FORUM: General Nuclear Issues Discussion Thread — New as of April 2016

Published: January 1st, 2016 at 11:06 am ET


Thread Guidelines:

  • This is a discussion thread intended for general Fukushima information and all other matters related to nuclear power.
  • For all other topics, please use the off-topic discussion forum.

Previous General Nuclear Issues Discussion Threads can be found here:


Published: January 1st, 2016 at 11:06 am ET


Related Posts

  1. FORUM: Off-Topic Discussion Thread (Non-Nuclear Issues) — New as of January 2017 January 2, 2016
  2. FORUM: Fukushima Webcam Discussion Thread — New as of April 2016 January 1, 2016
  3. FORUM: Post Your Radiation Monitoring Data Here January 1, 2016
  4. FORUM: Upcoming meetings, gatherings, & demonstrations about energy issues September 1, 2015
  5. FORUM: Petitions, Ballot Initiatives, Other Signature Drives (VIDEO) September 1, 2015

11,462 comments to FORUM: General Nuclear Issues Discussion Thread — New as of April 2016

  • PhilipUpNorth PhilipUpNorth

    In a post here in late 2017, this observer traced the possible course of a bombing attack on North Korean nuclear bomb test facilities, by a US B1 Bomber group, which flew up coastal North Korea on September 23, 2017.
    In the post, I stated:
    “Incidently, I believe the US bomb was a MOAB (Mother Of All Bombs), rather than a nuke.
    This is so the US cannot be blamed for initiating a nuclear exchange with North Korea, when this story hits the MSM, as it soon will.”

    Today, there is the additional information that the attack rendered the North Korean Mount Mantap nuclear testing facility no longer useable.

    “Beijing: North Korea's underground nuclear test site has partially collapsed following a massive bomb blast in 2017, making it unusable, Chinese seismologists have concluded.
    The North's leader Kim Jong Un declared last week that his regime would halt nuclear and long-range missile tests and shut down its nuclear site at Punggye-ri under Mount Mantap in the country's northeast.”

    We haven’t heard a lot from Kim Jong Un since the US bombing, have we? 😉

  • PhilipUpNorth PhilipUpNorth

    “At least five of North Korea's last six nuclear tests all took place under Mount Mantap at the Punggye-ri nuclear test site in North Korea’s northwest; in the process they unleashed artificial earthquakes and destabilized the mountain to the point of no return.

    According to the SCMP report, a group of researchers found that the most recent blast tore open a hole in the mountain, which then collapsed upon itself. A second group concluded that the breakdown created a “chimney” that could allow radioactive fallout from the blast zone below to rise into the air.

    A research team led by Wen Lianxing, a geologist with the University of Science and Technology of China in Hefei, concluded that the collapse occurred following the detonation last autumn of North Korea’s most powerful thermal nuclear warhead in a tunnel about 700 metres (2,296 feet) below the mountain’s peak. The test turned the mountain into fragile fragments, the researchers found.”

    The mountain’s collapse, and the prospect of radioactive exposure in the aftermath, confirms a series of exclusive reports by the South China Morning Post on China’s fears that Pyongyang’s latest nuclear test had caused a fallout leak. The scientists warned that radioactive dust could escape through holes or cracks in the damaged mountain.”

  • PhilipUpNorth PhilipUpNorth

    “China's earthquake administration said on Saturday it had detected a magnitude 3.4 earthquake in North Korea that was a "suspected explosion", but it was still unclear whether the nation had actually conducted a new nuclear test.

    Amid a growing war of words between Pyongyang and Washington, Chinese officials said in a statement on its website that the quake, which occurred around 0830 GMT, was recorded a depth of zero kilometres.

    Previous quakes from North Korea have indicated nuclear tests by the reclusive state, the most recent earlier this month. The quake was centred near North Korea's nuclear test site.

    The war of words between President Donald Trump and the leader of North Korea escalated Friday, with Trump saying North Korean leader Kim Jong Un "will be tested like never before."

  • PhilipUpNorth PhilipUpNorth

    Connect the dots:
    On September 3, 2017, the North Koreans detonated a hydrogen bomb, creating a M6.3 earthquake.

    But on September 23, 2017, the US flew up the coast of North Korea, with a fighter-escorted B1 Bomber.
    It just so happened, that at this date and time, that a M 3.4 earthquake also occurred at Mt. Mantap, North Korea.

    The evidence speaks for itself.

    Without doubt, the US B1 Bomber delivered a bomb to the Mount Mantap facility.

    You must have brass balls, Mr. Trump, if you did this! Own it, President Trump!

  • PhilipUpNorth PhilipUpNorth

    From my post of November 6, 2017:

    “North Korea conducts underground hydrogen bomb test, September 3, 2017, as widely reported.
    Registers as M6.3 earthquake.
    US fighters escort B1 bomber north, along the coast of North Korea on September 23, 2017, as widely reported.
    Registers as M3.4 “explosion.”
    “Xinhua, China's official news agency, said the country's seismic service registered a 3.4 magnitude event that it originally viewed as "likely caused" by an "explosion." Later, the China Earthquake Administration revised its estimation, saying the quake was not a nuclear detonation.” Also reported on September 23, 2017, by NPR.
    “Last week the U.S. Air Force dropped a nuclear weapon on a mountaintop close to North Korea’s nuclear test site as a warning to that country to stop its recent missile provocations, according to NSA sources. This was reported in the world’s media merely as U.S. bombers flying the furthest north of the demilitarized zone in the 21st Century.”
    Finally, it is widely reported that tunnel collapses at North Korean nuclear test site, killing 200.
NOVEMBER 6, 2017 AT 11:33 AM · REPLY 
“On September 3, 2017, a 4.6 magnitude earthquake-like event was detected at the Punggye-ri Nuclear Test Site only eight minutes after North Korea’s sixth and…

  • PhilipUpNorth PhilipUpNorth

    NOVEMBER 6, 2017 AT 11:33 AM · REPLY 
“On September 3, 2017, a 4.6 magnitude earthquake-like event was detected at the Punggye-ri Nuclear Test Site only eight minutes after North Korea’s sixth and largest underground nuclear test had been conducted. Its seismic waveform, together with the nominal “five kilometers” depth, rule out a nuclear test explosion (the likely deepest depth of burial under Mt. Mantap is 800 meters, see Figure 1). It has generally been speculated that the first post-test earthquake-like event was somehow related to a structural collapse or cave-in, but this remains unverified at this time. Another similar event of 3.5 magnitude having “earthquake characteristics” was detected at essentially the same location on September 23. Most recently, on October 12, a 2.9 magnitude earthquake with similar waveform and depth (~5 kilometers) was detected.[2] These three earthquakes were not caused by human intervention and hence were not related to new nuclear testing. Moreover, in terms of scale, all three earthquakes were smaller (two significantly so) in magnitude than North Korea’s second nuclear test in 2009, which had a magnitude of 4.7 and an estimated explosive yield of about 5 kilotons.“
NOVEMBER 6, 2017 AT 11:39 AM · REPLY 
Has anybody else been wondering why the North Korean government, and Trump, have both backed way up on the formerly constant exchange of threats? In short, North Korea…

    • CodeShutdown CodeShutdown

      PUN, if you are right, then TRUMP preemptively bombed a nuclear facility, killing hundreds in nightmare underground scenarios, further destroying a mountain, putting untold thousands at risk to an quantifiable amount of nuclear fallout. This seems like something the guy would do.

      The U.S. now firmly engaged in preemptive war. All through the middle east, N Korea (if PUN is correct). Lets follow the logic

      N Korea seems to making friendship gestures with S Korea. Any friend of your enemy is an enemy. In August 2004, South Korea revealed the extent of its highly secretive and sensitive nuclear research programs to the IAEA…so S Korea should be preemtively bombed by 'brass balls' Trump. A korean is a korean!

      What about Pakistan? Pakistan stands accused of state sponsored terrorism and they have nuclear. Bomb them before its too late!

      Israel. Israel is aggressive…they carried out airstrikes on neighboring countries. They are steadily taking over Palestine. They have nuclear. What military, terrorist horrors is a middle eastern aggressive country like Israel capable of? Bomb them back to the stone age preemptively. N Korea shows the value! Brass balls Donny is the man to do it

      What about China…and Russia? HUGE threat there. Go get em Donny!

