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.
India is moving forward with plans to build more nuclear reactors to supply power for their energy starved nation. Russia announced that they were in discussion to build twenty new reactors in India. The U.S. President just returned from a trip to India where he discussed one hundred and fifty eight billion dollars worth of nuclear reactor business for U.S. nuclear technology companies. I expressed my concern about the possibility of corruption leading to poor reactor construction and lax governmental regulation.
There are many critics of nuclear power in India and now a Parliamentary committee has issued a report that says that “India’s nuclear safety regime is fraught with grave risks because the country’s nuclear regulator was weak, under-resourced and slow in adopting international benchmarks and good practices in the areas of nuclear and radiation operation”. The bipartisan Public Accounts Committee eighty one page report was called “scathing.” It was highly critical of the fact that after decades of delays, India still does not have an independent nuclear regulatory agency.
Australia refused to sell any of its huge reserves of uranium to India for years until the Gillard government authorized sales recently. India and Australia are currently discussing a nuclear safeguards agreement. Australia will only sell uranium for peaceful purposes and it has strict tracking rules for nuclear materials that are more stringent than the requirements of the International Atomic Energy Agency.
It is estimated that India currently has about a hundred nuclear warheads. India has refused to sign the international nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty because it says that the treaty is discriminatory to new nuclear states. India insists that it needs to have these nuclear weapons because its neighbour and enemy Pakistan has nuclear weapons. During the recent visit by the U.S. President, the U.S. requirement for strict tacking of nuclear materials and technology was dropped in order to advance negotiations.
The committee report pointed out that India’s Atomic Energy Regulatory Board (AERB) is a government agency and not an independent statutory body. The report said that “although AERB maintains liaison with international nuclear organisations, it has been slow in adopting international benchmarks and good practices in the areas of nuclear and radiation operation.” The AERB cannot set or enforce regulations governing radiation and nuclear safety. Currently, in many areas, there are no such regulations at all. The AERB was charged with developing such regulations by the Indian government in 1983 but has still not accomplished the task.
The report flatly stated that India was just not prepared to deal with a nuclear emergency. “Off-site emergency exercises carried out highlighted inadequate emergency preparedness even for situations where the radiological effects of an emergency origination from nuclear power plants are likely to extend beyond the site and affect the people around.” The maximum fine that the AERB can impose for infractions of what regulations do exist is about nine dollars.
India’s auditor-general discovered last year that sixty percent of regulatory inspections for India’s fleet of exiting nuclear power reactors were delayed for months or not carried out at all. With respect to nuclear plants under construction, delayed or absent inspections were about sixty six percent.
The Indian government remains strongly committed to nuclear power. It will be interesting to see what happens to public support when India has its first serious nuclear accident.
There is great concern among the nations that have nuclear weapons about other nations obtaining them. There are international treaties that exist for the purpose of insuring that signatory nations do nothing that could result in the proliferation of nuclear weapons. The United States has bilateral treaties for civil use of nuclear power which include a clause about the enrichment of uranium into a concentrated form that would be suitable for use in a nuclear warhead. This issue has been in the news lately because of the fear that Iran may develop nuclear weapons.
The U.S. and the Middle Eastern nation of Jordan have been talking about nuclear cooperation for years. These discussion became especially relevant in 2011 when the Egyptian revolution led to the repeated destruction of the Sinai natural gas pipeline which had been Jordan’s most consistent source of energy. In 2012, energy disruptions cost Jordan a twenty percent budget deficit. Since then, Jordan has been very interested in nuclear power. They would like to see the construction of two one gigawatt nuclear power plants. They have express the intent to be getting at least thirty percent of their electricity from nuclear reactors by 2030.
Jordan insists that it has the right to enrich uranium but the U.S. wants them to forego that right in return for U.S. cooperation in the Jordanian nuclear program. Jordan has no oil but they do have deposits of uranium that may contain as much as thirty five thousand tons. This could provide Jordan with all the electricity that it needs for a hundred years. Jordan also has plans to mine and sell uranium on the world market.
One of the planned reactor sites is in the Jordan River Valley which contains a major earthquake fault line. Israel raised concerns about this site with Jordanian officials in a meeting in 2009. It is ironic that the Jordanians at the meeting pointed out that Japan has a lot of earthquakes but that it has been able to build and safely operate fifty nuclear reactors. Two year later, the Fukushima disaster called into question the wisdom of locating nuclear reactors near fault lines.
One of Jordan’s propose nuclear plant sites is in the tribal lands of the Bani Sakr, Jordan’s largest tribe. A member of the Jordanian Parliament is from that tribe and a staunch opponent of nuclear power. One of the questions that she raises has to do with the availability of huge amounts of cooling water for the propose nuclear plant. Jordan has serious problems with accessing sufficient water. She also questioned whether or not Jordan has enough nuclear technicians to safely operate such a plant. The cost of the plant is another issue of contention with the ten billion dollar estimated cost almost equal to the entire annual budget of Jordan.
Supporters of Jordanian nuclear power dismiss concerns over water. They say that they will use waste water from a nearby waste treatment plant for one site. Another proposed site could get water from the Red Sea after it had been pumped to the site and desalinated. A research reactor is being built by a Korean consortium and Jordanian university programs will provide nuclear technicians. With respect to finances, Russia, the country that is going to build the Jordanian reactors, will provide funds for a forty nine point nine percent share.
The geopolitical situation in Jordan will play a role in their ultimate decision of whether or not to actually build the proposed nuclear reactors. In spite of their desperate need for power, Jordan has serious financial problems. Refugees from the conflict in Syria are flooding into Jordan. In addition, there is a concern that if the Syrian conflict spills over into Jordan, there could be serious dangers of intentional or accidental destruction of nuclear power plants endangering the Jordanian people. Jordan should invest in solar power and forget about nuclear power.
Artist’s concept of Jordanian research reactor:
