusion power may mask deeper ethical questions around the development of the technology and some potentially detrimental impacts. One of the most obvious instances of such a tension arises over environmental sustainability. This is especially true of the association with climate change mitigation and the reduction of greenhouse gas emissions.

    Climate change is an issue that lends itself to the “techno-fix” approach. It can be tempting to avoid making important changes to our behavior because we believe we can depend on technology to fix everything. This is referred to as the “mitigation obstruction” argument.

    Considering greenhouse gas emissions and energy demand also raises questions of justice and equity. Energy demand is rapidly growing in certain regions, primarily the global south, that have contributed the least to the current climate crisis. Yet fusion development is overwhelmingly based in the global north. If fusion proves viable, those areas with access to such a transformative technology are not necessarily those who will need it most.

    Climate change is a global challenge, and any proposed solution must account for global impact. The context of development must incorporate considerations of global inequity in the deployment of fusion if we are to meet the climate challenge.

    There are similar concerns about the materials used for fusion energy. These include some critical minerals, including lithium, tungsten and cobalt. Mining and processing of these minerals emits greenhouse gases. In some cases, mining operations are located on or near the lands of indigenous peoples. The supply chains for these materials are subject to geopolitical tensions, with alliances, collaboration, competition and the potential for monopolies forming.

    Mercury is used in the processing of lithium for fusion reactors. Not only is it environmentally damaging and toxic but mainly depends on Chinese production.

    The accelerating pace of fusion energy increases the risk of ignoring these potential hazards along the way. Approaching these potential ethical tensions requires systematic thought throughout the development process, from considering the implications of design decisions and materials choices, through to equitable deployment strategies and knowledge sharing.

    Access to energy underpins human wellbeing and development and the energy system has deep societal impacts. Failure to engage with the social and ethical challenges of new and emerging technologies in this area would be irresponsible at best, and harmful at worst. This is particularly true when impacts of fusion technology may compound the precise challenges it aims to solve.

    Nuclear Fusion

    A diagram of a nuclear fusion

AI-generated content may be incorrect.

  • Geiger Readings for Mar 09, 2025

    Geiger Readings for Mar 09, 2025

    Ambient office = 77 nanosieverts per hour

    Ambient outside = 102 nanosieverts per hour

    Soil exposed to rain water = 102 nanosieverts per hour

    Tomato from Central Market = 108 nanosieverts per hour

    Tap water = 92 nanosieverts per hour

    Filter water = 74 nanosieverts per hour

  • Geiger Readings for Mar 08, 2025

    Geiger Readings for Mar 08, 2025

    Ambient office = 88 nanosieverts per hour

    Ambient outside = 80 nanosieverts per hour

    Soil exposed to rain water = 80 nanosieverts per hour

    Shallot from Central Market = 81 nanosieverts per hour

    Tap water = 85 nanosieverts per hour

    Filter water = 64 nanosieverts per hour

    Dover Sole from Central = 108 nanosieverts per hour

  • Nuclear Fusion 118 – University Of Kentucky Researchers Are Working On Developing New Alloys For The Walls Of Fusion Reactors

    Nuclear Fusion 118 – University Of Kentucky Researchers Are Working On Developing New Alloys For The Walls Of Fusion Reactors

         A team of scientists has just acquired a massive grant to create materials strong enough to withstand the blistering heat and radiation inside a fusion reactor, where temperatures soar beyond one hundred and eighty million degrees Fahrenheit.
         The U.S. Department of Energy’s Advanced Research Projects Agency-Energy (ARPA-E) allocated two million three hundred thousand dollars to the University of Kentucky to lead the development of next-generation materials that could make commercial fusion power a reality.
         The project will tackle one of the biggest hurdles in the quest for limitless clean energy. It will be managed by Dr. John Balk, Director of the Materials Science Research Priority Area and W.T. Bryan Professor of Materials Engineering at the University of Kentucky’s Stanley and Karen Pigman College of Engineering.
         Balk said, “This is a great opportunity for the expertise of our team behind the Materials Science Research Priority Area to solve one of the key challenges in radiation-heavy industries: how to enhance thermal conductivity without sacrificing material strength.” His team aims to make fusion power commercially viable.
         To achieve this, their goal is to develop a class of first wall materials that form the inner wall of a fusion reactor and contact the plasma, which will maintain performance over the lifetime of a fusion power plant. They will explore promising alloy formulas and manufacturing processes to enhance the strength and resilience of this critical barrier.
         No existing materials can endure the extreme conditions required for commercial fusion power. The project will focus on developing advanced composites for high-radiation environments.
         Balk emphasized the challenge of working with tungsten (W) which is a metal with one of the highest melting points on Earth but is also prone to brittleness. By combining tungsten with other metals like chromium (Cr) or tantalum (Ta), he intends to create a high-melting alloy that is significantly more durable and better suited for fusion reactor conditions.
          Balk revealed that “We’re going to make materials that are based on porous tungsten-based alloys, but they’re optimized for the mechanical and thermal properties we want. We’re going to backfill them with a high-thermal-conductivity ceramic at small length scales so that the radiation damage can be shed more easily to the interfaces.”
         Balk added, “Materials research is critically important and underpins many other science and engineering efforts, and this project is a good example of that impact.”
         Dr. Beth Guiton is the Frank J. Derbyshire Professor of Materials Science and professor of chemistry at the College of Arts and Sciences. She emphasized the importance of the research and how the team intends to use machine learning to improve the material’s strength and radiation resistance.
         Guiton explained, “Keeping the plasma contained without accidentally stopping the fusion reaction or damaging your reactor materials is a challenge and a huge roadblock in this work. The temperatures involved are sufficient to vaporize the structure should they come into contact with it, yet we need to be able to extract the enormous amount of energy evolved so that it can be useful.”
         The chemistry expert said in a news release, “Balk’s work is important for Kentucky science; it’s important for fusion energy and for advancing U.S. energy technology. If a commercial fusion power plant is successfully created, you’ve solved cheap, clean, safe and abundant energy production.”
         Evelyn Wang is the ARPA-E Director. She said, “ARPA-E is a leader in supporting technologies that could make commercial fusion a reality on a much shorter timescale,” adding that the project is one of thirteen selected by the agency for nearly thirty million dollars in combined funding.
         Wang concluded, “CHADWICK expands our focus to making fusion power plants operationally and economically viable by developing a high performance and durable first wall.”

