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 Aug 24, 2024

    Geiger Readings for Aug 24, 2024

    Ambient office = 97 nanosieverts per hour

    Ambient outside = 104 nanosieverts per hour

    Soil exposed to rain water = 108 nanosieverts per hour

    Tomato from Central Market = 129 nanosieverts per hour

    Tap water = 100 nanosieverts per hour

    Filter water = 85 nanosieverts per hour

    Dover Sole from Central = 1098 nanosieverts per hour

  • Nuclear Fusion 77 – Fluminense Federal University Is Investigating One Neutron Stripping As An Alternative To Nuclear Fusion

    Nuclear Fusion 77 – Fluminense Federal University Is Investigating One Neutron Stripping As An Alternative To Nuclear Fusion

         Nuclear fusion is one of the most powerful nuclear reactions known. It is the process that powers the Sun and stars. It produces a very high-energy output. However, creating nuclear fusion in a laboratory is quite difficult because it requires extreme temperature and pressure conditions.
         A recent study reveals a more practical alternative to nuclear fusion. It indicates that one-neutron stripping can produce similar or greater output than a fusion reaction. This is especially the case in low-energy regions close to the minimum energy threshold required for a nuclear reaction.
         One-neutron stripping is a reaction during which a neutron from a moving atomic nucleus is thrown out as it hits another nucleus. It is similar to knocking a ball (neutron) out of a moving box (nucleus) when it hits another box. This leaves the moving box with one less ball (neutron). Compared to nuclear fusion, nuclear stripping is much simpler to achieve in the lab. These findings open a new and easier avenue for achieving our nuclear energy goals.
         Jesús Lubián is one of the study authors and an associate professor at Brazil’s Fluminense Federal University. He said, “By better understanding the behavior of nuclei in these conditions, we can enhance our approaches to nuclear energy production and radiation therapy.”
         One-neutron stripping is a one-neutron transfer reaction. The thrown-out neutron (from the moving nucleus) is absorbed by the target nucleus.
         For decades, scientists have been studying the mechanism that leads to the transfer of neutrons in weakly bound nuclei. It is important to decode this mechanism because it can greatly improve our understanding of nuclear physics, including various nuclear reactions.
         The study authors performed a revealing experiment for this purpose. They examined the one-neutron stripping process between Li-6 (a Lithium isotope) and Bi-209 (an isotope of Bismuth). Then they compared its output with that of the complete fusion reaction involving the same isotopes.
         They utilized the GALILEO Array (a grammar-ray detector) in combination with the 4π Si-ball EUCLIDES (an advanced laser detector) to investigate gamma-ray emissions and detect charged particles during the reactions.
         They also used a special method known as the gamma-gamma coincidence, to catalog different gamma rays identified in the one-neutron stripping. The researchers noted that “The gamma-gamma coincidence was crucial in isolating specific reaction channels, allowing the team to pinpoint the behavior of nuclei under different conditions with high accuracy.”
         The results of neutron transfer between lithium and bismuth and revealed something surprising. In the above-mentioned reaction, the weakly bound Li-6 nucleus collides with the much heavier Bi-209 nucleus. The result of this interaction proves that one-neutron transfer is able to produce output similar to that of a full fusion reaction.
         The authors of the study said, “One-neutron stripping process yields results comparable to those of complete fusion reactions especially in energy regions near nuclear barriers. Contrary to previous expectations, the results indicate that the one-neutron transfer plays a dominant role at lower energies, exceeding the output of fusion reactions.”
         These results may unlock new opportunities for employing one-neutron transfer in areas such as nuclear energy research. The study authors added that “The process underscores the intricate and nuanced nature of nuclear reactions, providing a steppingstone for future scientific breakthroughs in nuclear science and technology.”

  • Geiger Readings for Aug 23, 2024

    Geiger Readings for Aug 23, 2024

    Ambient office = 119 nanosieverts per hour

    Ambient outside = 100 nanosieverts per hour

    Soil exposed to rain water = 103 nanosieverts per hour

    Red bell pepper from Central Market = 85 nanosieverts per hour

    Tap water = 99 nanosieverts per hour

    Filter water = 84 nanosieverts per hour

  • Radioactive Waste 934 – Fukushima Plant In Japan Is Leaking Radioactively Contaminated Water Again

    Radioactive Waste 934 – Fukushima Plant In Japan Is Leaking Radioactively Contaminated Water Again

         A terrifying incident has occurred at Japan’s wrecked Fukushima nuclear power plant. It has been reported that about twenty-five tons of radioactively contaminated water has leaked from the plant’s Reactor Unit-2.
         The Fukushima plant’s operator Tokyo Electric Power (TEPCO) discovered the leak on August 9th. However, the company claimed that the contaminated water didn’t get into the environment as it flowed into the basement, according to reports.
         Before the discovery of the leak, an abnormal decrease in the water level was noticed in one of the water control tanks in the nuclear fuel cooling pool.
         A robot was launched into the building to look for the reason. It turned out that the water that had leaked from the tank had run into the basement, reported UNN. The robot’s inspection confirmed that the water leaked via sewage systems and there was no outside leak, as per TEPCO. TEPCO says that a robot will be used for a more detailed examination of Unit 2.
         The company has now stopped pumping water into the cooling pond. They claim that the leak will not cause the fuel to heat up beyond the threshold of sixty-five degrees Centigrade.
         Earlier in February, TEPCO detected a radioactive water leak at the Fukushima Daiichi plant. The leakage volume for the February leak was about five and a half tons of water and the area was approximately four by four meters. The company began discharging water from the plant into the ocean in August of 2023. There were many complaints from other nations around the Pacific Ocean fearing radioactive contamination. Some countries banned import of Japanese seafood.
         Previously, TEPCO announced on August 9th that equipment related to the spent fuel pool of Reactor Unit 2 had malfunctioned. As a precautionary measure, the cooling system for the spent fuel pool was subsequently halted while investigations into the cause of the malfunction commenced were carried out.
         On the 11th of March 2011, the Fukushima-Daiichi Nuclear Power Station (FDNPS) suffered major damage after the magnitude 9.0 great east-Japan earthquake and subsequent tsunami which caused flooding of the plant.
         The combined impact and consequences of the earthquake and tsunami caused great loss of life and widespread devastation in north-eastern Japan. It was the largest civilian nuclear accident since the Chernobyl disaster in Ukraine in 1986.
         This was followed by severe flooding at the Fukushima Daiichi Nuclear Power Station which destroyed electrical generators that were needed to cool the nuclear fuel. The fuel overheated, melted down and caused explosions which destroyed other reactors at the plant. Radioactive material was released from the damaged plant and tens of thousands of people were evacuated. The Fukushima disaster was categorized as a Level 7 Major Accident on the International Nuclear and Radiological Event Scale.
         In the first days following the accident, the International Atomic Energy Commission established teams to evaluate key nuclear safety elements and assess radiological levels. The United Nations Scientific Committee on the Effects of Atomic Radiation (UNSCEAR) investigated the levels and effects of exposure to ionizing radiation.

  • Geiger Readings for Aug 22, 2024

    Geiger Readings for Aug 22, 2024

    Ambient office = 135 nanosieverts per hour

    Ambient outside = 113 nanosieverts per hour

    Soil exposed to rain water = 118 nanosieverts per hour

    Mini cucumber from Central Market = 137 nanosieverts per hour

    Tap water = 100 nanosieverts per hour

    Filter water = 90 nanosieverts per hour

  • Radioactive Waste 933 – Acid Canyon in New Mexico Contaminated With Plutonium From Los Alamos National Laboratory

    Radioactive Waste 933 – Acid Canyon in New Mexico Contaminated With Plutonium From Los Alamos National Laboratory

         Watchdogs are raising new concerns about legacy nuclear contamination in Los Alamos. Los Alamos is the birthplace of the atomic bomb and home to a renewed effort to manufacture key components for nuclear weapons.
         Michael Ketterer is a Northern Arizona University professor emeritus. He analyzed soil, water and vegetation samples taken along a popular hiking and biking trail in Acid Canyon. He said last Thursday that there were more extreme concentrations of plutonium found there than at any other publicly accessible sites he has researched in his decades-long career. That includes contamination of land around the federal gvernment’s former weapons plant at Rocky Flats in Colorado.
         Michael Ketterer specializes in tracking the chemical fingerprints of radioactive materials. Outdoor enthusiasts may not be in immediate danger while traveling through the pine tree-lined canyon. However, Ketterer said state and local officials should be warning people to avoid coming in contact with water in Acid Canyon.
         Ketterer said, “This is an unrestricted area. I’ve never seen anything quite like it in the United States. It’s just an extreme example of very high concentrations of plutonium in soils and sediments. Really, you know, the contamination is hiding in plain sight.”
         Ketterer teamed up with the group Nuclear Watch New Mexico to gather the samples in July. July is a rainy period that often results in isolated downpours and stormwater runoff coursing through canyons and otherwise dry arroyos. Water was flowing through Acid Canyon when the samples were taken from water and soil.
         Ketterer’s work followed mapping done by the group earlier this year that was based on a Los Alamos National Laboratory database including plutonium samples from throughout the area.
         Jay Coghlan is the director of Nuclear Watch. He said the detection of high levels of plutonium in the heart of Los Alamos is a concern. Especially as the lab gears up to begin producing the next generation of plutonium pits for the nation’s nuclear arsenal. The Los Alamos laboratory is under the direction of Congress, the U.S. Energy Department and the National Nuclear Security Administration. He stated that Acid Canyon is a place where more comprehensive cleanup should have happened decades ago.

    Coghlan said that “Cleanup at Los Alamos is long delayed.” He added that annual spending for the plutonium pit work has neared two billion dollars in recent years while the cleanup budget for legacy waste is expected to decrease in the next fiscal year.
         Acid Canyon is among the tributaries that eventually pass through San Ildefonso Pueblo lands on their way to the Rio Grande. From 1943 to 1964, liquid wastes from nuclear research at the lab was piped into the canyon.
         The federal government began cleaning up Acid Canyon in the late 1960s. The land was eventually transferred to Los Alamos County. Officials decided in the 1980s that conditions within Acid Canyon met DOE standards and were protective of human health and the environment.
         The U.S. Department of Energy’s Office of Environmental Management at Los Alamos said Thursday that it was preparing a response to Ketterer’s findings.
         Ketterer and Coghlan said the concerns about contamination now are the continued downstream migration of plutonium, absorption by plants and the creation of contaminated ash following wildfires.
         Ketterer described it as a problem that cannot be fixed. However, he said the residents and visitors would appreciate knowing that it’s there.

         Ketterer said, “It really can’t be undone, I suppose we could go into Acid Canyon and start scooping out a lot more contaminated stuff and keep doing that. It’s kind of like trying to pick up salt that’s been thrown into a shag carpet. It’s crazy to think you’re going to get it all.”