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.
Ambient office = 108 nanosieverts per hour
Ambient outside = 112 nanosieverts per hour
Soil exposed to rain water = 113 nanosieverts per hour
Avocado from Central Market = 100 nanosieverts per hour
Tap water = 96 nanosieverts per hour
Filter water = 87 nanosieverts per hour
Commercial SMR Agreement Reached at U.S-Africa Nuclear Energy Summit energycentral.com
Russia to change its nuclear doctrine in response to West’s “escalation course” Pravda.com.ua
US prioritizes deterrence over denuclearization on North Korea, experts say voanews.com
Kazakh President Announces Date For Controversial Nuclear Plant Project rferl.org
Ambient office = 87 nanosieverts per hour
Ambient outside = 99 nanosieverts per hour
Soil exposed to rain water = 95 nanosieverts per hour
Green onions from Central Market = 84 nanosieverts per hour
Tap water = 96 nanosieverts per hour
Filter water = 83 nanosieverts per hour
Dover Sole from Central = 98 nanosieverts per hour
France is starting up its first newly built nuclear reactor in a quarter of a century. The project is twelve years behind schedule and has suffered multiple setbacks. France is still looking to a nuclear revival with plans for more new plants.
EDF is the French state-owned operator of Europe’s biggest fleet of nuclear power stations. EDF said late on Monday that the first chain reactions at the Flamanville 3 reactor on France’s Normandy coast were due to get under way overnight.
If these tests are successful, the reactor will eventually be connected to the grid before the end of the year. This will happen once it has reached twenty five percent of its total one billion six hundred and fifty megawatts capacity.
The reactor is France’s fifty seventh and a prototype of models that EDF wants to develop at home and overseas. It has come to epitomize the reversals the nuclear industry was suffering globally in the wake of a downturn in orders over recent decades. This has prompted skilled workers to leave the nuclear sector.
Flamanville ended up costing more than four times its initial budget at fourteen billion dollars. It took longer to finish than similar models that EDF built in China and Finland that were also hit by major delays.
Components for the complex reactor design had to be retooled, some after complaints from safety regulators. EDF was also criticized by the French government for how much it had struggled to co-ordinate a project that involved hundreds of suppliers.
Régis Clement is the co-head of EDF’s nuclear production division. He explained that the launch is “… a historic step in this project. Our teams are on the starting blocks.”
EDF has contracts to build new reactors in Britain and is tendering to export its design elsewhere. It said that it had learned valuable lessons from Flamanville 3 that will allow it to reduce construction times in future. However, it still faces a series of hurdles at home despite French President Emmanuel Macron launching a plan to build at least six new reactors.
The orders have yet to be formalized. A political impasse in Paris may only delay the process further, after legislative elections this summer delivered a hung parliament. EDF is spending money filling thousands of new positions to prepare for the orders. It needs to agree on a funding plan for the projects, which could cost over fifty-seven billion dollars.
Several people close to the company said hopes of reaching a deal by the end of the year are fading. An initial ambition to deliver the new reactors by 2037 seems overly optimistic as a result. Other challenges include improving design updates for the future reactors and training a range of staff from engineers to welders. EDF also faces competition overseas from other players amid a worldwide revival of nuclear technology.
Nuclear power is valued for its low carbon emissions. However, it has faced an atmosphere of distrust after the Chernobyl accident of 1986 and the Fukushima meltdown in Japan following a tsunami in 2011.
Why Is the US Fighting Nuclear Threats Behind Closed Doors? Hindustantimes.com
TVA approves further funding for Clinch River SMR world-nuclear-news.org
Kazatomprom lowers 2025 uranium production expectations world-nuclear-news.org
Podcast: Finland’s innovative SMR aims to decarbonize district heating world-nuclear-news.org
Ambient office = 90 nanosieverts per hour
Ambient outside = 103 nanosieverts per hour
Soil exposed to rain water = 104 nanosieverts per hour
Blueberry from Central Market = 93 nanosieverts per hour
Tap water = 94 nanosieverts per hour
Filter water = 80 nanosieverts per hour
Finland is soon to become the first country in the world to attempt the burial of nuclear fuel waste in a permanent geological tomb stored for the next one hundred thousand years.
The plan is to pack the spent nuclear fuel in watertight canisters and deposit them about thirteen hundred feet below ground level in the forest of the southwest region of Finland.
Finland is planning to carry out this exercise in 2025 or the following year. The construction of the underground repository is already underway. It is being constantly analyzed to weed out any potential problems and ensure maximum security.
Onkalo means “cavity” in Finnish. It is the name given to the planned facility that will store spent nuclear fuel for centuries to come. Onkalo is close to the three nuclear reactors situated on the island of Olkiluoto and is approximately one hundred and fifty miles away from the country’s capital, Helsinki.
Every operating nuclear reactor produces radioactive waste, which can be separated into three broad categories.
The first category is low-level waste including paper, rags, tools, and clothing, which remain radioactive for a short period. The second category is the intermediate-level waste, including resins, chemicals, and reactor components, which can stay radioactive for a slightly longer duration. The third category, and the most radioactive, is the high-level waste. This is the spent nuclear fuel from the nuclear power plant. A small portion of the radioactive materials contained in the spent nuclear fuel have an extremely long lifespan, which requires their isolation from nature.
The final disposal canisters are designed to remain sealed and impervious in their final deposition place long enough for the radioactivity of spent fuel to be reduced to a level not harmful to the environment, the company in charge of Onkalo says.
The spent nuclear fuel waste is the product that will be stored at Onkalo because its radioactivity levels can be dangerous for humans and all living beings for centuries.
Posiva is the company which is handling the construction of Onkalo. The company says that the facility consists of a “spiral-shaped access tunnel, four vertical shafts (personnel shaft, canister shaft and two ventilation shafts), tunnels and technical rooms.” The company received the license for disposal facility construction from the Finnish government in 2015.
According to the Posiva, until 2020, over half a million solid cubic yards of rock had been removed from the site for construction to take place. Excavation began after a substantial number of tests and surveys had been carried out to find out whether the site was suited for building a nuclear waste repository.
The annual report of Posiva for 2023 says that the trial run for final disposal will be carried out in 2024. This will include simulation of final disposal with unirradiated copies of fuel elements.
The final system installations in the encapsulation plant are almost finished. The safety assessment and Radiation and Nuclear Safety Authority’s statement on the operating license application for the final disposal facility of spent nuclear fuel will be issued in 2024.
Kishida looks to restart Kashiwazaki-Kariwa units world-nuclear-news.org
Energoatom moves ahead with plans for new four-unit AP1000 plant world-nuclear-news.org
Norway taps South Korean expertise in SMR plant study world-news-world.org
Ambient office = 109 nanosieverts per hour
Ambient outside = 107 nanosieverts per hour
Soil exposed to rain water = 110 nanosieverts per hour
Beefsteak tomato from Central Market = 93 nanosieverts per hour
Tap water = 104 nanosieverts per hour
Filter water = 88 nanosieverts per hour
A South African Ministerial Determination for the procurement of twenty-five hundred megawatts of new nuclear capacity has been withdrawn to allow for further public consultation after legal challenges to the procedure for seeking public comments.
The Determination was reached in 2020 but was formally published in January this year. The official publication cleared the way for procurement activities to start. Kgosientsho Ramokgopa is the Minister of Energy and Electricity. He told a media briefing that the Determination, and National Energy Regulator of South Africa’s concurrence of the process, had come under legal pressure because public comments had not been sought and the procedure had not been fair.
Ramokgopa said, “I have taken the decision…to withdraw the gazette to allow for that public participation to happen.” The minister emphasized that nuclear power remains part of the government’s plans for energy security. He added that it is “happy” to delay the process “to allow for each and every party in the country that wants to add a voice in how we are going to procure this process … to be given the opportunity to be able to make that submission. So it will add another three to six months in the process. We are happy to do that for as long as we protect the integrity of the process; for as long as we cement the transparency of the process so that there’s general public confidence in the work that we are doing. Nuclear is part of the mix. Nuclear is part of the future but it’s important that as we go out…the procurement process must be able to stand the test of time. In this instance, it’s the ability to be able to subject itself to scrutiny.”
Ramokgopa added, “Let’s go back to that process; accord the public an opportunity to scrutinize, respond and then on the basis of that [National Energy Regulator of South Africa] can make a determination on concurrence. Once we receive that, we’ll issue the gazette and ensure that we procure.”
The South African Democratic Alliance (SADA) political party was one of the groups that had begun legal action challenging the determination, with a court hearing scheduled for 15 October. SADA said, “We view this withdrawal as a significant step in ensuring that public voices are considered in decisions of this magnitude. It represents an important win for the rule of law and the principles of transparency.”
The South African government is in the process of updating its Integrated Resource Plan (IRP). This document sets out how it will seek to ensure security of the South African electricity supply. The previous IRP, published in 2019, recognized the need to retain nuclear power in the country’s energy mix. It supported utility Eskom in pursuing a license for the long-term operation of the Koeberg nuclear power plant. The two-reactor plant at Koeberg is the only operating nuclear power plant on the African content and produces about five percent of South Africa’s electricity.
In July, South Africa’s National Nuclear Regulator granted Eskom a license to continue operating Koeberg Reactor 1 for another twenty years until the 21th of July 2044. The regulator is expected to render a decision on the long-term operation Reactor 2 by early November 2025.
