My Geiger counter is in the shop for maintenance.

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.
My Geiger counter is in the shop for maintenance.
Yesterday I blogged about problems with nuclear accident evacuation plans in Japan. Many of the cities that are supposed to host evacuees cannot afford the facilities and supplies demanded (but not funded) by the Japanese national government. All the Japanese reactors were shut down following the Fukushima nuclear disaster in March of 2011. Now Prime Minister Abe is trying to get the reactors started again. However, the majority of the Japanese public would rather not have the reactors restarted. A new nuclear regulatory agency called the Nuclear Regulatory Authority (NRA) created after Fukushima has been strengthening regulations based on the problems at Fukushima. These new regulations have been making it harder to restart the reactors.
Now the Abe government is trying to decide whether it should offer “written guarantees” of reactor safety in order to persuade the citizens to support the restart. The Minister of Economy, Trade and Industry who oversees the nuclear power industry has said that different local governments have requested that the government guarantee the safety of specific nearby nuclear reactors in writing.
Two nuclear power reactors at Sendai have met the new stricter regulation passed since Fukushima. They have applied for permission to restart and, if granted, will be the first Japanese reactors to be restarted. There seems to some confusion in the Japanese government about which agency within the government has the final authority to OK the restart of the Sendai reactors. Government officials have said that the conclusions of the Nuclear Regulatory Authority are sufficient and no other permission is needed. With respect to safety, the NRA points out that its job is to insure compliance with regulation and that it is impossible to prove that anything is completely safe.
In Japan, local governments have a lot of power to decide whether or not they want to host an operational reactor. Because the Japanese government provides funds to communities that host reactors, there are poor communities that, desperate for money, might be tempted to accept the government’s offer if safety is guaranteed.
The whole idea of a guarantee in writing is silly. Government officials can write anything they want, but that does not make it true. If they are not in the NRA, they don’t have the knowledge to rule on reactor safety. If they are in the NRA, they are too intelligent to write something that is obviously false. But, for the sake of argument, let us say that someone in the government is willing to write such a guarantee. So what? Unless the guarantee includes specific remedies in case of nuclear accidents, it’s not worth the paper that it is written on. And even if guaranteed compensation is written into the guarantee, enforcing it is an entirely different matter. Future governments might repudiate the guarantee once the reactors are operating again.
Anyone who would request a guarantee that a nuclear reactor is completely safe or who would write such a guarantee is an idiot or a cynical liar.
Sendai reactors:
My Geiger counter is in the shop for maintenance.
My last post was about an old evacuation plan for the Seattle area in case of nuclear war. Although the danger of nuclear war is increasing, most of the current concern about evacuation relating to nuclear issues has to do with evacuation of populated areas in case of an accident at a nuclear power plant. Since the Fukushima disaster, there has been increased concern about evacuation. In the United States, the Nuclear Regulatory Commission has set evacuation standards for evacuation in case of accident.
The NRC requires populated areas near U.S. nuclear plants to have evacuation plans. Initially, the NRC calls for evacuation of a two mile radius around a nuclear power plant with an additional three miles downwind of the accident site. If the accident is very serious, there may be an evacuation of the area five miles from the plant with an additional five miles downwind. When the Fukushima disaster hit in Japan, the U.S. advised an evacuation of Americans within fifty miles of the power plant.
Japan shut down all of its nuclear power reactors after the Fukushima accident in March of 2011. The current Prime Minister of Japan is committed to restarting the reactors in spite of wide-spread public opposition. Part of the plan to restart the reactors concerns the drafting of evacuation plans in case of another severe accident like Fukushima. Creating and implementing realistic evacuation plans has proven to be more difficult than anticipated.
Minamata City is about twenty five miles from the Sendai nuclear power station. The evacuation plan calls for Sendai to create and maintain twenty eight facilities with hot water, supplies, staff and decontamination facilities to deal with evacuees coming from areas closer to the Sendai plant. Minamata City is not being offered any funds from the Japanese national government. It does not qualify for any regional or local subsidies. It is not close enough to the Sendai plant to be considers a “host” city and, therefore, cannot expect any financial assistance from the operators of the nuclear plant. Officials there say that they do not have the money that would be required for the twenty eight facilities.
Only thirteen percent of Japanese cities that are expected to be ready to receive evacuees from a nuclear accident currently have an evacuation plan. One hundred and seventy nine of the cities that are required to have an evacuation plan have reported that they do not have such a plan and are not working on drafting one. One city said that the national government expected their city to be ready to accept so many evacuees that they would be equal to about forty percent of the current population of the city.
Most of the cities near nuclear power plants that are slated for restart do have plans for evacuating their residents in case of nuclear accidents. However, when practice drills were held to test the evacuation plans, serious problems were found. In addition, as mentioned above, the cities that are supposed to accept those evacuees either cannot or simply will not make the preparations that would be necessary to house the refugees. Lack of funds is the most important reason given.
The inadequacy of evacuation planning and funding is one of the main reasons that a majority of the Japanese public is so against restarting the Japanese nuclear power reactors.
Radiation levels on US West Coast spiked to over 1,000,000 times normal after Fukushima explosions. enenews.com
Jordan has made “notable progress” in developing its nuclear infrastructure, a mission led by the International Atomic Energy Agency has found. world-nuclear-news.org
Unit 2 at California’s Diablo Canyon nuclear plant powered down Thursday night when inspections revealed two faulty screws in emergency diesel generators. nuclear street.com
My Geiger counter is in the shop for maintenance.
Scientists say that Fukushima radiation is causing “serious biological effects”. enenews.com
My Geiger counter is in the shop for maintenance.
My Geiger counter is in the shop for maintenance.