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.

Blog

  • Geiger Readings for Dec 19, 2022

    Ambient office = 105 nanosieverts per hour

    Ambient outside = 107 nanosieverts per hour

    Soil exposed to rain water = 112 nanosieverts per hour

    Grape from Central Market = 106 nanosieverts per hour

    Tap water = 119 nanosieverts per hour

    Filter water = 111 nanosieverts per hour

  • Geiger Readings for Dec 18, 2022

    Ambient office = 87 nanosieverts per hour

    Ambient outside = 100 nanosieverts per hour

    Soil exposed to rain water = 93 nanosieverts per hour

    English cucumbers from Central Market = 73 nanosieverts per hour

    Tap water = 99 nanosieverts per hour

    Filter water = 89 nanosieverts per hour

  • Geiger Readings for Dec 17, 2022

    Ambient office = 121 nanosieverts per hour

    Ambient outside = 103 nanosieverts per hour

    Soil exposed to rain water = 108 nanosieverts per hour

    Blueberry from Central Market = 76 nanosieverts per hour

    Tap water = 91 nanosieverts per hour

    Filter water = 79 nanosieverts per hour

    Dover Sole from Central = 93 nanosieverts per hour

  • Radioactive Waste 883 – U.K. National Nuclear Laboratory Is Developing Space Batteries With Americium-241 From Spent Nuclear Fuel

          The U.K. Space Agency and the National Nuclear Laboratory are collaborating to create the world’s first space battery powered by americium-241. The isotope will be extracted from spent nuclear fuel stored at the Sellafield site in Cumbria.
          Radioisotope power systems are sometimes referred to as nuclear batteries. The current technology uses plutonium-238 as a fuel. Radioisotope thermoelectric generators and radioisotope heater units can supply power and heat continuously over long missions into deep space. Pu-238 is made by irradiating neptunium-237. The Np-237 is recovered from research reactor fuel or special targets in research reactors. Pu-238 is only produced in small amounts in the U.S. and Russia. An alternative is urgently needed.
         This NNL work is commissioned and funded by the U.K. Space Agency. It will be delivered in a new twenty-three million dollar laboratory at NNL’s flagship Central Laboratory on the Sellafield site in Cumbria. The new laboratory will be filled with next generation equipment and technology.
         NNL said that it will deliver a sovereign supply of fuel for space batteries in the context of a global shortage. This will enable the U.K and its partners to pursue new space science and exploration mission.
         The support from the U.K. Space Agency follows the U.K. record investment in the European Space Agency for a variety of new programs. One of the investments of this program is twenty-two million dollars for the European Devices Using Radioisotope Energy (ENDURE) which will use radioisotopes to develop systems for warming and powering spacecraft.
         NNL said that it had been working on this project since 2009 when its researchers first discovered that americium-241 is produced during the radioactive decay of spent nuclear fuel from commercial nuclear power reactors. The isotope emits power for four hundred years. In 2019, NNL and the University of Leicester announced that they had generated usable electricity from americium. This achievement was a major step towards potential use of americium in space batteries.
          With the plentiful supply of Am-241 at Sellafield, the new collaboration “will turn a proven scientific concept into a fully-realized technology”, the collaborators said. The Am-241-powered space battery is expected to be operational within the next four years. It is likely to be used first on the European Space Agency’s Argonaut mission to the Moon and for future missions into deep spaced.
         George Freeman is the U.K. Science Minister. He said, “Being able to offer a globally unique supply of americium-241 will encourage investment and unlock growth opportunities for all sorts of UK industries looking to explore nuclear energy.”
         Tim Tinsley is the account director for this project at NNL. He said, “For the past 50 years, space missions have used plutonium-238 to stop spacecrafts from freezing but it is in very limited supply. At NNL we have identified significant reserves of americium-241, a radioisotope with similar properties to plutonium-238 but game-changing potential for the UK’s space ambitions. This work, which is being made possible through the support of UK Space Agency, will see us applying decades of experience in separating and purifying used nuclear material in order to unlock great public benefits, and it goes to the heart of our purpose of nuclear science to benefit society.”
         Paul Bate is the CEO of U.K. Space Agency. He said, “This innovative method to create americium to power space missions will allow us not only to sustain exploration of the Moon and Mars for longer periods of time, but to venture further into space than ever before. Supporting the National Nuclear Laboratory’s expansion will make the UK the only country in the world capable of producing this viable alternative to plutonium, reducing the global space community’s reliance on limited supplies, which are increasingly difficult and costly to obtain. The UK Space Agency is committed to keeping space activities sustainable, and this resourceful technology exploits otherwise unused waste plutonium biproducts without generating additional waste.”

