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.
Ambient office = .114 microsieverts per hour
Ambient outside = .147 microsieverts per hour
Soil exposed to rain water = .121 microsieverts per hour
Raisins from Costco = .090 microsieverts per hour
Tap water = .084 microsieverts per hour
Filtered water = .063 microsieverts per hour
I have done a number of blog posts about nuclear weapons and nuclear treaties. Recently I criticized someone who thought that we should not reduce our nuclear weapons below their current levels. We still have a thousand warheads aimed at Russia ready to launch in minutes. The Russians have an equal number aimed at us and ready to launch. This is courting the destruction of human civilization and we should end it as quickly as possible. A battle between other nuclear armed countries such as India and Pakistan could bring a nuclear winter that would be global disaster. Further down the lists of dangers but still very real is the threat of nuclear war in the Middle East.
Although they have been reluctant to admit it, it is widely believed that Israel has had nuclear weapons since the 1960s. Estimates of the Israeli arsenal vary widely from seventy five all the way to four hundred warheads. Israel has not signed the international Non-Proliferation treaty but it has said that “it would not be the first to introduce nuclear weapons in the Middle East.” That sounds positive but it is has never been clear exactly what they mean. Other Middle Eastern countries have repeatedly called for Israel to get rid of its nuclear weapons.
In the mean time, some of the most anti-Israeli countries in the Middle East have tried to develop their own nuclear weapons. Sadam Hussien had a nuclear weapons program in Iraq before the first Gulf War. The Israelis staged a surprise aerial attack on an Iraqi nuclear reactor to interfere with that program in 1981. We invaded Iraq in the second Gulf War partly on the pretext that they were continuing to develop nuclear weapons although that later proved not to be true.
Iran has worked for years to develop the sophisticated technology required for refining uranium to weapons grade. They insist that they are not interested in acquiring their own nuclear weapons but the U.S. and many other countries do not believe them. Harsh sanctions have been levied on Iran to force them to open their facilities to international inspection. It is known that they have deeply buried laboratories where it is feared that nuclear weapons work is being carried out.
One motivation for Iran to develop a nuclear weapon is their perception, either right or wrong, that the U.S. would be more reluctant to invade Iran if Iran had nuclear weapons. There is also the fact that Iran is a bitter enemy of Israel and fears Israeli attacks. The greatest danger to Iran right now is the possibility that Israel will attack in the near future to try to stop Iran from getting nuclear weapons. I am afraid that Iran will succeed in creating a nuclear bomb in the near future even if the Israelis do attack. However, reducing the size of an Iranian bomb to be able to launch it on a missile will take years.
A new report from International Atomic Energy Agency on the Middle East and nuclear weapons concluded that there is “fundamental difference of views” between Israel and the other Middle East countries.” I am not sure why there needed to be a new study and a new report since this fact has been glaringly obvious for decades.
One thing that is occurs to me is that Israel will not accept possible defeat if it is attacked by other Middle Eastern countries with or without nuclear weapons. I have always thought that Israel would execute the “Samson” option if it looked like they were going to be defeated and destroyed by their enemies. That would consist of launching a last ditch nuclear attack against major population centers and oil fields across the Middle East. Such an event would be disastrous for the whole world. A possible war in the Middle East could threaten the entire world and it is important that other countries and regions would together to try to bring peace to that troubled region.
