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.
Experts See North Korea Shunning Nuclear Talks as Economic Crisis Deepens voanews.com
Iran says nuclear agreement can be reached if US sanctions lifted Aljazeera.com
France extends nuclear maintenance until spring – power prices stable for now seekingalpha.com
Nuclear icebreaker Sibir enters service world-nuclear-news.com
Ambient office = 103 nanosieverts per hour
Ambient outside = 69 nanosieverts per hour
Soil exposed to rain water = 72 nanosieverts per hour
Red bell pepper from Central Market = 88 nanosieverts per hour
Tap water = 84 nanosieverts per hour
Filter water = 73 nanosieverts per hour
North Korea has been under a severe set of U.S. led international sanctions for the past fifteen years. The sanctions were increased in 2017 after N.K. tested an intercontinental ballistic missile capable of reaching the U.S. mainland. In spite of this, N.K. has been able to work around these sanctions and access the global financial system. They have used “non-financial” businesses and professions, including precious metal dealers, estate agents and a casino to avoid sanctions. Such efforts are the subject of a new report.
In spite of these sanctions, N.K. continues it nuclear and missile programs. Last Wednesday, it fired a suspected ballistic missile towards the Sea of Japan according to the Japanese and South Korean governments.
This new missile test was N.K.’s first since a bunch of launches in September and October. Before this cluster of tests, the N.K. Leader, Kim Jong Un, vowed in a major speech to continue “strengthening defense capabilities due to the ever-destabilizing situation on the Korean Peninsula”.
Debates over the enforcement of international sanctions tend to focus on the role played by financial institutions, mainly banks. However, a report published on Wednesday by the Royal United Service Institute in London (RUSI) suggested that vague international standards regulating the activities of other actors were assisting North Korean efforts to accumulate and transfer wealth around the globe.
Aaron Arnold is a senior associate fellow at RUSI and a former member of the UN Panel of Experts that monitors implementation of UN sanctions on North Korea. He said, “One of the key reasons that North Korea is able to access global commercial channels despite international sanctions is because of regulatory blind spots that miss important entry points. These are the gatekeeper services and professions, like the accountants and lawyers who help North Korea establish front companies or the notary who signs vessel sales documents.”
The report by RUSI details an analysis of eighty-seven cases where N.K. evaded sanctions and proliferation financing. RUSI claimed that in every one of the cases studied, international standards set by the Financial Action Task Force, an intergovernmental body, failed to capture activities related to “designated non-financial business and professions”, or DNFBPs.
These cases included N.K.’s attempts to obtain and sell precious metals and stones and its global property investments. In one case, N.K. used a casino to “to obfuscate the traceability of funds”.
Sasha Erskine is a research analyst at RUSI and the principle author of the new report. She said, “North Korea has become increasingly skilled at evading targeted financial sanctions and has often exploited or used designated non-financial businesses and professions to do so. Despite this, there is a lack of guidance available to the sector on the sanctions evasion risks they face. This gap needs to be urgently addressed.”
Arnold said, “It’s not just relevant to North Korea — addressing these blind spots has implications for other sanctions regimes, too. Emerging thematic sanctions, like those against kleptocrats or human rights abusers, would also benefit from greater scrutiny of these gatekeeper services and professions.”
Posiva applies to operate used fuel disposal facilities world-nuclear-news.org
Ukraine pushes for domestic uranium supply world-nuclear-news.org
Kazakhstan / Country Looking At Two Locations For First Nuclear Station, Say Reports nucnet.org
Krško / Slovenia To Take Investment Decision On New Unit By 2027, Say Reports nucnet.org
Ambient office = 123 nanosieverts per hour
Ambient outside = 81 nanosieverts per hour
Soil exposed to rain water = 80 nanosieverts per hour
English cucumber from Central Market = 112 nanosieverts per hour
Tap water = 103 nanosieverts per hour
Filter water = 94 nanosieverts per hour
Third Hualong One unit connected to grid world-nuclear-news.org
US uranium acquisition completed world-nuclear-news.org
Second San’ao unit under construction world-nuclear-news.org
Application submitted for Paks II containment world-nuclear-news.org
Ambient office = 119 nanosieverts per hour
Ambient outside = 867 nanosieverts per hour
Soil exposed to rain water = 93 nanosieverts per hour
Celery from Central Market = 87 nanosieverts per hour
Tap water = 93 nanosieverts per hour
Filter water = 78 nanosieverts per hour
Virtual reality used to train nuclear staff world-nuclear-news.org
IDF intel chief reportedly says restored Iran nuke deal better than talks failing times
VVER units take shape in Russia and Bangladesh world-nuclear-news.org
Saudi, Greek ministers reaffirm opposition to Iran’s nuclear ambitions arabnews.com
Ambient office = 119 nanosieverts per hour
Ambient outside = 867 nanosieverts per hour
Soil exposed to rain water = 93 nanosieverts per hour
Celery from Central Market = 87 nanosieverts per hour
Tap water = 93 nanosieverts per hour
Filter water = 78 nanosieverts per hour
Dover sole = 115 nanosieverts per hour
Part 2 of 2 Parts (Please read Part 1 first)
In the state of Idaho, the waste being reclassified is stored at a nine hundred square mile Energy Department site in the southeastern part of the state that includes the Idaho National Laboratory. In the state of Washington, such waste is stored at the Hanford Nuclear Reservation. This site is a decommissioned nuclear site in the south-central part of the state that produced plutonium for nuclear bombs during the Cold War. In South Carolina, it’s stored at the three hundred square Savannah River Site. This site is the home of the Savannah River National Laboratory.
The Energy Department, in its statement to the Associated Press, said that it is “is committed to utilizing science-driven solutions to continue to achieve success in tackling the environmental legacy of decades of nuclear weapons production and government-sponsored nuclear energy research.”
Last week the Energy Department also made public a draft environmental assessment based on the new interpretation to move some contaminated equipment from the Savannah River Site to a commercial low-level radioactive waste disposal facility located outside of South Carolina. Potential storage sites that might be used for this purpose are located in Andrews County, Texas and Clive, Utah.
Previously, the Energy Department utilized a public process and said that under the new interpretation, they had approved moving up to ten thousand gallons of wastewater from the Savannah River Site. Some of this wastewater will be moved to a site in Texas. A similar public process would be used concerning additional reclassified radioactive waste at the Savannah River Site or at the sites in Idaho and/or Washington.
The U.S. has no permanent storage for high-level radioactive waste. Reclassifying some of the high-level waste under the new interpretation announced by the Energy Department means that it will be legal to send this waste to commercial facilities for storing radioactive waste that is has been reclassified as low-level waste.
Edwin Lyman is the director of Nuclear Power Safety at the Union of Concerned Scientists which is a nonprofit watchdog group. He said that his group agreed that radioactive waste should be classified using a technical analysis rather than a legal definition. However, Lyman also said that “any decision made under this new interpretation has to be backed up by solid analysis and a strong commitment to public health and safety and environmental protection.” He also said that he was concerned that the new interpretation might possibly hinder development of a permanent storage for high-level radioactive waste. Most of this waste currently sits above ground at sites where it was produced. It is stored in cooling pools or dry casks. “It shouldn’t be used as an excuse not to move forward with a repository. That’s the danger.”
The Energy Department was shipping high-level waste to Idaho until a series of lawsuits between the state and the federal government in the 1990s led to a settlement agreement. The agreement is seen as preventing the state from becoming a high-level nuclear waste repository. The Idaho site is located above a giant aquifer that supplies water to cities and farms in the region.
