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.
RoPower taps Studsvik for SMR core design neimagazine.com
Atomic Canyon inks AI deal with IAEA neimagazine.com
ComEd customers to receive $803M in credits in 2026. What that means for you nbcchicago.com
Linn County commission to review Duane Arnold nuclear rezoning application Dec. 15 condorbusiness.com
Latitude 47.704656 Longitude -122.318745
Ambient office = 141 nanosieverts per hour
Ambient outside = 130 nanosieverts per hour
Soil exposed to rain water = 129 nanosieverts per hour
Asian Pear from Central Market = 108 nanosieverts per hour
Tap water = 143 nanosieverts per hour
Filter water = 133 nanosieverts per hour
Approaches to bolster nuclear supply chain preparedness were the focus at a meeting convened by the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) as part of its efforts to streamline advanced reactor deployments, including facilitating more robust international cooperation.
More than one hundred participants from thirty-four countries and international organizations including the World Nuclear Association, the World Association of Nuclear Operators and the Electric Power Research Institute attended the three-day meeting on approaches to improve nuclear supply chain readiness.
Global interest in nuclear power has risen significantly in recent years as an international consensus on the importance of realizing its transformational potential has emerged. Projections for new nuclear build projects continue to trend upward. However, deploying commercial nuclear power reactors at scale remains complex, with bottlenecks created by bespoke component production and jurisdictional requirements that vary widely. Addressing these challenges is a priority for a growing number of countries considering nuclear power to help shape the clean energy future.
Mikhail Chudakov is the IAEA Deputy Director General and Head of the Department of Nuclear Energy. He said, “We all recognize that efforts are underway worldwide to establish and maintain sustainable supply chains for nuclear power. But coordination remains essential. “Harmonization of requirements, especially for codes and standards, will reduce duplication, ease market entry, and help ensure that the nuclear sector can scale up to meet urgent global energy and climate goals.”
The program covered a wide range of supply chain topics, including procurement dynamics for both nuclear power plant operation and new build projects, the challenge of developing and maintaining suppliers and ways to create a reliable supply chain across multiple markets.
King Lee is the Head of Policy and Industry Engagement at the World Nuclear Association. He said, “As global ambitions for nuclear power continue to grow, supply chain considerations are becoming increasingly important. A clear and long-term commitment to a pipeline of nuclear projects is critical for the industry to invest in the global nuclear supply chain capabilities and capacity to capitalize on the opportunities.”
IAEA Director General Rafael Mariano Grossi launched the Nuclear Harmonization and Standardization Initiative (NHSI) in 2022. It aims to aid the deployment of small modular reactors (SMRs) and other advanced reactors through a dual-track methodology. The initiative’s Industry Track focuses on standardizing industrial approaches while the Regulatory Track considers how to harmonize regulatory considerations.
The initiative’s Industry Track published its latest working paper last week on aligning in-service inspection codes and standards to boost SMR exports. In-service inspections are critical for keeping plants functional throughout their operational lifetimes by verifying system integrity and minimizing reactor outages. Accounting for these inspections in the design phase and standardizing practices across jurisdictions could allow a more standardized SMR fleet and hasten their introduction into more markets.
Jeremy Hubert is the Chair of the Working Group on Supply Chain at the Nuclear Energy Agency. He said, “Benchmarking supply chain practices with other industries can help speed up advanced reactor deployments going forward,” said “Regulators are doing their part, but we need more effective collaboration. Full, industry-wide cooperation is needed to optimize the supply chain.”
Australia Says It Will Meet ‘Challenges’ of AUKUS Nuclear Submarine Timeline usnews.com
Europe Approves State Aid For Poland Nuclear Station, First Concrete Planned For 2028 nucnet.org
Ontario, Bulgaria sign nuclear support agreement constructionconnect.com
Nuclear waste company with 400 Tri-Cities workers earns longer contract tri-cityhearald.com
Latitude 47.704656 Longitude -122.318745
Ambient office = 98 nanosieverts per hour
Ambient outside = 123 nanosieverts per hour
Soil exposed to rain water = 122 nanosieverts per hour
Tomato from Central Market = 87 nanosieverts per hour
Tap water = 100 nanosieverts per hour
Filter water = 84 nanosieverts per hour
Part 2 of 2 Parts (Please read Part 1 first)
As part of a push for expansion of renewable energy in Indonesia, the government plans to rollout ten thousand megawatts of nuclear power by 2040. Malaysia’s thirteenth national plan revives nuclear energy as part of Malaysia’s net-zero commitment, although specific targets will be determined through future study. In 2022 the Philippines mentioned plans to add nuclear power back into the national power mix. In September of 2025, the government established the Philippine Atomic Energy Regulatory Authority (PhilATOM) as the country’s independent nuclear regulator. PhilATOM will oversee all nuclear and radiation-related activities, ensuring that all aspects of nuclear energy infrastructure from siting through to licensing and operation are peaceful, safe, and secure. In 2024, Thailand added six hundred megawatts of SMRS back into its draft PDP. And in April 2025, Vietnam approved the latest iteration of its PDP to include between four thousand to six thousand megawatts of nuclear power by 2053 and eight thousand megawatts of nuclear power by 2050.
These new plans will need significant regulatory, educational, and investment efforts to ensure their success. Many countries in the region slowed or halted training programs for the nuclear field. Vietnam has already identified a need to rapidly rebuild its educational and training pipeline for the technical, regulatory, and policy experts in nuclear energy that will be needed in order to support its planned nuclear plant coming online in 2030.
Before construction decisions can be made, governments must decide what type of reactors they plan to deploy. Many Southeast Asian states are reviewing small modular and advanced reactor designs. However, most of these technologies remain in early stages of licensing and commercial deployment. Of one hundred and twenty-seven SMR designs under consideration globally, only Russia and China have operational SMRs. Key issues remain regarding fuel supply chains, waste management pathways, long-term security and safeguards requirements, and total lifecycle cost.
These energy choices are further shaped by geopolitics: Major nuclear suppliers including Russia, China, South Korea, France, and the U.S. offer distinct reactor technologies, financing models, training programs, political expectations, and deployment timelines. Russia offers a comprehensive “build-own-operate” package that is attractive to many countries considering nuclear power and will even remove spent nuclear fuel, which is often a politically charged issue for governments and communities to deal with. The U.S. meanwhile is racing to reignite its domestic civil nuclear power sector and reclaim technological and export primacy after ceding the field in recent decades to Russia and China, both of which have the power of the state behind their nuclear industry for a potentially faster turnaround time for initiating these significant projects. Yet, choice of supplier brings with it a “one-hundred-year relationship” of servicing and supply, for better or for worse, and Russia’s unprecedented seizure and occupation of Zaporizhia, Europe’s largest nuclear power plant, during the course of its full-scale invasion of Ukraine may give some governments pause in accepting Moscow strategic leverage over a critical energy asset.
To take advantage of the renewed interest in nuclear power, regional governments and their partners will need to take the time to thoroughly evaluate reactor technologies, negotiate supplier arrangements, and develop the domestic expertise necessary to operate and regulate nuclear power safely and securely. Countries in the region need to start now to invest in sustained workforce development, strengthen regulatory infrastructure, and cultivate a public that is informed on the benefits and risks of nuclear energy and the responsibility that comes with it. A coordinated regional approach to nuclear power could help spread the cost burden and streamline nuclear adoption through joint feasibility studies, shared training centers, and regional safety and security exercises. Ultimately, selecting a nuclear supplier is a long-term strategic decision that must reflect each country’s broader national interests. Countries will need to weigh carefully the technical, financial, and geopolitical implications of different nuclear suppliers before making long-term commitments with lasting consequences.