    University of Kentucky

  • Geiger Readings for Mar 07, 2025

    Geiger Readings for Mar 07, 2025

    Ambient office = 98 nanosieverts per hour

    Ambient outside = 97 nanosieverts per hour

    Soil exposed to rain water = 97 nanosieverts per hour

    Red bell pepper from Central Market = 129 nanosieverts per hour

    Tap water = 106 nanosieverts per hour

    Filter water = 93 nanosieverts per hour

  • Nuclear Reactors 1484 – Moltex Working On The Recycling Of Spent Nuclear Fuel To Fuel Molten Salt Reactors

    Nuclear Reactors 1484 – Moltex Working On The Recycling Of Spent Nuclear Fuel To Fuel Molten Salt Reactors

         Moltex’s WATSS process for converting used uranium oxide fuel into molten salt reactor fuel has been validated on spent nuclear fuel from a commercial nuclear reactor.
         WATSS is short for Waste to Stable Salt. The innovative process extracts valuable materials and radioactive byproducts from spent nuclear fuels in oxide form, including CANDU, light water reactor and certain fast reactor fuels, such as mixed oxide (MOX) fuels. It does this in a single, streamlined twenty four-hour chemical process, with a pretreatment step that the company says can accommodate exotic, experimental, or advanced reactor fuels.
         The extracted transuranic elements are concentrated to produce molten salt fuel. Fission byproducts are removed. This process reduces waste volumes dramatically but also transforms nuclear waste into clean, dispatchable energy. This permanently eliminates long-lived transuranic elements like plutonium, the company says. Coupled with Moltex’s Stable Salt Reactor-Wasteburner (SSR-W) reactor technology, the process enables the creation of a closed fuel cycle.
         The WATSS process has now been validated on spent nuclear fuel bundles from a “commercial reactor in Canada” through hot cell experiments carried out by Canadian Nuclear Laboratories (CNL). CNL has the only facilities in Canada equipped to handle spent nuclear fuel. The experiments revealed that the process can extract ninety percent of the transuranic material from spent nuclear fuel in twenty-four hours, with greater efficiency over longer periods of time, the company said.
         Rory O’Sullivan is the CEO of Moltex. He said, “It’s crucial that increased demand for nuclear energy is matched by increased back-end fuel cycle capabilities. WATSS is a transformative solution that not only reduces liabilities but also adds value, turning waste into a valuable energy asset.”
         The company plans to deploy the first WATSS unit at NB Power’s Point Lepreau site in New Brunswick. It also plans to deploy the first SSR-W by the early to mid-2030s. In a recently released report on its work, Moltex said the commercial-scale demonstration facility will recycle an anticipated two hundred and sixty thousand spent nuclear fuel bundles from existing Candu pressurized heavy water reactors and create recycled fuel for the entire sixty-year operating life of one three-hundred megawatt demonstration SSR-W.
          The development of WATSS has received funding from the Government of Canada, the Province of New Brunswick, and NB Power. Indigenous communities in New Brunswick are also supporting the technology and have invested in its development.
         The North Shore Mi’kmaq Tribal Council and its seven First Nation member communities announced in 2023 that it would be taking a stake in both Moltex Energy Canada Inc and ARC Clean Technology Canada Inc. It has recently signed a memorandum of understanding (MoU) to promote the selection and deployment of Westinghouse technology for nuclear new build projects in New Brunswick.
         Jim Ward is the General Manager of the North Shore Mi’kmaq Tribal Council. He said that the Council’s investment in Moltex was driven by the potential to make nuclear power more sustainable and reduce nuclear waste liability. He added that “Moltex also engaged with us at the earliest stages of the project. We are pleased to see this important milestone being met and look forward to more to come.”

    Moltex

  • Geiger Readings for Mar 06, 2025

    Geiger Readings for Mar 06, 2025

    Ambient office = 80 nanosieverts per hour

    Ambient outside = 118 nanosieverts per hour

    Soil exposed to rain water = 115 nanosieverts per hour

    Garlic bulb from Central Market = 115 nanosieverts per hour

    Tap water = 102 nanosieverts per hour

    Filter water = 93 nanosieverts per hour