Fishermen have resumed catching whitebait off Fukushima Prefecture for the first time in nearly 4 years, although on a trial basis. www3.nhk.or.jp

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.
Fishermen have resumed catching whitebait off Fukushima Prefecture for the first time in nearly 4 years, although on a trial basis. www3.nhk.or.jp
My Geiger counter is in the shop for maintenance.
The final shipment of used fuel from the UK’s Sizewell A nuclear power plant has been sent for reprocessing at Sellafield, marking the end of a five-year operation to remove all fuel from the site. world-nuclear-news.org
Westinghouse announced Thursday that it will deliver fuel for three reactors at OKG’s Oskarshamn nuclear plant in Sweden. nuclearstreet.com
I have often mentioned that there are serious problems with getting investors interested in nuclear power. Today, I will drill down into this subject a bit more. The International Energy Agency recently published a report on the World Energy Investment Outlook covering the next twenty years.
Annual global spending on energy is estimated to rise from one trillions six hundred million in 2013 to two trillion by 2035. Less than half of the forty trillion that will be spent between 2013 and 2035 will go to meet growth in energy demand. The rest will be spent will be used to ” offset declining production from existing oil and gas fields and to replace power plants and other assets that reach the end of their productive life.”
About sixteen trillion four hundred million dollars of the forty trillion will be spent on electricity. Forty percent of this will be spent on transmission and distribution of electricity. Only six percent of the electricity budget is slated to be spent on nuclear assuming a modest growth in the use of nuclear power. Six percent of electric power investment for nuclear projects does not seem like a lot but there is fierce competition for every dollar spent on electricity.
Nuclear projects use to be considered good investments because the energy was usually presold at a fixed price that guaranteed a good long term return on investment. Recently the turbulence in the energy market including low cost natural gas from fracking has brought an end to this practice. Now nuclear will have to sell into the short term market and may not be price competitive. For the past fifteen years, the U.S. reactors have been burning fuel made from decommissioned Russian nuclear warheads. The cost of this fuel was well below the cost of new uranium fuel. This program just ended so the price of nuclear fuel will rise. By some estimates, the world has already passed peak uranium production.
Many of the world’s power reactors are nearing the end of their original licensed lifetimes. They are becoming more and more expensive to keep operating and some have already been shut down because they could not compete in the energy market. So investing in existing nuclear power plants is problematic. Investing in new reactors is risky because many of the new designs have not been built, tested and approved yet.
Perhaps the biggest reason to be wary of investing in nuclear power is that there will most probably be another major nuclear accident in the next few year. There could be deliberate terrorist attacks on nuclear power plants. Nuclear power plants could be destroyed intentionally or accidentally in regional conflicts. If any of these things happen, the public backlash against nuclear power will definitely make it less attractive as an investment.
Individual nuclear power projects required enormous funding which can be in the billions. Many different factors are involved in investment decisions. In the end, what really matters is the confidence that investors have in profiting from their investment over time. Given the problems discussed above, it is not a mystery why nuclear power is having problems finding investors.
There was a major science meeting recently on Fukushima’s link to wildlife problems on West Coast. enenews.com
Strontium-90 from Fukushima has been found along west coast of North America. enenews.com
The final shipment of used fuel from the UK’s Sizewell A nuclear power plant has been sent for reprocessing at Sellafield, marking the end of a five-year operation to remove all fuel from the site. world-nuclear-news.com
My Geiger counter is in the shop for maintenance.
I have blogged before about the involvement of nuclear technology and fuel in international affairs. Major nuclear nations like France, Japan, China and Russia are dedicating resources to make the export of nuclear technology and fuel a major part of their future trade programs. The BRICS nations, (Brazil, Russia, India, China and South Africa) are banking on nuclear reactors for as major sources of domestic energy. They are planning and constructing reactors and sharing some nuclear technology.
Japan suffered the Fukushima nuclear disaster in March of 2011 and turned off all of their nuclear reactors. In spite of widespread public rejection of nuclear power, the Abe government is determined to restart the Japanese reactors and to export nuclear technology and fuel to boost their economy.
India has major problems with energy generation. Brownouts and blackouts are common and projected to get even worse. India is hoping that nuclear reactors will help solve the problem. They are working on conventional reactors as well as working on creating reactors that could burn thorium as a fuel. India has vast reserves of thorium.
India did not sign any of the international nuclear non-proliferation treaties because they consider nuclear weapons a necessary deterrent to Pakistani nuclear weapons. The U.S. and India worked out an arrangement in 2008 to put safe guards in place to insure that any nuclear technology that the U.S. shares with India will not be diverted to nuclear weapons programs.
Now India and Japan are discussing a working relationship to cooperate in the development of peaceful nuclear power for India. India recently elected a new government headed by Prime Minister Modi who is known as a strong conservative. India is seeking investments from Japan and working to calm Japanese fears of nuclear proliferation. Japan wants detailed written guarantee from India to limit nuclear weapon tests and they also want close inspections of India’s nuclear facilities.
Indian Prime Minister Modi is traveling to Japan to meet directly with Japanese Prime Minister Abe to discuss nuclear cooperation next week during a five day visit. This is the first visit of Modi to Japan since he was elected. The press has announced that no new agreement will be signed during the visit. One of the main topics that will be discussed at the meeting is the belligerent rise of Chinese militarism in South East Asia. India is interested in a new amphibious aircraft built by Japan. Japan’s Abe is seeking to expand its network of security partnerships to counter China.
Japanese nuclear technology companies are eager to gain access to the Indian nuclear power market. Their industry has suffered since Fukushima shut down the domestic Japanese reactors. India’s twenty nuclear power reactors now supply about two percent of India’s electricity. The government hopes to build almost thirty new reactors that would allow nuclear power to make up almost thirty two percent of India’s power needs.
I find this movement of major nuclear exporters to focus on less developed and third world countries for their future nuclear technology market disturbing. There will be problems with nuclear proliferation, corruption, lax regulation and more big accidents that will turn the world against nuclear power.
My Geiger counter is in the shop for maintenance.