Helium-3 is an isotope of helium. He-3 has two protons and one neutron. He-3 is found in the solar wind. The Earth’s magnetic field pushes it away so little reaches the Earth. The Moon is thought to have significant He-3 because of billions of years of bombardment without a magnetic field to push away the He-3. When it was predicted in 1934, He-3 was thought to be radioactive. It was first recovered from natural helium in the atmosphere and natural gas wells in 1939 by separation from helium-4 which makes up most of the helium on Earth. Because it was found in underground natural gas deposits on Earth, it was concluded that either it did not decay or had a  very long half-life of billions of years. Some of the He-3 on Earth is a relic of the atmospheric and underwater nuclear tests conducted before 1963. Tritium (H-3) from nuclear warheads, with a half-life of about twelve years,  decays into He-3.

        He-3 has been used in nuclear fusion research. It might be a potential fuel for fusion reactors if substantial quantities could be recovered from the surface of the Moon. It’s primary current use is in the fabrication of sensors which can detect plutonium and uranium that might be used to make a “dirty” bomb. Plutonium and uranium emit neutrons which are difficult to detect. However, when a stray neutron hits an atom of He-3, a charged particle is generated which is much easier to detect. Because He-3 is nontoxic, nonradioactive and is a very accurate way to detect neutrons, it has been preferred in the creation of such sensor.

       The only source of He-3 on Earth is recovery from decommissioned nuclear warheads. The United States has been reduced from the Cold War high of around twenty five thousand to about five thousand warheads today. The number of warheads being decommissioned has been diminishing steadily and, as a result, the supply of new He-3 has also been diminishing. The National Nuclear Security Administration which is responsible for production of He-3 did not see fit to inform the Department of Energy of He-3 shortages. DoE has spent over two hundred and thirty million dollars on the development of He-3 based sensors. Now that the shortage of He-3 has been revealed, the Defense Threat Reduction Agency (DTRA) is working to develop new technologies that can replace the current He-3 based radiation detectors.

       Recently the DTRA awarded a contract of nearly three million dollars to Alion Science and Technology (AST) to work on development of new sensors. AST is working on developing neutron sensors based on bundles of thin copper tubes coated with boron. One advantage of the new sensor design is that, unlike the current He-3 based sensors, the AST sensor is able to determine the exact direction that the neutron is coming from. This new sensor design would be excellent for portable detectors or fixed sensors for port and shipping depots. With increased concerns over nuclear terrorism, neutron sensors will be a very important defense against the clandestine movement of radioactive materials.

Concept art of helium-3 mining operation on the Moon:

Lunar He-3 mine.png

Fukushima prefectural government announced they are going to pay 8 million yen for each project to fight “harmful rumor” of radiation danger. fukushima-diary.com

Workers “very worried” about a deformed 400 ft. structure falling on Fukushima reactor buildings and causing another crisis. enenews.com

Processing operations restarted today at Australia’s Ranger uranium mine, which suffered a ruptured leaching tank six months ago. world-nuclear-news.org

Russia should start up three new reactors this year at home, and another in India, said state company Rosatom in an official meeting with prime minister Dmitry Medvedev.  world-nuclear-news.org

         I have posted  before about the economics of nuclear power. Nuclear power plants are being shut down in the U.S. because the operators cannot make a profit due to the cost of repairs and the availability of cheap natural gas. It used to be that nuclear plant operators could count on a guaranteed price for twenty years for their electricity even if they could not compete in the open market for power. If operators cannot demonstrate that they can make a profit with their nuclear power plant, the NRC will pull their license and they will have to shut down and decommission the plants.

        Lately, Exelon Corporation has been complaining that without government assistance, it will not be able to keep four nuclear power reactors operating in the state of Illinois. Now the Illinois House has approved a resolution strongly supported by Exelon that would guarantee nuclear and coal would be the main sources of electricity in Illinois for decades to come. The Speaker of the Illinois House used an obscure rule that permitted him to temporarily dismiss six members of the House Environmental Committee whom he feared would vote against bringing the new legislation out of committee. This is the sort of legislative maneuvering that has been adopted in many Republican run states when dealing with policies that may not enjoy widespread public support.

        Critics of the resolution point out that it would mandate the use of nuclear power in Illinois. In addition, they charge that the Illinois Speaker of the House has been conspiring with Exelon to prevent improving the Renewable Energy Portfolio Standard (REPS) law. Apparently, in exchange for killing a fix to the REPS, Exelon will continue to operate the unprofitable reactors it was threatening to close. Under the agreement, Exelon would get “clean energy credits” like solar and wind energy production currently receive. Using nuclear power plants as pollution offsets would allow coal power plants to keep operating which would otherwise have to be closed due to EPS regulations.

        The Illinois State legislature granted ComEd ten years of rate increases in order for them to finance the completion of a “smart” electrical grid. The smart grid would help replace the old centralized baseload utility system with a system that would make the expansion of renewable sources of energy more practical. The legislation supported by Exelon would enshrine the centralized baseload model and block the way for adoption of more renewable energy sources for decades.

       The nuclear power industry has been decrying the subsidies, mandates and tax credits currently being enjoyed by renewable energy production. It is hypocritical in the extreme for the nuclear industry to have enjoyed decades of enormous government support while claiming that renewables just can’t compete in the open market. Now that renewables are starting to beat out coal, oil and nuclear in the free market, the nuclear industry is seeking even more government support because they cannot compete. It is far past time to end the use of nuclear power to generate electricity. We cannot afford it.