      Now shouldnt we go after the most aggressive countries first? Yes, it only makes sense. Lets go after the country that has USED nuclear…

      • CodeShutdown CodeShutdown

        thats right, Trumps mission of assuring global safety wont be complete until he preemptively bombs Los Alamos, and Livermore. Besides this will create jobs for reconstruction. Destroying things creates great capitalist opportunities for profit

  • PhilipUpNorth PhilipUpNorth

    This is real news, people.
    Get this out, please.

  • razzz razzz

    'The True Cost of the Chernobyl Disaster Has Been Greater Than It Seems'

    "…In Ukraine, in the first five years after the disaster, cases of cancer among children increased by more than 90 percent. During the first twenty years after the accident, approximately 5,000 cases of thyroid cancer were registered in Russia, Ukraine, and Belarus among those who were younger than eighteen at the time of the explosion. The World Health Organization estimates that approximately 5,000 cancer deaths were related to the Chernobyl accident, but this figure is often challenged by independent experts. In Ukraine in 2005, 19,000 families were receiving government assistance owing to the loss of a breadwinner whose death was deemed to be related to the Chernobyl accident. Other consequences include genetic damage to people born after the disaster. Scientists are particularly concerned about cases of microsatellite instability (MSI), a condition that affects the ability of DNA to replicate and repair itself, which has been detected in children whose fathers were exposed to radiation after the accident. Similar changes were found earlier among children of Soviet soldiers who absorbed radiation during nuclear tests…"

  • DUDe DUDe

    Ongoing Chernobyl and Fukushima Disasters
    vid 15 minutes

    Thirty two years ago the Chernobyl nuclear power plant in the Ukraine melted down. Huge radiation releases occurred; estimates are 10x higher than Fukushima. Official deaths are ridiculously low (9,000 people). New analysis recently by Russian scientists assesses the death toll range as 1 to 1.5 million people. Fukushima deaths: 200,000 people within 10 years and 400,000 people within 50 years. Given that we in early stages of abrupt climate change, with huge increases in frequency, severity and duration of extreme weather, how resilient are nuclear reactors?

  • Jebus Jebus

    Credit to Christina…

    "if it's in the bugs & birds, it's in the people"

    Nuclear accidents make mutant bugs and birds

    Biologist Timothy Mousseau has spent years collecting mutant bugs, birds and mice around Chernobyl and Fukushima. In a DW interview, he shares some surprising insights into the effects of nuclear accidents on wildlife.

    From then on we started collecting these little bugs in each place we visited, from the most contaminated parts of the Red Forest to relatively clean areas in abandoned villages. Eventually we had several hundred of these little critters. It was very obvious that deformed patterns were much more prevalent in areas of high contamination.

    This is just one of many similar anecdotes about the deformed critters of Chernobyl. Literally every rock we turn over, we find a signal of the mutagenic properties of the radiation in the region.

  • Jebus Jebus

    Here, I'll clean that up a bit…

    Nuclear accidents make mutant bugs and birds

  • Jebus Jebus


  • Jebus Jebus

    The Transfer of Dissolved CS-137 from Soil to Plants

    The problem of transition of radionuclides to plants is significant for many countries, because there is always the possibility of an accident “a la Chornobyl”. Moreover, soil may be polluted with radionuclides from other sources. Now one of the most acute problems is the transport of the long-life isotopes of cesium – Cs-137.

  • Detailed photos of inside of Fukushima Reactor 2

    Big news folks!!!!!

    They melted it!

  • “…Citing a Kremlin briefing slide that was leaked in 2015, Schneider said that the weapon’s role appears to be the destruction of ports with a massive blast and radiation.

    “’If used against major US ports, it could kill millions in each attack,” he explained, via email. “I have called it “insane” because there is no way to limit damage from its use and no way to safely test it.’…

    “’”’ Russia has a new nuclear drone submarine that is be capable of causing 300ft-high tsunamis, able to wipe out coastal cities, experts say. The drone is the Status-6 system or otherwise nicknamed Putin's doomsday machine.

