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.
Portland in the Australian state of Victoria is the oldest European settlement in the state. It was founded in the early Nineteenth Century but only designated as an Australian “city” in 1895. It currently has about ten thousand residents. The primary industrial activity in Portland is an Alcoa aluminum smelter. It processes about three hundred and fifty thousand tons of aluminum each year. It is the third largest aluminum smelter in Australia and exports about thirty percent of Australia’s aluminum.
On December 2nd of this year, there was a major power failure in Portland due to a problem in the Victoria system of power transmission lines. The Alcoa plant has two production lines which handle molten aluminum in pots. One of the lines stopped because of the power failure which lasted for five hours. During this time, the molten aluminum solidified in the pots on the halted line and caused severe damage. The other line was running at limited capacity because of technical problems. After the power failure, the second production line was stopped. Alcoa is currently assessing the damage and working on a plan to salvage as much of the facility as possible.
About two thousand jobs in Portland rely on the smelter. Alcoa is Victoria’s biggest exporter. There is a great deal of concern about the continued viability of the smelter. Recently, Alcoa had to negotiate new higher-priced contracts for the supply of electricity to the smelter which will cost Alcoa an extra fifty million dollars this year. Alcoa will also lose forty million dollars because of a drop in aluminum prices. In addition, Alcoa is losing an important government subsidy. Currently, the Portland smelter is operating at a loss. Now with the severe accident that just occured, the future of the smelter is in serious doubt and there are some reports that it may have to close permanently within the next ten years.
Australia has a parliamentary form of government which means that there are many political parties of various sizes. The smallest parties are referred to as micro-parties. A member of Parliament (MP) from the Vote 1 Local Jobs has now been suggested that a small nuclear power plant should be built in Portland to supply reliable electricity to the smelter to help ensure its continued operation and contribution to the economy of Victoria.
Currently, Australian national law and Victorian state law prohibit the use of nuclear power for the generation of electricity. There are political forces on both sides of the issue with a major party pushing for relaxation of the nuclear prohibition and a very strong anti-nuclear movement push back.
It may be possible to improve the chances for continued operation of the Alcoa smelter in Portland if a nuclear power plant could be built to supply it with electricity. However, such a plant would require major political changes to the current Australian stance on nuclear power. In addition, such a project would require significant government support to cover the costs of building the nuclear plant. This is unlikely in view of the fact that Alcoa recently tried and failed to receive government subsidies for changes in the regional electrical grid to make the supply of electricity to the smelter more reliable. The outlook for the Portland smelter is grim.
An 18-member team from the International Atomic Energy Agency carried out an Integrated Regulatory Review Service (IRRS) mission to evaluate the regulatory framework for nuclear and radiation safety in Italy in late November of this year. Fourteen experts from Sweden, France, Germany, Switzerland, Finland, Slovenia, Cuba, Luxembourg, Spain and Hungary, plus four International Atomic Energy Agency staff members, spent 12 days in Italy. The mission was hosted by the Italian government and the Italian Institute for Environmental Protection and Research’s (ISPRA’s) nuclear, technological and industrial risk department.
The IRRS carries out these review missions in order to ” strengthen the effectiveness of the national radiation safety regulatory infrastructure, while recognizing the responsibility of each member state to ensure nuclear and radiation safety.” The IRRS review compares the nuclear regulatory frameworks in a member country with IAEA standards and best practices in the international nuclear industry. The review results in a report that identifies good nuclear regulatory practices in the nation hosting the review and also points out area for improvement.
The review verified that Italy has a regulatory framework for nuclear safety. Italy has “state of the art” practices with respect to decommissioning nuclear reactors and handling nuclear waste. There is a comprehensive database and analytical software for evaluating nuclear transport issues. And, the IRRS review concluded that Italy has excellent training for radiation protection experts.
The IRRS review identified areas where Italy could improve its framework for regulating nuclear safety. Italy should continue working on national policies for safety, decommissioning and radioactive waste management. It also recommended that Italy complete work on legal frameworks for “the approval of technical services, the establishment of national databases related to safety and improvements in aspects of the authorization process.”
The IRRS review suggested that an integrated management and communication system should be developed for the new NSRP regulatory board and said that Italy should improve the regulation of “review and assessment, authorization, inspection, emergency preparedness and response, and occupational and public exposure control.”
The ISPRA Director said, “The effort made by ISPRA staff to conduct the self-assessment and to host the IRRS mission as well as the commendable work done by the IRRS team will provide very useful basis for further improving our national regulatory system for nuclear safety and radiation protection.”
Italy has operated four nuclear power reactors in the past but decided to abandon the use of nuclear power following the Chernobyl nuclear disaster in 1986. The last two power reactors were shut down in 1990. The Management Company for Nuclear Plants was created to oversee the decommissioning of the old nuclear power plants and to locate a site for the permanent disposal of nuclear waste. Italy still operates five research reactors and utilizes nuclear radiations sources for medical, industrial and research applications.
Legislation was passed in 2014 in Italy to create the Inspectorate for Nuclear Safety and Radiation Protection (NSRP) which will take over the duties for nuclear regulation from ISPRA which has had that responsibility for many years.
