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 Nuclear Regulatory Commission has a system for assessing the status of nuclear power reactors in the U.S. and deciding what action the Commission should take with respect to a particular reactor. It is called the Reactor Oversight Process Action Matrix. It has five column. The program draws information for reactor inspections and performance indications in order to make an objective assessment. The columns in the matrix from less to more serious are License Response Column, Regulatory Response Column, Degraded Cornerstone Column, Multiple/Repetitive Degraded Cornerstone Column, Unacceptable Performance Column. Any reactor that winds up in the fifth column must be shut down immediately.
The NRC also issues color coded reviews of their findings about particular incidents at nuclear power plants. The colors of the findings are green, white, yellow and red. A “green” finding means that “performance within an expected performance level in which the related cornerstone objectives are met.” A “white” finding means that related cornerstone objectives are still being met with a minimal reduction in safety margin.” A “yellow” finding means that “related cornerstone objectives are being met but with a moderate reduction in safety margin.” A “red” finding means that there was a significant reduction in safety margin in the area measured by that performance indicator.”
The NRC has just announced that it is going to send a team of twenty five inspectors to carry out a “Comprehensive Inspection” at the Arkansas Nuclear One nuclear power plant being operated Entergy Operations in Russellville, Arkansas. Currently, this is the only power plant in the U.S. that is in the fourth column of the Action Matrix indicating that there are very serious problems at that power plant. The NRC inspectors will spend thirty six hundred hours to conduct an independent assessment and document the adequacy of the Entergy programs to “identify, evaluate and correct performance issues at the plant” where Entergy operates two pressurized water reactors.
In March of 2013, there was an accident at the plant when a crane moving a one million pound generator collapsed. Eight workers were injured and one was killed. The collapse of the crane also tore open a water pipe which resulted in a four-month shutdown of both reactors. In August of 2013, both reactors were turned back on. It was estimated that the cost of the accident was around one hundred and twenty million dollars.
Subsequent inspections found a design flaw in the seals protecting safety equipment in the emergency diesel fuel storage building. In June of 2004, the NRC issued a yellow finding to ANO with regard to an incident involving the handling of heavy equipment. In January of 2015, the NRC issued another yellow finding related to flood protection adequacy at the plant. The crane collapse and the yellow findings together moved the plant from Column Three of the Action Matrix to Column Four.
The NRC will charge Entergy Operations two hundred and twenty five dollars per hour. It is estimated that the bill for NRC inspections at ANO this year will cost about two million three hundred thousand dollars.
Arkansas Nuclear One:
One of the byproducts of the operation of nuclear reactors is the creation of plutonium. Plutonium is a toxic radioactive metal that is primarily useful for the creation of nuclear weapons. Hundreds of tons have been produced by nuclear reactors and every day more is being produced. There has been an attempt to use plutonium in conventional reactors as fuel or in fast breeder reactors to produce more fuel but there has been little success in creating an economically viable use for the metal. There is also great international concern that terrorists could obtain plutonium from the stockpiles scattered around the world and use it to construct a nuclear or dirty bomb. Currently fifteen countries have stockpiles of plutonium.
The U.K. has the biggest stockpile of plutonium in the world. One hundred and forty tons have been produced at the Sellafield facility in northwest England. The U.K. government has no current plans for what to do with the plutonium and the cost of security for the stockpile keeps rising. The cost of maintaining this stockpile is not reported as a cost of nuclear power so proponents continue to claim that nuclear power is economically viable.
Japan intended to create fuel from their plutonium but endless technical problems at their conversion facility have prevented this program from achieving success. They have a stockpile of forty seven tons of plutonium and are uncertain as to whether it will ever be put to a productive use.
This week, two nuclear fuel carriers, the Pacific Egret and Pacific Heron, set out from England on a mission to retrieve a small amount of plutonium from Japan and take it to the United States. They have been fitted with naval cannons and there are heavily armed security squads on both ships.
Japan is sending seven hundred and thirty pounds of plutonium from their Tokai Research Establishment to the U.S. Most of this plutonium was given to Japan by the U.K. for experimental purposes at the Tokai Fast Critical Assembly facility. There has been concern that this particular plutonium is a security threat presenting a “high risk of theft of diversion.” It could be used to make forty nuclear bombs.
The shipment of plutonium from Japan to the U.S. is part of the U.S.-led Global Threat Reduction Initiative also referred to as the Materials Management & Minimization (M3) program. This program was established to removed weapons-grade plutonium and uranium from other countries and ship it to the U.S. for safe storage. The plutonium will be sent to the Savannah River site in South Carolina. The U.S. Department of Energy has plans to import almost two thousand pounds of plutonium currently stored in seven other countries. There are plans for twelve shipments over the next seven years.
International groups that monitor the transport of nuclear fuel and waste around the world are highly critical of this mission. A British watchdog group has issued a statement that said, “The practice of shipping this plutonium to the US as a safeguard is completely undermined by deliberately exposing this prime terrorist material to a lengthy sea transport, during which it will face everyday maritime risks and targeting by those with hostile intentions. We see this as wholly unnecessary and a significant security threat in today’s volatile and unpredictable world.”
U.S. critics of the plan to transport the plutonium to the Savannah River site claim that there is no plan for what to do with the plutonium once it reaches Savannah River. They are afraid that the Savanna River site is being used as a dumping ground for dangerous international nuclear waste.
One of the main problems with plutonium is that the world once prized this metal during the arms race of the Cold War. Now it is a liability. But there are still dreams of using it for fuel and, until those dreams are abandoned, it will be difficult to substantial reduce the amount of plutonium lying around in national stockpiles.
Tokai nuclear research campus:
On 1/19/2016, TEPCO announced they measured Cesium-134/137 from 40.5 % of fish in 20km radius sea area from Fukushima plant. Fukushima plant port is excluded. fukushima-diary.com
J. Winston Porter’s recent opinion piece regarding eliminating energy credits for wind and solar was misleading considering his support of nuclear energy. greenvilleonline.com
A bill that would promote nuclear power in Washington state as a clean power source was passed out of a Senate committee this week, but with some opposition. tri-cityherald.com
The Los Alamos National Laboratory could resume production of plutonium pit triggers for nuclear weapons. washingtontimes.com
