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.
There is a great deal of international concern about Pakistan’s nuclear arsenal. There are a lot of factions vying for power in Pakistan split along ethnic, religious and ideological lines. The government of Pakistan has maintained tight control over nuclear weapons but insurgents still managed to attack one of the military bases where the weapons are stored. The great fear is that insurgent groups such as Al Queda or the Taliban might get their hands on Pakistani nuclear weapons.
The recent decision by the Pakistani military to deploy tactical nuclear weapons to the Pakistani-Indian border is increasing fear of stolen nuclear weapons. These tactical nuclear weapons will be small and simpler to detonate than major nuclear warheads. They will be under the control of the local commanders and will not be as secure as the nuclear weapons stored on major military bases. They would be prime targets for terrorists and rebels.
Shivshankar Menon, a former Indian National Security Advisor, has now claimed that the real dangers of Pakistani nuclear weapons theft and misuse is not from terrorists. He says that nuclear weapons including tactical versions are “complex devices that are difficult to manage, use and deliver and required a very high level of skills.” Instead, Menon says that rogue elements in the Pakistani military are the real danger.
In his recent book, “Choices: Inside the Making of India’s Foreign Policy,” Menon raises the prospect of a Pakistani pilot in a plane equipped with nuclear weapons deciding to attack India without orders or permission. Ground based commanders with access to tactical nuclear weapons could also decide to unleash them on Indian troops or military facilities without orders or permission. Menon points out that Pakistan is the only nuclear armed nation in the world whose nuclear arsenal is exclusively under the control of the military.
Menon claims that Indian nuclear weapons exist solely as a deterrent and not to compensate for a military imbalance with respect to the number of troops that a country might possess. Pakistan, to the contrary, explicitly says that it is deploying tactical nuclear weapons to the border with India to deal with a possible ground invasion by the numerically superior Indian army. Menon says that while India has a no-first use policy, if Pakistan used tactical nuclear weapons inside Pakistan against Indian troops, India would retaliate with a full scale nuclear attack.
The recent attacks by Pakistani militants on Indian troops in Kashmir and the retaliatory artillery attack by India on Pakistan positions near the border have heightened tensions between Pakistan and India. If this cycle of attack and counter attack continues, it could lead to a nuclear exchange between Pakistan and India which would be disastrous for both nations. In addition, if more than a hundred nuclear warheads are detonated in such an exchange, it might lead to a nuclear winter that could destroy our global civilization.
Whether terrorists, rogue military elements or the high command of the Pakistani military, the use of nuclear weapons by Pakistan could spill over into nuclear exchanges between other countries including the U.S., NATO, Russia and China. World War III is becoming more likely.
Bitcoin is a virtual currency that has been in the news lately. It is based on something called “blockchain.” “A blockchain is a distributed database that maintains a continuously-growing list of records called blocks secured from tampering and revision. Each block contains a timestamp and a link to a previous block.” (Wikipedia) The idea behind the blockchain is that as transactions are recorded, the growing database is distributed to all parties that are using the system. Everyone has a complete record of all transactions. With respect to bitcoin, each transaction with bitcoins is recorded and distributed to all bitcoin users.
The Pentagon is now considering the use of the blockchain system to make its computers more secure including the computers that control the U.S. nuclear arsenal. The Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency (DARPA) has awarded a one million and eight hundred thousand dollar contract to Galois, a computer security firm, to research the possibility of using a blockchain system purchased from Guardtime to allow administrators of Pentagon computers to discover if a network or database has been compromised. Every time a block in the blockchain database is accessed or altered, a transaction record is generated and sent to all users.
When an authorized user accesses a block or makes a change, the system users are informed and the access or change is accepted as legitimate. On the other hand, if a block is accessed or altered by someone who is not authorized, all users are informed that the access or change is not authorized and an investigation is triggered.
While this system does not immediately prevent unauthorized access or alteration of blocks, it does raise an alert that something is wrong. With respect to alterations, these could be prevented by running the party trying to make the alteration against a list of authorized users and blocking the change if there is no match. This is an excellent automated monitoring system that does not require constant human involvement.
When used to protect computer systems that control our nuclear weapons, the blockchain system could raise an alarm if the system is accessed by unauthorized users. The system would also prevent such unauthorized users from making changes to computer code that might interfere with missile launches or change targets for missiles.
If blockchaining is found to be useful for protecting Pentagon computers, then the blockchain technology will probably spread to many other security applications. There has been a great deal of concern recently that hackers will be able to penetrate computer systems controlling critical infrastructure in the U.S. such as the computers that control nuclear reactors. Blockchaining might be a good tool from preventing remote sabotage of nuclear power plants and other infrastructure like dams and components of the national electrical grid.
There was a recent report that stated that nuclear facilities were not being protected against cyberattacks. Their security was found to be way behind the security of other industrial sectors. Blockchaining may help plug this dangerous hole in U.S. cyber security.
Today’s blog combines technical information about a new generation of small Chinese nuclear reactors with geopolitical issues in the South China Sea. When dealing with multiple topics in a single article, there are always issues with respect to how to present the different aspect and in what order. For today, I am going to talk about the technical issues before the geopolitical issues.
The Chinese Academy of Sciences’ Institute of Nuclear Energy Safety Technology in Hefei, Anhui province in China, is working on what is being referred to as the smallest nuclear reactor design for commercial use. The People’s Liberation Army of China is providing part of the funding for the project. The Institute hopes to have production models ready to ship within five years.
The new reactors are called “hedianbao”, or “portable nuclear battery pack”. They based on an old Soviet design that was used to power submarines in the 1970s. The units use lead to cool the reactor and transfer heat. They will be about twenty feet long and about eight and a half feet wide. They can be transported in shipping containers. One fueling will last for decades. The reactors can generation about ten megawatts of heat. If the heat is used to produce electricity, it is estimated that this type of reactor could power about fifty thousand homes. It will not product dust or smoke and so will not pollute the local environment. The reactors will be located on floating platforms.
There is an ongoing territorial dispute between China and the Philippines over the ownership of the Spratly Islands in the South China Sea. China has occupied these islands and has been dredging and extending them. An international Tribunal recently denied China’s claim to the Islands but China denied the authority of the tribunal. There are also five other nations that are arguing about territorial waters in the South China Sea. The U.S. has been sailing naval vessels in the area as a show of force. A great deal of international shipping flows through the Straits of Malacca in the South China Sea and many nations are concerned about China working to claim the whole Sea. As tensions have increase, China has been considering starting full time patrols by nuclear submarines in the South China Sea.
One of the first areas that is being considered by China for the deployment of the new reactors is the Spratly Islands. The China National Nuclear Corporation is talking about building up to twenty of these reactors to power homes and businesses on the Spratly Islands. This is consistent with the ongoing development of infrastructure on the islands by China.
These reactors could be used to desalinate the water as well as for providing electricity. Unfortunately for the marine environment, the heat generated by the reactors will have serious detrimental effect on fish. The desalinization will increase the salinity in the area and could affect fish. A nuclear accident could lead radioactive materials that would wind up in fish and be carried by ocean currents to other nations in the area.
The introduction of these reactors into the South China Sea cannot fail to increase tensions even further between China and other nations in the area, as well as the U.S.
There have been a lot of stories lately in the press about the danger of cyberattacks on critical U.S. infrastructure. Chatham House, an international think-tank, issued a report over a year ago that gave details on fifty different incidents of hacking at nuclear power plants in different countries. The author of the report criticized the nuclear industry and said that many nuclear facilities are in denial about the need for enhanced cyber security. The report said that the nuclear industry is “far behind” other industrial sectors in improving cyber security.
Some in the nuclear industry take comfort in the claim that no hacking at a nuclear power plant could result in the release of dangerous radiation or radioactive materials. The report calls this idea into question.
Another reason that the nuclear industry gives for a lack of concern is the fact that their control computers are not connected to the internet and so would not be vulnerable to an online attack. Investigators have found out that despite when the operators may think about there being “air-gap” separation between their computers and the Internet, many nuclear control computers actually are accessible to the Internet. The critics also point out that there are other ways that an infection can be delivered.
There was an incident in 2003 at the Davis Bessie nuclear power plant in Ohio which involved an engineer accessing the plants computers from his laptop through a virtual private network connection (VPN) from his home. When he connected his laptop to a nuclear power plant’s computers, a computer worm that had infected his laptop, uploaded itself and caused a critical safety system to overload and shutdown. This is a concrete example of the possibility that a cyber attack on a nuclear power plant could compromise critical safety systems that could lead to a serious accident at the plant. In 2006, a computer at Browns Ferry nuclear power plant in Alabama overloaded and nearly caused a meltdown. In 2008, a contractor uploaded a routine patch update to the control system of the Hatch nuclear power plant in Georgia which triggered a shutdown of the reactor.
In addition to cyber attacks from viruses there are also dangers from inadequate password protection for the control computers. Some have no passwords and other have default passwords like “1234”. This means that someone could easily log into a control computer and cause mischief with plant operations that could lead to serious accidents.
After the recent terrorist attack in Paris, there was evidence that the same group was planning on infiltrating a nuclear facility in Belgium. A guard had his identification stolen. There were Belgians involved with the terrorists who had nuclear training and could have caused serious problems if they gotten into the plant and accessed the control computers.
Another problem is that companies that own and operate nuclear facilities are opening more remote access portals into plant control computers in order to collect data on plant operations for the purpose of operational analysis and increasing efficiency. These portals could be used by cyber terrorists.
Computer and nuclear contracted technicians often bring their own computers into a nuclear power plant in order to carry out their tasks. Any of these external computers could be infected and could introduce dangerous viruses into the control computers. Such external computers are routinely connected to the plants computer and left unattended overnight.
Yukiya Amano, the Director of the International Atomic Energy Agency just announced the attack. Amano said, “This is not an imaginary risk. The issue of cyber-attacks on nuclear-related facilities or activities should be taken very seriously. We never know if we know everything or if it’s the tip of the iceberg.”
Of all public infrastructure, nuclear power plants are some of the most dangerous and most vulnerable. Cyber security must be taken seriously and enhanced before an attack endangers millions of Americans.