Israel’s attack on Iraq:
Aboriginal people in British Columbia who rely on Skeena River sockeye are facing some extremely difficult decisions as sockeye salmon returns plunge to historic lows. theglobeandmail.com
Study shows Fukushima nuclear pollution becoming more concentrated as it approaches U.S. West Coast. springer.com
Permission has been granted to begin construction of Jordan’s first nuclear reactor. world-nuclear-news.org
Ambient office = .069 microsieverts per hour
Ambient outside = .074 microsieverts per hour
Soil exposed to rain water = 114 microsieverts per hour
Fiberwell Gummies from Costco = .076 microsieverts per hour
Tap water = .151 microsieverts per hour
Filtered water = .135 microsieverts per hour
Ambient office = .069 microsieverts per hour
Ambient outside = .074 microsieverts per hour
Soil exposed to rain water = 114 microsieverts per hour
Fiberwell Gummies from Costco = .076 microsieverts per hour
Tap water = .151 microsieverts per hour
Filtered water = .135 microsieverts per hour
Ambient office = .084 microsieverts per hour
Ambient outside = .072 microsieverts per hour
Soil exposed to rain water = .070 microsieverts per hour
Balance nutrition bar from Costco = .080 microsieverts per hour
Tap water = .088 microsieverts per hour
Filtered water = .081 microsieverts per hour
Japan expert says radiation levels in ocean too high to be explained by groundwater flow from Fukushima alone. www3.nhk.or.jp
The start of operation of the Four Mile uranium mine in South Australia has moved a step closer with final environmental approval. world-nuclear-news.org
Ambient office = .114 microsieverts per hour
Ambient outside = .070 microsieverts per hour
Soil exposed to rain water = .109 microsieverts per hour
Raw pistachios from Costco = .089 microsieverts per hour
Tap water = .081 microsieverts per hour
Filtered water = .071 microsieverts per hour
Yesterday I posted a blog article about problems with Rosatom, the Russian state corporation that regulates and promotes nuclear industry in Russia. I also mentioned problems with the Japanese nuclear industry and the South Korean nuclear industry. All three of these countries are busy trying to sell questionable nuclear technology to other countries. There are not a lot of countries manufacturing nuclear reactors these days. France is a member of the nuclear club and like Russia, Japan and South Korea, it is trying to sell its nuclear technology abroad. France relies on nuclear power for eighty percent of its electricity and their need to keep their nuclear industry alive is as much aimed at domestic power generation as it is in stimulating export sales of nuclear technology.
AREVA is a French public corporation with strong ties to the French national government. It was created in 2001 by the merger of several companies active in various nuclear industries in Europe It is the only major international nuclear company that is involved in every facet of nuclear energy and research including “mining, chemistry, enrichment, combustibles, services, engineering, nuclear propulsion and reactors, treatment, recycling, stabilization, and dismantling.” They appear to have a better record of competence and integrity than the Russian, Japanese and South Korean nuclear companies but they have had some problems.
In 2003, Finland ordered a new reactor system from AREVA. When there were serious cost overruns, AREVA refused to pick up the extra costs and the case is in arbitration. Currently, the project is four years behind schedule and ninety percent over budget. It is unlikely that the reactor will start producing electricity before 2015.
In 2007, the French government signed an agreement with Libya for civilian nuclear power. It was announced that the project was aim at desalinization of sea water but some critics claimed that it was really just an excuse to export AREVA’s expensive nuclear technology. Other critics said that the nuclear power deal was related to the release of Belgian nurses being held by the Libyans. The German government denounced the deal.
In 2007, AREVA was fined fifty three million Euros for “rigging European Union electricity markets through a cartel involving eleven companies..”
In 2010, anti-nuclear activist fought the construction of a new AREVA nuclear power plant on the Normandy coast because of design changes to the fuel pellet cladding. AREVA made the changes when its original design was challenged on safety grounds. The critics said that the changes that were made were not sufficient to solve the problems.
Also in 2010, complaints were raised by Greenpeace about nuclear dust contamination of native villages near the uranium min which provided one half of AREAVA’s uranium. AREVA carried out some cleanup activities and declared that the problem was solved. Investigators who went to the villages after the cleanup still found high levels of radioactive contamination.
At the end of 2011, the new director of AREVA announced a three billion dollar writedown due to a downturn in the nuclear market. Half of that was related to the purchase of UraMin, a uranium mining stock. The woman who had managed the company for ten years was investigated covertly and then removed from her post. She was blamed for making the decision to purchase the UraMin stock. On the other hand, she accused the man who replaced her as director of incompetence in the management of project to develop a third generation nuclear reactor which was over budget and behind schedule. The new director also said that they might lose as much as two billion in 2012 and that they would have to lay off fifteen hundred workers.
In 2012, AREVA faced problems with a bid to build a United Kingdom reactor. Other bidders were threatening to trigger a market monopoly investigation if AREVA won the bid.
While AREVA has not been accused of using substandard part and other types of overt corruption and crime, they still have had safety and legal problems in the international marketplace. In addition, their close ties to the French government have led to questionable behavior. I am afraid that doing business with AREVA could be problematic for other countries seeking new reactors for power generation.