Korean interest in Finnish heating SMR world-nuclear-news.com
Palisades plant set for historic nuclear restart with $400M federal investment boost michiganadvance.com
Missouri nuclear plant back online after incident fox2now.com
Kazakhstan builds partnerships at home and abroad world-nuclear-news.com
Czech Public Continues To Show Strong Support For Nuclear, Says Poll nucnet.org
Latitude 47.704656 Longitude -122.318745
Ambient office = 81 nanosieverts per hour
Ambient outside = 66 nanosieverts per hour
Soil exposed to rain water = 61 nanosieverts per hour
Roma tomato from Central Market = 93 nanosieverts per hour
Tap water = 80 nanosieverts per hour
Filter water = 70 nanosieverts per hour
Part 1 of 2 Parts
Countries around the world are grappling with the clean energy transition and the challenges of rapidly expanding solar, wind, and battery storage. Many countries are looking to nuclear power as an additional option. In Southeast Asia, the five countries responsible for the vast majority of regional power consumption have all taken steps to include nuclear power in national plans. After a historical conversation on whether to adopt nuclear power given concerns over cost, waste management, and risks, the region must now contend with geopolitical and governance considerations, as well as reinvestment in human, technical, regulatory, and institutional capacity to ensure success in a nuclear power transition.
Global representatives gathered in Belem, Brazil the week of November 13th to explore next steps to mitigate climate change. Many attendees recalled the ambitious pledge of twenty countries at COP28 to triple nuclear energy output by 2050. This was a historic recognition of nuclear power as a key element of world efforts to transition away from fossil fuels. However, for developing and middle-income countries, realizing this “nuclear renaissance” brings its own set of challenges, from geopolitics and governance to financing, infrastructure, and workforce development. These issues are particularly palpable in Southeast Asia, where six of the eleven countries in the Association of Southeast Asian Nations (ASEAN) are exploring or are already investing in nuclear power.
Southeast Asia, where fossil fuels currently dominate the power mix, is a priority zone for rapid adaptation to nuclear power. Electricity demand in the region is estimated to grow by four percent annually through 2035, accounting for one fourth of global energy demand growth and adding more than South Korea’s entire energy demand over the next decade. To meet net zero carbon commitments, the region must massively expand investment in and access to clean energy while ensuring power system reliability and affordability for consumers and manufacturing. Most countries are taking an all-of-the-above approach to meet the rising energy demand, targeting not only solar and wind, which are broadly available in the region, but also alternative sources including hydrogen, geothermal, and nuclear power.
As the COP28 pledge underscored, nuclear energy will be critical to balancing many national clean energy portfolios given its ability, unlike wind or solar, to supply consistent stable baseload to national grids. However, despite a long history in southeast Asian regional power plans, concerns around safety, waste management, and financing have slowed down its adoption.
The Philippines completed building the Bataan Nuclear Power Plant in 1984 but never started operations due to safety concerns, including its proximity to a fault line. Vietnam initially planned to deploy nuclear energy in the early 2000s but removed two nuclear power plants from its national power development plan (PDP) in 2016 because of cost concerns. Thailand included nuclear energy in national PDPs between 2007-2015 before deleting them from the 2018 PDP. Malaysia decided in 2018 to not exploit nuclear power given concerns over risks and waste management.
Given both existing net-zero commitments as well as the emergence of advanced and small modular reactors (SMRs), nuclear power is again attracting policy support and investment. Five countries including Indonesia, Malaysia, the Philippines, Thailand, and Vietnam are responsible for eighty nine percent of the region’s energy demand, and all of them are moving forward with plans for nuclear power.
Please read Part 2 next
Ukraine’s Zaporizhzhia nuclear plant temporarily lost power overnight, IAEA says reuters.com
Dunkirk to declare nuclear interest post-journal.com
Japan pulls out of Vietnam nuclear project, complicating Hanoi’s power plans rreuters.com
Two Rivers secures long-term nuclear energy deal to power city through 2050s fox11online.com