    “’….The world is headed south with every rising of the Sun.’
    — Sandrah (@Sandrahnk) April 25, 2018…”

  • Jebus Jebus

    The true impacts of the 1986 nuclear disaster on people and the environment

    By Beyond Nuclear staff

    The strategy of the desperate is to downplay and dismiss. A major nuclear disaster is more than just an inconvenient truth for an industry that doesn’t want you to know it kills people. As a result, when a serious nuclear accident happens — arguably always preventable and therefore not strictly an accident — there is a scramble to present the event as largely insignificant.

  • PlowboyGrownUp

    On the Hunt for Mutated Chernobyl Monsters | River Monsters

  • Hitachi seeks talks to slash shareholding in UK nuclear business

    Chairman to ask British premier May to take direct stake in Horizon power unit

    “…Hitachi has recently concluded that the risk of proceeding with the Anglesey project at an estimated cost of more than 3 trillion yen ($27.5 billion), is too great to manage on its own as a private company. It plans to withdraw from the project if restructuring negotiations fail through. Such a move would have significant repercussions for both Britain and Japan…”

  • PlowboyGrownUp

    "(Reuters) – Pluristem Therapeutics Inc, a developer of placenta-based stem cell products, said the U.S. Food and Drug Administration has cleared the emergency use of its therapy to treat acute radiation exposure in a nuclear event.

    Pluristem said it will start preparations to keep an emergency stock of PLX-R18 on hand for use in such events."

  • Jebus Jebus

    How nuclear fucked are we?

    The radiation dispersed into the environment by the three reactor meltdowns at Fukushima-Daiichi in Japan has exceeded that of the April 26, 1986 Chernobyl catastrophe, so we may stop calling it the “second worst” nuclear power disaster in history. Total atmospheric releases from Fukushima are estimated to be between 5.6 and 8.1 times that of Chernobyl, according to the 2013 World Nuclear Industry Status Report. Professor Komei Hosokawa, who wrote the report’s Fukushima section, told London’s Channel 4 News then, “Almost every day new things happen, and there is no sign that they will control the situation in the next few months or years.”

    Tokyo Electric Power Co. has estimated that about 900 peta-becquerels have spewed from Fukushima, and the updated 2016 TORCH Report estimates that Chernobyl dispersed 110 peta-becquerels.[1](A Becquerel is one atomic disintegration per second. The “peta-becquerel” is a quadrillion, or a thousand trillion Becquerels.)

  • Jebus Jebus

    Counting the way's…

    EU-funded Research: Fukushima atmospheric release of 210 quadrillion becquerels of cesium-137 used as upper bound in simulation — Chernobyl estimated at 70 to 85 quadrillion

    Published: September 23rd, 2013 at 5:45 pm ET
    By ENENews

    A must read even if just for orwell's and gassers prose…

  • Many at Fukushima “now have brain damage” — Worker develops 3 types of cancer in a year — Secret hospital used to treat those sickened by radiation exposure — Doctor: “People cried… Can we survive?”

    Published: March 3rd, 2017

  • Lawsuit filed over ex-nuclear weapons plant converted to refuge

    “…Environmental and community activists filed suit in federal court saying the Rocky Flats National Wildlife Refuge outside Denver is too dangerous because of the potential presence of plutonium and other hazardous materials.

    "The suit says the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service did not complete a required analysis of environmental risks. The suit also claims the agency did not examine contamination on about one square mile recently added to the refuge.…”

  • Fusion reactors: Not what they’re cracked up to be

    Aprrl 19, 2017

    Daniel Jassby was a principal research physicist at the…

    “Fusion reactors have long been touted as the “perfect” energy source. Proponents claim that when useful commercial fusion reactors are developed, they would produce vast amounts of energy with little radioactive waste, forming little or no plutonium byproducts that could be used for nuclear weapons. These pro-fusion advocates also say that fusion reactors would be incapable of generating the dangerous runaway chain reactions that lead to a meltdown—all drawbacks to the current fission schemes in nuclear power plants.

    “And, like fission, a fusion-powered nuclear reactor would have the enormous benefit of producing energy without emitting any carbon to warm up our planet’s atmosphere.
    “But there is a hitch: While it is, relatively speaking, rather straightforward to split an atom to produce energy (which is what happens in fission), it is a “grand scientific challenge” to fuse two hydrogen nuclei together to create helium isotopes (as occurs in fusion). Our sun constantly does fusion reactions all the time, burning ordinary hydrogen at enormous densities and temperatures. [cont.]

