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.
The Columbia Fuel Fabrication Facility is a factory in Columbia, South Carolina where nuclear fuel rods are manufactured for commercial nuclear power plants. The forty seven year old plant is owned and operated by Westinghouse. The facility occupies over half a million square feet and employs one thousand workers.
If uranium deposits build up in the wrong places in a nuclear fuel plant, it can pose a serious hazard. The uranium used in nuclear fuel rods can spontaneously combust if exposed to air and start a serious fire. If a buildup of uranium passes a threshold, there is the danger of a “critical event” which could release a burst of radiation that could pose a serious or even lethal threat to the health of workers nearby.
In 2004, the Nuclear Regulatory Commission fined Westinghouse twenty four thousand dollars because Westinghouse had allowed uranium to build up for eight years in an incinerator at the plant. The NRC concluded that Westinghouse did not properly assess the risk of a uranium buildup and did not set proper standards for monitoring the incinerator. As a result of the fine, Westinghouse invested three million dollars in improving the equipment at the plant including replacing the incinerator.
Westinghouse notified the NRC five weeks ago that they had discovered that one hundred and ninety one pounds of uranium had accumulated in one part of an air pollution scrubber system. This amount of uranium is more than three times the federal safety limit of eighty pounds. Westinghouse knew about the accumulation at the beginning of June but did not report it to the NRC until July. Questions have been raised about why it took Westinghouse a month to notify the NRC when such incidents are supposed to be reported within twenty four hours of discovery.
On August 7th, the NRC reported that “residual material” was discovered in an old air pollution scrubber component at the Columbia plant that had not been in use since 2002.
This week, Westinghouse notified the NRC that a safety inspection at the Columbia plant found another buildup of uranium in the air pollution scrubber system that may be beyond the safety limit.
The danger of a critical event caused by one of these three incidences of uranium accumulation was minimal facility because other conditions for a critical event were not met. It is unknown at that this time why these uranium accumulations occured. The incidents are being studied and a report will be issued this fall.
Until the reason for the uranium accumulation is discovered and dealt with, Westinghouse has shut down the chemical processing area where the contaminated air pollution scrubber system is located. One hundred and seventy workers will be laid off temporarily while the investigation proceeds and solutions are implemented.
NRC records show that the Westinghouse fuel plant has been the subject of twelve major NRC enforcement records since the late 1990s. A member of the Sierra Club who specializes in nuclear issues accused the company of being lax in the handling of nuclear materials. He said, “It sounds like sloppy house-keeping and poor maintenance.”
Columbia Fuel Fabrication Facility:
The San Onofre Nuclear Generating Station was a nuclear power plant located near San Diego, California. It went operational in 1968, providing over two gigawatts of power to the grid. It was operated by Southern California Edison. In 2004, with San Onofre reaching the end of its licensed lifespan, the owners went to the California utility regulators and proposed an upgrade for the facility to allow it to operate for decades more. Despite some opposition, the utility regulators agreed. The NRC was also approached for permission to proceed with the upgrade with the understanding that no significant changes were to made to the steam turbines that needed to be replaced.
Mitsubishi Heavy Industries was contracted to build the replacement turbines. Despite what the NRC had been told, there were design changes in the turbines that caused MHI express concern over the integrity of the new design. The new turbines were built and installed. Within two years, a steam pipe ruptured due to vibrations and released radioactive materials. It was decided that it would not be cost effected to replace the steam turbines again and the plant was shut down in 2013. Law suits and debates on the disposition of spent fuel followed.
Due to the fact that there was no permanent geological repository for spent nuclear fuel in the U.S., it was decided to place the spent fuel in dry casks for storage at the San Onofre site. It was estimated that it would take about five years and over four billion dollars to bury millions of tons of spent fuel at San Onofre. The fuel is expected to remain there for at least thirty five years. Despite public backlash against storing all that radioactive materials close to the ocean, the project is proceeding.
Holtec will utilize their new Hi-Storm Umax dry-cask storage systems for this project. A reinforced concrete pad has been constructed at San Onofre. Seventy five giant concrete tubes will be placed on the pad, bolted in and then surrounded by concrete. When the cooling pools containing the twenty six hundred fuel assemblies are opened, huge storage canisters will be lowered into the pool. Thirty seven fuel assemblies will be loaded into each canister. The canisters will be inserted into transfer casks which will be lifted out of the pools and drained.
Trucks will carry the canisters to the Umax installation and lowered into the giant tubes which will be capped when full. A twelve ton lid of concrete and steel will be placed atop the tubes and earth will be piled around the whole construction.
One and a quarter billion dollars have been set aside for spent fuel management. The operators at San Onofre hope that the U.S. government makes good on its promise to create a permanent geological repository for spent nuclear fuel by 2050 so they can remove the spent fuel from San Onofre.
Critics are worried about the ability of the casks to safely contain what is referred to as “high burn-up” spent fuel. The use of nuclear fuel with a higher percentage of U-235 came into use a few decades ago. It allows the nuclear plant operators to get more power from the fuel before it needs to be replaced which is expensive and time consuming. Because this is a relatively new practice, its is not well known how well dry-cask will be able to cope with the greater heat and radioactivity of the spent fuel. The critics are worried that the moist salty environment close to the ocean could result in a greater tendency of the canisters to crack. They want Holtec to use casks with thicker sides as is mandated in some other countries storing spent nuclear fuel in casks.
Iran Arrests Member Of Nuclear Deal Negotiation Team nuclear-news.net
THE police force charged with guarding UK nuclear power plants has admitted to a substantial increase in the number of breaches of security last year. nuclear-news.net
Chinese, British energy officials discuss Hinkley Point nuclear project reuters.com