  • Geiger Readings for Dec 16, 2022

    Ambient office = 87 nanosieverts per hour

    Ambient outside = 93 nanosieverts per hour

    Soil exposed to rain water = 97 nanosieverts per hour

    Avocado from Central Market = 126 nanosieverts per hour

    Tap water = 84 nanosieverts per hour

    Filter water = 67 nanosieverts per hour

  • Nuclear Reactors 1106 – Silicon Valley Venture Capital Flows To Nuclear Power – Part 4 of 4 Parts

    Part 4 of 4 Parts (Please read Parts 1, 2 and 3 first)
        Small modular reactors have aroused great interest among venture capitalists who are interested in investing in nuclear fission reactors.
         MIT’s Parsons said “These are going to be very expensive at first. But the goal is to find something that is a product that’s much more flexible, can go on to the grid in many more different places and serve different functions, and go off grid also.”
         Similarly, fusion startups claim that they will generate energy much faster than government research projects like ITER which has already been in progress since 2007.
         This quick-return approach to investment is certainly stimulating experimentation. New generations of nuclear reactors will have different sizes, different fuels, and different coolants. Some reactors are being designed for companies or communities in isolation areas. Others are being made to operate at extremely high temperatures for industrial processes.
         Matt Crozat is the senior director of policy development at the Nuclear Energy Institute. He said, “It really is expanding the range of what nuclear can mean. Many won’t succeed, but time and the market will figure out what’s needed and what’s possible.”
         Because venture capitalists are hungry for returns, this also stimulates nuclear startups to chase multiple revenue streams as they are getting their big-bet technology up and running.
         Nuclear innovation company TerraPower is working on a demonstration of its advanced reactor in Wyoming in collaboration with the U.S. Department of Energy (DoE). In the meantime, TerraPower is using its capacity to produce isotopes that are also used in medical research and treatments. Advanced nuclear company Kairos Power is developing the technology to produce salt for molten salt reactors, both for internal use and to sell to other companies.
         Critics of this new wave of investments in nuclear power say that venture capitalists are ignoring the troubled history of nuclear power as a business.  
         David Schlissel of the Institute for Energy, Economics and Financial Analysis said, “Investors have forgotten or are ignoring the lessons from earlier generations of nuclear plants which cost 2 to 3 times as much to build and took years longer than was promised by the vendors.”
         A project to put two new reactors at the Vogtle nuclear power plant in Georgia was originally estimated to cost fourteen billion dollars and ended up costing more than thirty-four billion dollars. It took six years longer to complete that expected.
          Harvard’s Oreskes says that the nuclear industry is a “technology with a long history of broken promises.” She said that she was skeptical of the sudden investor interest in the nuclear industry. She also said, “If you were my daughter, and you had a boyfriend that had made repeated promises to you over months, years, decades, constantly breaking them, I would say, ‘Do you really want to be with this guy?’”
          Oreskes is not categorically anti-nuclear. She supports the continued operation of nuclear power plants that already exist. However, she is particularly skeptical of nuclear fusion as a power source. It has been promised to be “just around the corner” for decades. She said that this new round of investments in fusion “doesn’t pass the laugh test.”
          Ultimately this new crop of nuclear startups has to figure out how to create nuclear energy in a cost-competitive way or nothing else matters, according to Rothrock. He said, “More money means more startups and to me that means more shots on goal (improving odds of success). The issue in nuclear is economics. Plants are complicated and take a while to build. Some of these new startups are tackling those issues making them more simple and thus cheaper. No one will buy an expensive power plant, especially a nuclear plant. Economics drives it all.”