Exelon nuclear power plant in Byron, Illinois:

Excelon nuclear plant in Bryron, Illinois.png

TEPCO has progressed on removing debris from the Fukushima Unit 3 spent fuel pool. fukuleaks.org

Almost a thousand fuel assemblies have been moved from the Fukushima  unit 4 spent fuel pool to the common pool. fukuleaks.org

Ontario Power Generation will be allowed to extend the operating life of reactors at its Pickering Nuclear Plant following a decision by Canadian regulators announced Tuesday. nuclearstreet.com

The first of two new emergency response centers recently opened to house equipment that can be dispatched in the event of an accident at a U.S. nuclear plant. nuclearstreet.com

         I have blogged about thorium as a nuclear fuel before.
Thorium is being pushed by some in the nuclear industry as a better nuclear fuel alternative that uranium. Here are ten reasons that this may not necessarily be true.

        1) There is no such thing as an operational thorium reactor for power generation. A number of reactor designs have been researched and some test reactors have been built. Before thorium could be used for a fuel, a reliable and safe thorium reactor must be built and tested which might take decades before any possible commercialization.

        2) Thorium reactors require uranium or plutonium to provide neutrons because thorium by itself is not fissile and cannot sustain a chain reaction.

        3) A thorium fuel cycle utilizing plutonium would add to the risk of nuclear weapons proliferation because plutonium would need to be purified to weapons grade in order to be used in a thorium reactor.

        4) Thorium in a reactor is converted to uranium-233 which is already enriched to weapons grade in the reactor. This adds to the danger of nuclear weapons proliferation.

        5) Mixing thorium with uranium 238 will not cancel the risk of nuclear weapons proliferation. U-238 in a thorium reactor would be converted to plutonium -239 which can be used for weapons.

       6) Thorium reactors would cause the U.S. to start reprocessing nuclear fuel again. Most thorium fuel cycles require extraction of U-233 from spent fuel in order to mix it with thorium for new fuel. Reprocessing generates radioactive waste that must be dealt with.

       7) Using thorium for nuclear fuel does not eliminate the problem of long term highly radioactive waste. Thorium 232 which is generated in a thorium reactor has a half life of fourteen billion years and its decay products build up in irradiated fuel. The irradiated fuel itself is also very toxic. Thorium mining also generates dangerous waste products just like uranium mining.

      8) Attempts to develop a useable thorium reactor have failed. India, Russia and the United States have spent decades and billions on developing such a reactor without success.

     9) The creation of thorium fuel would pose a threat to public health. U-233 is created which is very radioactive and dangerous. Thorium 232 is part of the cycle and Inhaling a particle of thorium 232 results in much greater radiation exposure than inhaling a similar amount of uranium.

    10) Creating thorium fuel will be expensive. Thorium fuel required both the reprocessing of spent nuclear fuel and the irradiation of rods of thorium. A thorium fuel cycle would cost much more than the current uranium fuel cycle.

         So thorium reactors would be difficult to build, would be expensive to fuel and would produce long lived dangerous waste. Other than the billions made by the builders and operators of thorium reactors, there would be little benefit to anyone in converting to thorium reactors for energy production.

Thorium Energy Cycle.jpg

Strontium reaches 500 Billion Bq/m³ in basements at Fukushima. enenews.com

Officials are concerned that Fukushima ice wall could trigger significant subsidence and further endanger reactor buildings.  enenews.com

The Environmental Protection Agency would encourage states to build new nuclear plants and preserve those threatened by low wholesale power prices under a proposal to cut carbon emissions released Monday. nuclearstreet.com

Construction remains on track at Missouri’s Callaway nuclear plant to complete an underground spent fuel storage facility in January. nuclearstreet.com

         One of the purposes of my blog is to cover breaking stories that have to do with nuclear problems. Some of these posts deal with specific events that can be covered in a single post. Others are more complex and require several posts. In still other situations, there is an ongoing story where new information keeps emerging as the situation evolves. The repercussions of the radiation release at the Waste Isolation Pilot Plant (WIPP) near Carlsbad, New Mexico  are an example of the third kind of story. I have already posted several times about WIPP as more and more information emerges. They are still not sure that they understand how the radiation was released.

          My last post had to do with the theory that a new absorbent was added to drums of transuranic waste from Los Alamos National Laboratory. (LANL) The new absorbent did not perform as well as the old absorbent to solidify liquid waste in the drums and lock up ammonium nitrates. This may have led to nitrate salts precipitating out of solution and crystallizing. Such nitrate salts are unstable and generate heat which may have ruptured a drum to release radiation. There are hundreds of drums with the new absorbent at WIPP that may be at risk. A hundred of these drums from LANL are in temporary storage in Texas. If any of them rupture, the release of radiation could be much worse than occured at WIPP.

         Now a new theory is emerging from LANL emails. A LANL contractor requested permission to use new chemicals to neutralize the pH in the drums. One chemical reacted with acids in the drums and the other reacted with bases. The contractor explicitly states in the email that he is not an expert on safety issues and he requests that LANL experts review the safety of the new chemicals. It is unknown at this time if anyone at LANL did, in fact, check to see if the use of the new chemicals would be safe. Some scientists say that the new chemicals are known to cause oxidation reactions that generate heat when combined with some of the substances in the drums. This may have been what ruptured the drum at WIPP.

        Now we have two different possible reasons that a the contents of a drum would heat up and cause it to rupture. In both cases, a new substance was added to these drums of plutonium waste from nuclear weapons production. Over five hundred drums of their waste contain these new chemical and are a risk. Because of the radiation release and the uncertainty over the cause, WIPP is closed. There are estimates that it may take as much as two years to seal off the dangerous drums before the facility can reopen. In the meantime, more waste is piling up at LANL which will cause it to fail to meet a deadline for waste disposal. It is still an open question as to whether or not anyone with the necessary expertise actually investigated to find out whether these new chemicals could cause problems. At the very least, this is serious negligence on the part of LANL.

Diagram of Waste Isolation Pilot Plant:

wipp-fig2sm.gif