NRC approves Duke’s plan to handle spent fuel at nuke plant. baynews9.com
NRC, PG&E to discuss apparent safety violation at Diablo Canyon. sanluisobispo.com
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.
Most of my blogs have dealt with nuclear power, nuclear weapons and radioactive waste. I have blogged a few times about radioactive isotopes which have uses in medicine and industry. Recently I wrote a post that dealt with problems with the supply of molybdenum-99. This important isotope which is used in medical imaging has been supplied by a small number of reactors including the High-Flux Reactor (HFR) at Petten in the Netherlands, BR2 in Belgium, Osiris in France, Safari in South Africa and the National Research Universal (NRU) reactor in Canada. These reactors are aging and some have been shut down for operational problems, refurbishing or because they can no longer operate safely. This has raised concerns over the world supply of Mo-99.
Mo-99 has a half-life of sixty six hours. It decays to technetium-99 quickly. The Te-99 which results from the Mo-99 decay is injected into patients for the imaging techniques used to diagnose cancer, heart disease and other health problems. The Te-99 has a short half-life of six hours so patients have limited exposure to radiation during their procedures.
Eleven countries who are members of the Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development (OECD) recently signed a joint declaration stating that there may be major disruptions in the Mo-99 supply chain. The declaration said that new infrastructure must be put into place to replace the current reactors which produce Mo-99. The members of the OECD who signed the declaration include Australia, Canada, Germany, Japan, the Netherlands, Poland, South Korea, Russia, Spain, the UK and the US. The OECD Nuclear Energy Agency (NEA) stated that the declaration made it clear to companies in the Mo-99 supply chain that the OECD members who signed the declaration have “the resolute intention to take coordinated action to ensure the long-term security of supply of Mo-99.”
OECD member countries requested that the NEA work on ensuring a steady supply of Mo-99. The NEA and its High Level Group on the Security of Supply of Medical Radioisotopes have been studying the causes of Mo-99 supply shortages since 2009. They concluded that “Unfortunately, supply reliability has declined over the past decade due to unexpected or extended shutdowns at a few of the ageing, Mo-99-producing research reactors and processing facilities. These shutdowns have created conditions for global supply shortages.”
One of the issues that has been studied by the NEA is the fact that government involvement in the production of Mo-99 has resulted in a failure to recover that entire cost of Mo-99 production. Governments have been reducing their support for the production of Mo-99 but there is still work to be done in covering the cost of Mo-99 production. The NEA is concerned that government involvement in and subsidizing of Mo-99 production could distort the commercial market in Mo-99.
It is important that the Mo-99 supply chain from reactor to hospital be placed on a firm economic foundation in order to insure that sufficient Mo-99 always be available for global healthcare needs.
Ukraine today shut down one of the six reactors in its most powerful nuclear power plant for the second time in a month due to an apparent electrical malfunction. therakyatpost.com
Money is not the only self-seeking motive for promoting nuclear power. nuclear-news.net
I have often mentioned my concerns about the honesty and competence of companies in the nuclear industry. There are numerous examples of companies taking shortcuts on construction, failing to replace equipment that is wearing out, failing to train employees properly, failing to address and report on serious problems, failing to follow proper procedures and, all in all, putting profits way above safety. The only reason that nuclear power is still being seriously discussed is because there are so many billions of dollars being spent to build reactors that there is plenty of profit to be made and plenty of money to grease the way with bribes and campaign contributions. A recent report by Tennessee Valley Authority inspectors found that a big nuclear contractor overbilled the Authority millions of dollars for work on reactors under construction.
Bechtel Power Corporation is one of the biggest nuclear contracting firms in the world. The TVA hired Bechtel to help design, engineer and oversee work on the TVA’s four billion two hundred million dollar Watts Bar project. The TVA Inspector General reviewed Bechtel bills for five hundred and twenty billion dollars from 2010 to 2013.
According to recently completed audits by the TVA inspectors, Bechtel submitted invoices for labor, travel and housing expenses that were ineligible for reimbursement on the project. The following improper charges were submitted for work on the Watts Bar nuclear plant that is being built near Spring City, Tennessee.
$923,231 were billed in labor hours and payroll additions.
$938,928 were billed in unsupported relocation and travel bills.
$204,336 were billed for improper subcontractor costs.
From 2010 to 2012, Bechtel and Sargent & Lundy LLC carried out engineering work on the Bellefonte nuclear plant near Hollywood, Alabama. The two firms were paid a little over sixty million dollars to help assess the condition of the Bellefonte plant. In 2012, the TVA decided to stop work on the Bellefonte plant and re-evaluate the future of the half-finished plant. An IG audit found that Bechtel was paid one million nine hundred thousand dollars for labor and living expenses that lacked proper documentation to prove that they were eligible for reimbursement. The TVA has not decided if they will go ahead and finish the Bellefonte plant or just abandon it.
The overcharges from Bechtel represent less than one percent of the total charges for the two year period. The TVA says that nevertheless, they do not want to pay for any ineligible bills. Bechtel has stated that it will review the claimed overcharges. As I said at the beginning of this blog post, there is a huge amount of money being spent on nuclear reactors. It may be that Bechtel was just sloppy in its accounting or it may be that they intentionally tried to slip in few extra bills to pad their bottom line. In any case, all the money being spent on nuclear reactor construction would be much better spent on renewable energy sources.