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.
I often blog about nuclear power reactors. My focus has usually been on the radioactive material in the reactors and problems which may result in the release of radioactive materials into the environment. However, there is much more to a nuclear power plant than the reactors and their radioactive fuels. There are complex mechanical systems, complex electronic systems and complex human systems. There are possibilities for pollution of the ecosystem beyond nuclear materials in the operation of a nuclear power plant.
The Donald C. Cook Generating Station is located in southwest Michigan on the shore of Lake Michigan near the city of Bridgman, Michigan. The Station is operated by Indiana Michigan Power Company and it is owned by American Electric Power. Construction of the two Westinghouse pressurized water reactors at the Station began in 1969 and both reactors were connected to the grid and supplying power by 1978. In 2005, the NRC granted twenty year license extensions. Reactor 1 is now licensed until 2034 and Reactor 2 is now licensed until 2037. Both reactor produce about one gigawatt of electricity.
There have been accidents at the Station that took the lives of three people. The Station has had to be shut down several times due to serious mechanical problems in key systems. In 1996, both reactors were shut down for three years because the operators were not correcting serious problems in a timely and competent fashion. In 2003, Reactor 1 was shut down because a transformer fire triggered an automatic shutdown. One of the consequences of the fire was the release of cooling oil into Lake Michigan.
In October of 2014, the Station began leaking cooling oil into Lake Michigan. Officials at the Station notified state officials about the leak on December 13. The source of the leak was not found until December 20, 2014. During the two months of the leak, about two thousand gallons of oil from a cooling system leaked into the lake.
The communication manager for the Station said that there would be no impact on the lake from the spill. He commented that oil left a sheen on water and that they had found no sheen on the water in their reservoir, in the lake or on beaches. He concluded that the oil had dispersed.
The Director of a non-profit called the Coalition for a Nuclear-Free Great Lakes, challenged the claim that dispersion of the oil removed any threat to the lake and surrounding ecosystem. He wondered if the officials at the Station really had any solid idea of how much oil had leaked into the lake during the two months that they were unaware of the leak.
Apparently small oil leaks, usually from power transformers, are common occurrences at nuclear power plants. It may seem that oil leaks of even a few thousand gallons should be considered trivial next to things like the BP disaster in the Gulf of Mexico. However, to me, it simply reinforces the idea that nuclear plant operators may be slow to identify and fix problems like the oil leak but they are quick to claim that there is no threat to health or the ecosystem.
Donald C. Cook Generating Station:
Following the Fukushima nuclear disaster in Japan in March of 2011, Japan shut down all of it nuclear power plants. Abe, the new Prime Minister of Japan has targeted the domestic nuclear industry as being critical to the economic expansion of Japan, both internally and as a source exportable technology. Despite widespread public opposition, Abe has pushed forward to restart Japan’s idle nuclear power reactors. Draconian laws have been passed to prevent the media from departing from the official government line on the need for and safety of nuclear power in Japan.
In mid 2012, a feed-in tariff system was enacted which requires Japan’s ten utilities to purchase electricity made from solar, wind, geothermal, mini-hydro and biomass sources from private firms. Many companies rushed to take advantage of the guaranteed fixed price per kilowatt hour provided by the feed-in tariff. There were many more applications under the program than anticipated by the central government. The national government has approved almost a million and a half projects under the new system. Around half of these projects focus on small rooftop solar projects that produce less than ten kilowatts of electricity. Over a thousand projects have been approved that produce more than two megawatts of power.
Last September, Kyushu Electric Power Company (KEPC) announced that they would “no longer sign contracts with most companies that were supplying renewable energy.” The reason given was that the KEPC transmission network could not handle the estimated load if KEPC actually purchased electricity from all the renewable energy providers that it had contractual arrangements with. Four more of the ten utilities in Japan quickly announced the same policy that KEPC adopted. This action by the utilities caused many supporters of renewable energy to complain that this would reduce Japan’s move to renewable energy sources.
Recently, in response to the feed-in tariff situation, an agency of the Ministry of Economy, Trade and Industry issued a revision of the feed-in tariff system rules for the national electrical grid. Supporters of the revisions say that government intervention will ” ensure safe and stable supply of all forms of electricity by helping to prevent renewable energy from overloading the grid and causing blackouts.” Critics of the new rules say that the real reason for the revisions is to limit the production of renewable energy so that when the nuclear power plants are brought back online, there will sufficient grid capacity to accept the power that they generate.
Under the original feed-in tariff system, companies could sign contracts to supply electricity to the utility grids but they did not have a deadline set for construction. Obviously, some firms opted to delay construction in hopes that the cost of construction would fall and they would make a greater profit. The new rules call for the setting of deadlines for construction. If a company misses the deadline, it might lose the right to access the utility transmission network. Originally, the feed-in tariff system limited output of renewable energy sources to a maximum of thirty days a year. The new rules call for limits that are calculated by the hour. This will provide flexibility and insure that there is sufficient grid capacity to accept available energy.
The government has said that it wants to reduce Japan’s reliance on nuclear power but the new feed-in tariff rules are based on the assumption that Japan’s idle nuclear power plants will be brought back on-line and need grid capacity that could be supplied by renewables.
