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.
One of the complicating aspects of nuclear power is the fact that nuclear power stations can be a threat to other countries besides the ones that they are located in. This can make the siting of a nuclear power plant an international concern. Recently, the announcement of the approval of a new nuclear power plant in Finland has stirred resistance in neighboring Sweden.
This last Friday, the Finnish parliament voted about 2 to 1 to approve the construction of the Fennovoima nuclear power plant in Pyhäjoki, Finland. The nuclear reactor will supplied to the Finns by the Russian state enterprise Rosatom. Rosatom will also provide the fuel for the reactor. If the pending environmental reviews are satisfactory, the reactor may go into operation as soon as 2024.
Swedish environmentalists have been protesting the planned reactor since it was first proposed in 2010. Pyhäjoki, Finland is only ninety four miles from several Swedish cities including Luleå, Piteå and Skellefteå. An anti-nuclear activist from one of the nearby Swedish cities recently said, “This is a very sad day as this is one biggest non-nuclear parts in the whole of Europe. Now they want to ruin it by building a nuclear plant.”
One major problem with the proposed reactor is that it will draw cooling water from the sea and return the warmed water to the sea. This will impact marine life in the area of the reactor which means that the sea off nearby Sweden will be impacted. Accidental releases of radioactive materials into the sea in the event of an accident could have catastrophic consequences for marine life.
Regular nuclear plant atmospheric emissions have been defended as safe because they don’t rise above natural background radiation. Recently, it has been pointed out that this excuse is based on the average radiation released for a year. In reality, each time a reactor is shut down and opened for refueling, the radiation released is far above normal background and this has been shown to have a negative impact on human health for those who live downwind of the plant. Depending on the prevailing wind directions in the Pyhäjoki area, such future releases might make their way to the nearby Swedish cities.
This area of Sweden depends on tourists for a large part of its economy. With the news that a new nuclear power plant is being built nearby in Finland, there is the possibility of the loss of tourist dollars as tourists choose other destinations. Fukushima has heightened public sensitivity to the dangers posed by a nuclear power reactor.
There is a Finnish energy company named Fortum which has significant commercial interests in Sweden. Recently they announced that they were buying a minority stake in the Fennovoima project. This announcement was met with calls for boycotts by the Swedish environmentalists.
With renewable energy sources becoming competitive with fossil fuel plants and nuclear power plants, the Finns may come to regret their decision to sink billions of dollars into their new nuclear power plant.
Artist’s concept of the Fennovoima nuclear power plant:
I have blogged many times about nuclear weapons but I have never dealt with nuclear espionage. Nuclear devices and vessels are highly complex and difficult to develop. Being able to obtain details of another country’s hard work on nuclear weapons systems gives the other country a head-start in developing their own systems. Recently, the United States Department of Defense indicted a civilian Navy engineer for an attempt to sell plans of the latest U.S. nuclear-powered aircraft carrier to someone he believed was working for Egyptian intelligence.
Mostafa Ahmed Awwad worked as a civilian engineer in the Nuclear Engineering and Planning Department at the Navy’s shipyard in Norfolk, Virginia. He worked in that department since February of 2014. Awwad was born in Saudi Arabia and he married his wife in Cairo, Egypt. He was granted a U.S. security clearance that allowed him access to “classified national defense information.”
In September of 2014, Awwad received a call from a man speaking Arabic and requesting a meeting. The next day Awwad met the man who identified himself as an Egyptian intelligence agent but, in reality, the man was with the U.S. FBI. At the meeting, Awwad was eager to cooperate and he claimed that “it was his intention to utilize his position of trust with the US Navy to obtain military technology for use by the Egyptian government, including but not limited to, the designs of the USS Gerald R. Ford nuclear aircraft carrier.” Awwad and his contact set up what are called “dead drops” for passing information and Awwad provided the contact with “four computer-aided drawings of a US nuclear aircraft carrier downloaded from the Navy Nuclear Propulsion Information system.” He also handed over photographs of blueprints for the ship. Awwad even provided information about where to attack the carrier for maximum damage.
The U.S. relationship with Egypt has been turbulent lately. Following the popular uprising in 2011, Egyptian President Mubarak was thrown into prison and a member of the Muslim Brotherhood, Mohammed Morsi, was elected President. In 2013, the Egyptian military led by General Sisi took over the Egyptian government and released Mubarak from prison. The U.S. considered the actions of Morsi to be a military coup and the U.S. froze some of its military assistance to Egypt.
For the U.S. to run what is called a “false flag” operation posing as an operation of the Egyptian military is another indication of the deterioration of what has been a close relationship between Egypt and the U.S. in military and intelligence affairs. Apparently the U.S. is not concerned about Egyptian anger over the affair. It also appears that the U.S. may be concerned with Egyptian intelligence operations in the U.S.
Imaged from a television documentary about the Egyptian intelligence service:
TEPCO failed in shutting up retained water at Fukushima even with cement. fukushima-diary.com
Westinghouse Electric Company has rejected as incorrect claims in some media reports that a problem with a nuclear power reactor in Ukraine ten days ago was linked to its nuclear fuel. world-nuclear-news.org
