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.
Latitude 47.704656 Longitude -122.318745
Ambient office = 111 nanosieverts per hour
Ambient outside = 137 nanosieverts per hour
Soil exposed to rain water = 143 nanosieverts per hour
Lime from Central Market = 100 nanosieverts per hour
Tap water = 135 nanosieverts per hour
Filter water = 119 nanosieverts per hour
UAE collaboration delivers first low-carbon aluminum world-nuclear-news.org
Uranium producers share market confidence in half-year roundups world-nuclear-news.org
Nuclear reactor groups tap into Spac revival to fuel atomic energy boom ft.com
Iran ready to accept certain limitations on nuclear program if sanctions lifted: deputy FM news.az
Latitude 47.704656 Longitude -122.318745
Ambient office = 113 nanosieverts per hour
Ambient outside = 112 nanosieverts per hour
Soil exposed to rain water = 110 nanosieverts per hour
Jalepeno pepper from Central Market = 115 nanosieverts per hour
Tap water = 83 nanosieverts per hour
Filter water = 70 nanosieverts per hour
Vigil in Avon marks 80 years since Hiroshima bombing, calls for nuclear disarmament thelcn.com
South Africa pushes ahead with new Cape nuclear plant reuters.com
Site surveys begin for first Kazakh nuclear power plant world-nuclear-news.org
Construction permit granted for new Chinese plant world-nuclear-news.org
Latitude 47.704656 Longitude -122.318745
Ambient office = 95 nanosieverts per hour
Ambient outside = 112 nanosieverts per hour
Soil exposed to rain water =115 nanosieverts per hour
Heirloom tomato from Central Market = 100 nanosieverts per hour
Tap water = 94 nanosieverts per hour
Filter water = 88 nanosieverts per hour
Dover Sole from Central = 113 nanosieverts per hour
Neutrinos are extremely elusive elementary nuclear particles. Sixty billion of them stream from the sun through every square centimeter of Earth every second, which is transparent to them. They were detected decades after the first theoretical prediction of their existence. The experiments used to detect are usually extremely because of the very weak interaction of neutrinos with matter.
Researchers at the Max Planck Institute for Nuclear Physics (MPIK) in Heidelberg have now succeeded in detecting antineutrinos from the reactor of a nuclear power plant using the CONUS+ experiment. CONUS+ has with a detector mass of just one and one third pounds. The new research work is published in the journal Nature.
The CONUS experiment was originally based at the Brokdorf nuclear power plant. In the summer of 2023, it was relocated to the Leibstadt nuclear power plant (KKL) in Switzerland in the summer of 2023. Improvements to the one-pound germanium semiconductor detectors, as well as the excellent measurement conditions at KKL, made it possible for the first time to measure what is known as Coherent Elastic Neutrino-Nucleus Scattering (CEvNS).
In this new process, neutrinos do not scatter off the individual components of the atomic nuclei in the detector, but rather scatter coherently off the entire nucleus. This significantly increases the probability of a very small but observable recoil of nuclear. This recoil caused by neutrino scattering is comparable to the effect of a ping-pong ball bouncing off a car. The new detector registers the changing motion of the nucleus.
In the case of CONUS+ experiment, the scattering partners are the atomic nuclei of the germanium. Detecting this effect requires low-energy neutrinos, such as those produced in large numbers in nuclear reactors.
The effect was predicted as early as 1974. However, it was first confirmed in 2017 by the COHERENT experiment at a particle accelerator. For the first time, the CONUS+ experiment has now successfully observed the effect at full coherence and lower energies in a nuclear reactor. The compact CONUS+ setup is located twenty-two yards from the reactor core. At this location, more than ten trillion neutrinos flow through every square centimeter of surface every second.
After approximately one hundred and nineteen days of measurement between autumn 2023 and summer 2024, the researchers were able to extract an excess of three hundred and ninety-five ± one hundred and six neutrino signals from the CONUS+ data, after subtracting all background and interfering signals. This value is in very close agreement with theoretical calculations, within the measurement uncertainty.
Dr. Christian Buck is one of the authors of the study. He explained, “We have thus successfully confirmed the sensitivity of the CONUS+ experiment and its ability to detect antineutrino scattering from atomic nuclei.” He also emphasizes the potential development of small, mobile neutrino detectors to monitor reactor heat output or isotope concentration as potential future applications of the CEvNS technique presented here.
The CEvNS measurement provides unique insights into fundamental physical processes within the Standard Model of particle physics which is the current theory describing the structure of our universe. Compared to other experiments, the measurements with the CONUS+ apparatus allow for a reduced dependence on nuclear physics aspects, thereby improving the sensitivity to new physics beyond the Standard Model. CONUS+ was equipped with improved and larger detectors in autumn 2024. With the increased measurement accuracy, even better results are expected.
