St. Louis-area lawmaker seeks removal of radioactive waste from Bridgeton landfill. therepublic.com
CO2 alarms forced workers to temporarily evacuate a turbine building at Pennsylvania’s Beaver Valley nuclear plant Friday morning. nuclearstreet.com
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.
Geiger Counter Readings in Seattle, WA on June 18, 2013
Ambient office = .085 microsieverts per hour
Ambient outside = .069 microsieverts per hour
Soil exposed to rain water = .068 microsieverts per hour
Vine ripened tomato from Costco = .118 microsieverts per hour
Tap water = .102 microsieverts per hour
Filtered water = .088 microsieverts per hour
The new administration of Prime Minister Abe in Japan is bullish on nuclear power. Although the majority of the Japanese people do not want to restart the Japanese nuclear reactor fleet that has been shut down since the Fukushima disaster in 2011, the Abe government has been very insistent that nuclear power has got to part of the Japanese energy mix if they are going to expand the Japanese economy in the coming years. Abe has purged a lot of nuclear energy opponents for the inner circles of the Japanese national government. Abe’s focus on nuclear power is not restricted to Japan. He is traveling outside of Japan to other countries to advertise Japan’s interest in increasing exports of Japanese nuclear technology. Abe has pledged to triple Japanese infrastructure exports to three hundred billio, partly with nuclear components.
In May, it was announced that Japan’s Mitsubishi Heavy Industries and France’s Areva are expected to win a twenty two billion dollar contract to construct a nuclear power plant in Turkey. The plan is for four pressurized water reactors to be constructed at Sinop on the Black Sea. The four reactors will produce over four million kilowatts of electricity. This will be the second nuclear power plant for Turkey and the first rector is expected to start producing electricity in 2023.
Last week, Japan and France announced that they were entering into a partnership to capture a bigger share of the global marked for nuclear technology. France gets eighty percent of its electricity from nuclear power and it is very important for them to support a thriving global nuclear technology industry. Japan is hoping to substantially expand their economy with nuclear exports. In addition, France has said that it will assist Japan with their spent fuel reprocessing and fast breeder projects that have been plagued by problems.
Recently Japan attended a conference with the leaders of four ex-communist countries in Poland to push Japanese nuclear products. The Visegrad Group consists of the Czech Republic, Hungary, Poland and Slovakia. At Japan’s first summit with the Visegrad Group, Abe called for increase cooperation, especially in energy policies. Following the meeting, a joint statement was issued that said that there was interest by private parties on both sides in cooperating on nuclear power.
The Japanese Atomic Energy Commission has been criticized for being a victim of regulatory capture by the private Japanese nuclear companies. Mitsubishi Heavy Industries is one of the leading Japanese nuclear technology companies at the forefront of efforts to expand nuclear exports. They manufactured two new steam turbines for the San Onofre reactors near San Diego. The new turbines failed in two years due to design flaws. Japan has a lot of problems with their nuclear industry which tends to motivate skepticism about their ability to successfully export safe and reliable nuclear reactors. While the Japanese government is working hard to convince the people of Japan that their future prosperity depends on nuclear power, there are tens of thousands of anti-nuclear protestors expressing their disagreement in major Japanese cities.
20 million tons of Fukushima debris is getting closer to the west coast of the United States. rense.com
Official to reveal “new concerns” about landfill fire near a nuclear dump outside of St. Louis, Missouri. enenews.com
There has been a radioactive leak at the Perry nuclear reactor in Ohio. enenews.com
Sellafield Ltd in the U.K has been fined $1.1 million for mistakenly sending four bags of low-level waste to a conventional landfill instead of the correct facility. world-nuclear-news.org
Geiger Counter Readings in Seattle, WA on June 17, 2013
Ambient office = .096 microsieverts per hour
Ambient outside = .060 microsieverts per hour
Soil exposed to rain water = .081 microsieverts per hour
Romaine lettuce from Costco = .100 microsieverts per hour
Tap water = .085 microsieverts per hour
Filtered water = .058 microsieverts per hour
Geiger Counter Readings in Seattle, WA on June 16, 2013
Ambient office = .075 microsieverts per hour
Ambient outside = .079 microsieverts per hour
Soil exposed to rain water = .087 microsieverts per hour
Mango from Costco = .103 microsieverts per hour
Tap water = .104 microsieverts per hour
Filtered water = .071 microsieverts per hour
Geiger Counter Readings in Seattle, WA on June 15, 2013
Ambient office = .072 microsieverts per hour
Ambient outside = .093 microsieverts per hour
Soil exposed to rain water = .103 microsieverts per hour
Iceberg lettuce from Costco = .137 microsieverts per hour
Tap water = .093 microsieverts per hour
Filtered water = .079 microsieverts per hour
The Nuclear Regulatory Commission has mandated new vent filters for the thirty five Mark I and Mark II reactors in the United States because of what happened at Fukushima involving the Mark reactors there. Other rule changes have been suggested to the safety protocols for nuclear reactors in the U.S. Other nations and groups of nations have also been updating their rules for nuclear safety in the wake of the Fukushima disaster.
In the European Union, the central agency for nuclear power regulation, the European Commission for Energy has proposed new tougher rules for the one hundred and thirty five nuclear reactors in the EU with an emphasis on increasing the safety of nuclear power generation. A battery of stress tests was run on all the reactors in the twenty seven nations of the European Union following the Fukushima disaster. The report the resulted from those tests found that almost all of the reactors in the EU needed to have improvements in their safety measures. There was also a call for standardizations so that there would be greater consistency across all the reactors in all the countries in the Union.
E.U. reactors already have regular tests but under the new rules there would more frequent and stringent tests. The new rules call for a safety review across the EU every six years. Inspectors from the Commission would be sent into any member state that was not doing enough to insure the safety of their reactors. There was also a call for peer review which in this context would mean that countries in the Union could send their own inspectors into neighboring member countries to review their neighbors’ adherence to safety rules and procedures. One additional provision of the new rules would be to have an emergency response center on each reactor site that would be protected against radioactivity, earthquake and flooding.
The rules would not go into effect unless and until approved by each of the member states in the E.U. As might be expected, some critics are saying that the new rules don’t go far enough while other critics are saying that they do not go far enough. It is not surprising that France which gets eighty percent of its electricity has been resisting some of the new rules, claiming that the rules that it has in place are good enough. Greenpeace, on the other hand, criticizes the new rules because there is no increased protection against the threat of terrorism. They are also concerned about regulatory capture and the lack of any increase in the power and authority of the regulators. The Commission views the new rules as “realistic.” The estimated cost spread of the coming years of all the proposed changes is in the neighborhood of thirty two billion U.S. dollars. Some of the countries in the E.U. such as Germany are turning their back on nuclear power entirely while some Eastern European countries have old Soviet era reactors that will have to be shut down because they cannot even be brought up to the current standards for reactors in the E.U.
Nuclear European Union: