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.
I have been covering the North Korean nuclear program from its beginning in 1956 to a new international agreement called the Leap Day Deal because it was signed on February 29th in 2012. There was great hope that this deal would lead to a final end to the N. K. nuclear threat. But, as happened so often in the past, that hope was not to be realized.
In April of 2012 N.K. announced another missile launch which was a clear violation of the Leap Day Deal. This launch coincided with the emergence of Kim Jong-Un, the son of the previous head of N.K., as the new leader of N.K. The launch may have been a symbolic act ordered by the new leader to demonstrate his elevation to leadership. The U.S. also suspected that N.K was getting ready to test another nuclear device. It became clear that N.K. was not taking the Leap Day Deal seriously and another round of hostility and recrimination broke out. In the fall of 2012, the U.S. and South Korea announced a new missile agreement and N.K. announced that it had nuclear missiles that could reach the U.S. mainland. In December of 2012, N.K. launched another satellite. The United Nations issued Security Council Resolution 2087 condemning the launch. In addition, trade sanctions against N.K. were expanded.
N.K. responded to the resolution and new sanctions by announcing that it would continue missile tests and work on nuclear weapons. In February of 2013, N.K tested another nuclear device. This unleashed what was referred to as the North Korean crisis. Kim Jong-un responded to Resolution 2087 with inflammatory rhetoric and threats to carry out nuclear attacks against South Korea, Japan and the U.S.
In March of 2013, during a military exercise involving the U.S. and S.K., N.K. withdrew from the Korean Armistice Agreement that ended the Korean War in the 1953. They claimed that nuclear weapons were a part of the joint exercise and that the U.S. was unwilling to negotiate a peace treaty that would replace the KAA and denuclearize the Korean peninsula. The U.S. increased the number of antiballistic missiles in Alaska and California. The U.S. also announced intentions to deploy a new radar system to Japan to warn of N.K. missile launches. N.K. launched a cyberattack against S.K.s computers. U.S. B-52 bombers overflew S.K. to reaffirm the “U.S. nuclear umbrella” over S.K. Japan deployed destroyers equipped with missiles defense systems. In late March, N.K. cut the hotline between N.K. and S.K. and announced that a “state of war” now existed between N.K. and S.K. The situation on the Korean Peninsula was rapidly deteriorating.
Korean Peninsula:
I have been blogging about North Korea’s nuclear program for the past few days. I am spending a lot of time on N.K. because it is the most belligerent of nuclear powers on Earth and often threatens to launch pre-emptive military strikes on South Korea and other nations including the United States. Yesterday, I talked about the period from 2002 to 2008 and ended with an apparent “deal” between North Korea and other nations to end N.K. development of nuclear weapons in return for aid.
In 2009, N.K. attempted to launched a satellite which it claimed would only be used for broadcasting patriotic songs, but the launch was a failure. A U.N. resolution condemned the launch and N.K. responded by saying that it will not participate in any six party talks again and it will not be bound by any agreements from such talks. They expelled the U.N. inspectors and stated their intention to restart their nuclear program. Spent fuel reprocessing for plutonium was restarted. N.K. also announced that it was going to build its own thirty megawatt light water reactor and uranium enrichment facilities to create fuel for the new reactor.
This pattern has been repeated over and over with N.K. They are coaxed to the bargaining table, a deal is worked out for foreign aid, U.N. inspections and an end to nuclear weapons development. Things seem to proceed for a while and then there is some incident or disagreement and it is back to square one.
A two thousand gas centrifuge enrichment plant began operating in 2010. In 2011, satellite photographs showed that N.K. was proceeding swiftly with the construction of the light water reactor. U.S. intelligence agencies estimated that the reactor would be operational by 2013. N.K. also announced that it intended to build larger light water reactors for electricity generation.
In early 2012, N.K. offers to suspend uranium enrichment, nuclear bomb tests and long range missile launches as long as “productive” negotiations with the U.S. continue. N.K also said that U.N. inspectors could return to Yongbyon. The U.S. states that it does not have any “hostile intent” toward N.K. and that it is ready to restore diplomatic relationships with N.K. In addition, twenty four thousand tons of food aid was promised to N.K. These steps would lead to restoration of the six party talks. This agreement, referred to as the Leap Day Deal, was signed on February 29th, 2012. Once again there was hope that the N.K. nuclear program could be brought to a halt and relationships normalized between N.K. and other nations including the U.S.
Potential ranges of North Korean Missiles:
My last blog about the history of the North Korean nuclear program ended with the collapsed of the Agreed Framework between the United States and North Korea in 2002. Following the collapse that was caused by both sides accusing the other of violating the terms of the Framework, North Korea threw out the U.N. inspectors and proceed to ramp up its development of plutonium production and nuclear weapons. The U.S. and South Korea held military exercises as North Korea threatened pre-emptive strikes on U.S. forces in South Korea and fired missiles into the Sea of Japan to intimidate other nations.
During 2003, there were many diplomatic initiatives to try to improve relations between N.K. and the rest of the world. There were bilateral talks between the U.S. and N.K. The mainland Chinese government was approached to try to get them to exert leverage on N.K. Japan, South Korea, Taiwan, Russia and other nations tried to establish a dialog with N.K. N.K.’s major focus was to demand major concessions from the U.S. before it would consider ending its nuclear weapons program. Six party talks including N.K., the U.S., Russia, China, Japan and South Korea were held in Beijing.
During 2004, the diplomatic efforts continued with new rounds of the six party talks as N.K. continues to produce plutonium and issue belligerent threats. They say that they need nuclear weapons to deter the threat of U.S. and S.K. military action. In the fall of 2004, N.K. claims that it has turned plutonium from reprocessed fuel rods into nuclear weapons.
Diplomatic talks, threats, claims of breakthroughs, demands that the U.S. supply the power reactors that were promised in the Agreed Framework, demands for food, and N.K. work on its own reactors and plutonium processing continue in 2006. An estimate is published that N.K. may have enough plutonium for a dozen nuclear bombs. N.K. test fires a number of missiles including a new long range version. In the fall of 2006, N.K. states its intention to test fire a nuclear bomb. The U.S. says that “it can have a future or it can have these weapons but not both. The U.N. Security Council issues a statement calling for N.K. not to test a bomb. N.K proceeds with an underground test as registered by seismographs. There was some debate about whether the test was a failure or a fraud.
The six party talks continued into 2007 without producing any significant results. N.K. maintains its belligerent attitude while participating in the talks. N.K. finally agrees to shut down the Yongbyon reactor in exchange for being supplied with fifty thousand metric tons of fuel oil. Following the delivery of six thousand tons of fuel oil from S.K., N.K announces that it was shutting down the Yongbyon reactor. IAEA inspectors confirm that the reactor has been shut down as more fuel oil is delivered to N.K. The U.S., Russia and China send inspectors to the Yongbyon site to study the best way to permanently shut down fuel reprocessing and plutonium production.
2008 saw N.K. supplying documentation on its nuclear operations to the U.S. and allies. A U.S. State Department expert on the Koreas, managed to obtain thousands of pages of classified N.K. documents on their nuclear program. N.K. destroys a cooling tower for Yongbyon’s main reactor. It appeared that progress was finally being made in ending N.K.’s nuclear weapons program.
Yongbyon cooling tower destroyed:
