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.
One of my goals for this blog is to inform people of the wider political, social and economic context of nuclear issues. The negotiations between members of the UN Security Council and Iran over the Iranian nuclear program have passed the deadline at the end of June but participants are hopeful that they will soon reach and acceptable deal. One of the major issues is the removal of crippling trade sanctions. Iran has serious economic difficulties brought on by the trade sanctions and is eager to find a way to get rid of them.
The Iranian Revolutionary Guard Corps was created in 1979 by Ayatollah Khomeini during the 1979 Islamic revolution which saw Americans taken hostage by the Iranians. However, what many in the U.S. don’t know is that the Corp is not just a military organization. It is also an industrial “empire” with significant political power. The business of the IRGC has grown tremendously over the last decade because of the support of a former president who was a member of the Corp and also from business opportunities created by Western trade sanctions. As Western companies pulled out of Iranian businesses such as the oil industry, the Iranian government awarded huge no-bid contracts to companies controlled by the IRGC.
A recent estimate of the annuals revenues from all of the IRGC’s economic activities is over ten billion dollars. That would be as much as seventeen percent of Iran’s GDP. The IRGC controls major Iranian companies in tourism, transportation, energy, construction, telecommunications and other market sectors. Many of the businesses that profit the Corps are not owned directly by the Corps but are operated by front companies and individuals connected to the Corps. not directly owned by the Crops.
If the Western Trade sanctions are lifted, the Iranian economy will boom and so will the fortunes of the IRGC empire. Lifting of trade sanctions will result in lower insurance, shipping and commission costs will allow Corp businesses to import spare parts, equipment and technology from international companies. To do business in Iran, foreign companies will have to be connected to Iranian companies many of which are be indirectly controlled by the Corps. This will be important because Corps companies such as Khatam Al-Anbia, a huge construction consortium with over eight hundred affiliated companies is itself on a list of banned companies because it is a “proliferator of weapons of mass destruction.”
Considering all this, it is not surprising that the Corps has been a public supporter of the nuclear negotiations. In addition, even though the Corps has proven resourceful in circumventing international trade restrictions, some projects could not be undertaken because Iranian companies lacked technology and expertise required. The removal of the trade sanctions will allow the Corps and its front companies to flourish. Even though the Corps friendly president is gone from office there are still high officials of the Iranian government connected to the Corps. Regrettably, although the Corps is pro-trade, some of its other political positions with international ramifications are considered “hard-line.” Lifting the trade sanctions will result in increasing the power of the IRGC.
Flag of the Iranian Revolutionary Guard Corps:
Ambient office = 105 nanosieverts per hour
I have blogged about the Chinese project to construct two nuclear reactors in Karachi, Pakistan before. I decided to delve more deeply into the subject because I am very concerned about the safety of this project.
Pakistan and China have a long history of nuclear cooperation. It is believed that China helped Pakistan develop nuclear technology in the 1990s after India tested an atomic bomb. There is deep hostility between China and India as well as hostility between Pakistan and India. Apparently China was working on the enemy of my enemy is my friend principle. Neither India nor Pakistan have signed the Nuclear Non-proliferation Treaty. This makes it difficult for either to purchase nuclear technology on the open international market. Currently, global nuclear suppliers are struggling with the question of how to sell nuclear reactors to India while preventing India from diverting the technology to use in their nuclear weapons program. Japan recently gave up and said that they would sell reactors to India without any guarantees. China is the only possible source for Pakistani reactors at the moment.
There is currently fierce competition among exporters of nuclear reactors for customers. So far, China has not found any buyers other than Pakistan. They are working on using financing of the Hinkley Point C nuclear plant project in England in return for being allowed to construct a demonstration reactor in Bradwell, England. The reactor design that China is selling to Pakistan is a Chinese version of a French prototype that they call the ACC-1000 or Hualong-1. So far, it is only a design and none have been built. Pakistani critics of the project point out that Pakistan bought four Chinese reactors in the 1990s that had technical problems that ultimately had to be dealt with by nuclear experts from other nations.
The Chinese reactors for Karachi are going to be built on a beach fifteen miles from the downtown of Pakistan’s biggest city. Safety experts recommend that nuclear reactors be built in low population areas with less than five hundred people per square mile. The Karachi reactors will be in an area with over six thousand people per square mile or more than ten times the recommended population density. Pakistani critics of the project say that construction of these untested reactors in Karachi which is prone to tsunamis is an unacceptable threat to the people who live there. There is an offshore fault in the area that has generated big tsunamis in the past. If there was a quake, the tidal wave would hit Karachi in 90 minutes, far to little time to do anything about protecting the reactors on the beach. Activists managed to get a stay from a court which temporarily halted the reactor project.
The Pakistani government intervened and construction of the reactors has been resumed on the grounds of national security. The government pointed out that Karachci which contains twenty million people has acute shortages of electricity. In the last month, over a thousand people died in a heat wave and the public is pressing for more electricity of provide power for cooling systems. The China National Nuclear Cooperation company is due to complete the project in five years.
This situation is a recipe for disaster. If there is a major accident at the nuclear plant under construction, there would be no possible way to evacuate the twenty million people in Karachi. The repercussions of such an accident would spread far beyond Pakistan and deal a major blow to the global nuclear industry.
Karachi Nuclear Power Complex:
The South African government intends to begin its nuclear new-build procurement process this month, energy minister Tina Joemat-Petterson has indicated in a response to parliamentary questions. world-nuclear-news.org
Russia’s reactor design subsidiary Atomproekt has reported lower earnings and net profit than expected in its first year of operations following consolidation with other Rosatom subsidiaries. world-nuclear-news.org