Professor Manfred Lindner is the initiator of the project and also an author of the study. He said, “The techniques and methods used in CONUS+ have excellent potential for fundamental new discoveries. Groundbreaking CONUS+ results could mark the starting point for a new field in neutrino research.”
NextEra seeks to reconnect Duane Arnold to the grid world-nuclear-news.com
Utahns can get compensated for nuclear poisoning — but there’s a catch newsfromthestates.com
India sets out two-pronged strategy for nuclear expansion world-nuclear-news.com
Third Korean reactor taken offline as license renewal decision awaited world-nuclear-news.org
Latitude 47.704656 Longitude -122.318745
Ambient office = 81 nanosieverts per hour
Ambient outside = 96 nanosieverts per hour
Soil exposed to rain water = 100 nanosieverts per hour
English cucumber from Central Market = 115 nanosieverts per hour
Tap water =120 nanosieverts per hour
Filter water = 106 nanosieverts per hour
Part 2 of 2 Parts (Please read Part 1 first)
Over the past decade, the NRC has become the favorite whipping boy of zealots beholden to a stagnant nuclear industry. Nuclear industry lobbyists have persistently chipped away at the structural pillars of safety and independence at the NRC while justifying the restructuring — i.e., weakening — of the NRC as needed for nuclear power’s survival.
The Nuclear Energy Innovation Capabilities Act (NEICA) of 2017, Nuclear Energy Innovation and Modernization Act (NEIMA) of 2019, and Accelerating Deployment of Versatile, Advanced Nuclear for Clean Energy Act (ADVANCE Act) of 2024 have all been critical tools in the legislative toolbox. These bills were passed with bipartisan support, further eroding safety and the NRC’s independence.
The ADVANCE Act proved to be particularly damaging, because it required the NRC to change its mission statement to ensure licensing “does not unnecessarily limit the benefits of civilian use of radioactive materials and nuclear energy technology to society.” This represents a fundamental departure from the agency’s original safety-first mandate, introducing promotional language that echoes the very conflicts of interest that led to the AEC’s dissolution in 1974.
Many former NRC commissioners have sounded the alarm about these dangerous trends. Allison Macfarlane served as NRC chair under President Obama. She warned, “An independent regulator is one who is free from industry and political influence. Once the White House enters into the process, there is no independent regulator anymore.” Three former NRC chairs together warned that recent changes “serve to weaken protections for those who work in or live near reactors.”
The irony of this situation is profound. Just as the nuclear industry seeks to expand deployment of advanced reactor designs involving technologies that are largely unproven and require more rigorous safety review, not less, the regulatory framework is being systematically weakened. These new reactor designs, from small modular reactors to advanced fast reactors, represent significant changes from existing light-water reactor technology. They require intensive safety analysis precisely because they lack the many decades of operational experience that inform current safety protocols.
This regulatory erosion threatens to undermine the critical public confidence the nuclear industry desperately needs to expand. Edwin Lyman is with the Union of Concerned Scientists. He warned that the Trump administration’s approach could “take talent and resources away from oversight and inspections and put them into licensing,” calling the strategy “totally misdirected.”
Former NRC officials noted that the potential consequences extend beyond U.S. borders. “If it becomes clear that the NRC has been forced to cut corners on safety and operate less transparently, U.S. reactor vendors will be hurt” internationally, because “a design licensed in the United States now carries a stamp of approval that can facilitate licensing elsewhere.”
As Trump returned to the White House pontificating about a “golden era” and “energy dominance in America,” the die was cast for the NRC. After DOGE staff infested the NRC and the DoE, Trump’s May nuclear executive orders solidified the collapse of the NRC’s safety role and independence. Adam Blake’s “rubber stamp” comment was just the silent part said out loud. The structural pillars that have protected Americans from nuclear accidents for five decades are crumbling under the weight of industry pressure and political interference.
The ultimate tragedy is that weakening safety oversight just when unproven reactor technologies need the most rigorous review sets the stage for the kind of serious accident that could devastate public confidence in nuclear power for generations. This is the very outcome the nuclear industry claims to want to avoid.
Iranian executed for Mossad espionage was a nuclear scientist, state media claims jpost.com
Eight Decades of Catholicism and Nuclear Weapons sspx.org
Public opinion ranges on TMI, now Crane, nuclear myhometowntoday.com
Ukraine Condemns Russia’s Use of Zaporizhzhia Nuclear Plant as Military Shield, Warns of Nuclear Disaster united24media.com
