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 = 93 nanosieverts per hour
Ambient outside = 87 nanosieverts per hour
Soil exposed to rain water = 87 nanosieverts per hour
Organic carrot from Central Market = 87 nanosieverts per hour
Tap water = 50 nanosieverts per hour
Filter water = 46 nanosieverts per hour
When the term “nuclear power” is used today, it is actually referring to reactors that utilize nuclear fission to generate electricity. Scientists have been working for decades to develop reactors that would use nuclear fusion. Currently there are at least six companies in the U.S. working on fusion reactors that are expected to be smaller, cheaper and safer than nuclear fission reactors with the added benefit of cheap fuel and no pollution or radioactive waste.
Unfortunately, a sustained nuclear fusion reaction that could be used in a commercial power generator is not easy to achieve. Enormous temperature and pressure are needed. Often very powerful magnetic fields are used to confine a superheated plasma but it is difficult to control the plasma and keep it from touching the walls of the containment vessel and dissipating. There is a great deal research in fundamental plasma physics going on as part of the work on nuclear fusion power generation.
The University of Michigan Center for Laser Experimental Astrophysical Research (CLEAR) is conducting a study which indicates that heat plays an important role in the mixing of materials during a fusion reaction. This factor has not received sufficient attention to date. The researchers are studying nuclear fusion in supernovas as well as small-scale fusion reactions generated in the lab. A key part of fusion reactions in both the supernovas and in the lab is something called Rayleigh-Taylor mixing.
When a star goes supernova, plasmas of elements such as iron, carbon, helium and hydrogen are hurled outward. Supernova remnant clouds are created by the dynamic mixing of plasmas with different densities which is called Rayleigh-Taylor instability.
The U of M scientists have concluded that the methods that have been used to model the plasma mixing that takes place in a supernova are incomplete. Energy fluxes that cause heating in the cloud of plasma have an important affect on the mixing. In spite of this, Rayleigh-Taylor instability has not been taken into consideration in astrophysical modeling.
Carolyn Kuranz, is the director of U-M’s CLAER and an associate research scientist of climate and space sciences and engineering. She recently said, “Rayleigh-Taylor has been studied for over 100 years. But the effects of these high energy fluxes, these mechanisms that cause heating, have never been studied.”
The U of M team found that with the increase in energy fluxes and the resulting heating, the amount of mixing and the Rayleigh Taylor instability were reduced. Kuranz said, “These heating mechanisms reduce mixing and can have a dramatic effect on the evolution of a supernova. In our experiment, we found that mixing was reduced by 30 percent and that reduction could continue to increase over time.”
To research the way that heating affects a fusion reaction, the U of M researchers booked time on the largest laser in the world at the National Ignition Facility in Lawrence, CA. This facility uses lasers and heat to create a momentary fusion reaction. This creates conditions that resemble those in the cloud left over from a supernova explosion. Kuranz said, “Rayleigh-Taylor is theorized to occur in all Type II supernovae and there is evidence that these stars are turning themselves ‘inside out’ when they explode. These experiments help us learn what’s going on inside.”
It is believed that observation of supernovas and controlled nuclear fusion reactions in the laboratory will have wide applications in the quest for commercial nuclear fusion power generation. Among other things, this research should help maximize the efficiency of energy generation.
Kuranz said, “Right now, all of our nuclear plants are fission plants. But fusion tends to be more efficient and yield less nuclear waste. Instead of using plutonium or uranium, as with fission, fusion can be generated using lighter elements such as hydrogen isotopes. We have a nearly unlimited source of fusion fuel on Earth.”
Ambient office = 87 nanosieverts per hour
Ambient outside = 93 nanosieverts per hour
Soil exposed to rain water = 93 nanosieverts per hour
Crimini mushroom from Central Market = 65 nanosieverts per hour
Tap water = 131 nanosieverts per hour
Filter water = 121 nanosieverts per hour
Part 2 of 2 Parts (Please read Part 1 first)
The entire WWER is enclosed in a massive steel shell and hermetically sealed. A concrete containment building contains the reactor and containment vessel is strong enough to contain the pressure of an explosion of the core.
The containment zone in a WWER is an advanced safety system. It is designed to withstand the enormous pressure in the reactor’s core in the event of an emergency. It is built to be able to survive an earthquake that registers eight on the Richter Scale, one hundred and twenty mile an hour winds, powerful explosions and a four-hundred-ton plane crashing into the reactor at four hundred and twenty miles per hour.
There is a special sprinkler system in the WWER that can spread boronated chemicals in the containment zone which reduces neutron flow and slows down nuclear reactions. This system is one of the few systems that must have electrical power to operate. Emergency generators are located some distance from the reactor itself to protect them in case of a serious emergency.
Four passive systems are installed in the containment zone of a WWER that can function without human intervention or electrical power. First, there are tanks of boric acid that can absorb neutrons which will stop nuclear reactions. The tanks are located above the reactor and the valves can open even if power to the building fails.
Second, passive coolant systems in the containment zone absorb extra heat and transfer it outside of the zone. Third, hydrogen “re-combiners” prevent hydrogen from building up to dangerous levels which protects the containment zone from internal explosions. And finally, there is a “melt-trap” below the reactor that can trap any nuclear fuel that leaks out of the core in a meltdown. It is composed of ferrous oxide and boric acid which will stop any chain reactions from occurring.
Currently, Rosatom, the Russian-owned nuclear company, is working on fault tolerant fuel which will reduce the possibility of uncontrolled chain reactions and will also increase the efficiency of the reactor. The Modernized International Reactor (MIR) is a version of the twelve hundred megawatt WWER is being designed to satisfy the requirements of the European Union.
Russia is also working on a WWER-600 version of the WWER twelve hundred WWER for sale to smaller markets. The first one of these will be built by 2030 for the Kola Nuclear Power Plant in northwest Russia.
Russia recently installed two WWER 1000 reactors based on an update of an older design in Taiwan. This power plant has ninety four percent of its system automated which means that the plant can run autonomously without needing human intervention most of the time. They still have five operators in the control room for safety.
All these safety features are impressive but, unfortunately, they are only as good as the integrity of the components and the competence and conscientiousness of those who constructs the reactor.
Ambient office = 77 nanosieverts per hour
Ambient outside = 88 nanosieverts per hour
Soil exposed to rain water = 86 nanosieverts per hour
Avocado from Central Market = 95 nanosieverts per hour
Tap water = 129 nanosieverts per hour
Filter water = 117 nanosieverts per hour
Ambient office = 111 nanosieverts per hour
Ambient outside = 80 nanosieverts per hour
Soil exposed to rain water = 179 nanosieverts per hour
Orange bell pepper from Central Market = 78 nanosieverts per hour
Tap water = 52 nanosieverts per hour
Filter water = 48 nanosieverts per hour