    • [cont.] "But to replicate that process of fusion here on Earth—where we don’t have the intense pressure created by the gravity of the sun’s core—we would need a temperature of at least 100 million degrees Celsius, or about six times hotter than the sun. In experiments to date the energy input required to produce the temperatures and pressures that enable significant fusion reactions in hydrogen isotopes has far exceeded the fusion energy generated.

      “But through the use of promising fusion technologies such as magnetic confinement and laser-based inertial confinement, humanity is moving much closer to getting around that problem and achieving that breakthrough moment when the amount of energy coming out of a fusion reactor will sustainably exceed the amount going in, producing net energy. Collaborative, multinational physics project in this area include the International Thermonuclear Experimental Reactor (ITER) joint fusion experiment in France which broke ground for its first support structures in 2010, with the first experiments on its fusion machine, or tokamak, expected to begin in 2025.

      “As we move closer to our goal, however, it is time to ask: Is fusion really a “perfect” energy source? After having worked on nuclear fusion experiments for 25 years at the Princeton Plasma Physics Lab, I began to look at the fusion enterprise more dispassionately in my retirement. [cont.]

      • [cont.] "I concluded that a fusion reactor would be far from perfect, and in some ways close to the opposite.

        “Scaling down the sun. As noted above, fusion reactions in the sun burn ordinary hydrogen at enormous density and temperature sustained by an effectively infinite confinement time, and the reaction products are benign helium isotopes. Artificial (terrestrial) fusion schemes, on the other hand, are restricted to much lower particle densities and much more fleeting energy confinement, and are therefore compelled to use the heavier neutron-rich isotopes of hydrogen known as deuterium and tritium—which are 24 orders of magnitude more reactive than ordinary hydrogen. (Think of the numeral one with 24 zeroes after it.) This gargantuan advantage in fusion reactivity allows human-made fusion assemblies to be workable with a billion times lower particle density and a trillion times poorer energy confinement than the levels that the sun enjoys. The proponents of fusion reactors claim that when they are developed, fusion reactors will constitute a “perfect” energy source that will share none of the significant drawbacks of the much-maligned fission reactors….[cont.]

        • [cont.] "“But unlike what happens in solar fusion—which uses ordinary hydrogen—Earth-bound fusion reactors that burn neutron-rich isotopes have byproducts that are anything but harmless: Energetic neutron streams comprise 80 percent of the fusion energy output of deuterium-tritium reactions and 35 percent of deuterium-deuterium reactions.

          “Now, an energy source consisting of 80 percent energetic neutron streams may be the perfect neutron source, but it’s truly bizarre that it would ever be hailed as the ideal electrical energy source. In fact, these neutron streams lead directly to four regrettable problems with nuclear energy: radiation damage to structures; radioactive waste; the need for biological shielding; and the potential for the production of weapons-grade plutonium 239—thus adding to the threat of nuclear weapons proliferation, not lessening it, as fusion proponents would have it.

          “In addition, if fusion reactors are indeed feasible—as assumed here—they would share some of the other serious problems that plague fission reactors, including tritium release, daunting coolant demands, and high operating costs. There will also be additional drawbacks that are unique to fusion devices: the use of fuel (tritium) that is not found in nature and must be replenished by the reactor itself; and unavoidable on-site power drains that drastically reduce the electric power available for sale….[cont.]

          • [cont.]
            “All of these problems are endemic to any type of magnetic confinement fusion or inertial confinement fusion reactor that is fueled with deuterium-tritium or deuterium alone. (As the name suggests, in magnetic confinement fusion, magnetic and electrical fields are used to control the hot fusion fuel—a material that takes an unwieldy and difficult-to-handle form, known as a plasma. In inertial confinement, laser beams or ion beams are used to squeeze and heat the plasma.) The most well-known example of magnetic confinement fusion is the doughnut-shaped tokamak under construction at the ITER site; inertial confinement fusion is exemplified by the laser-induced microexplosions taking place at the US-based National Ignition Facility.

            “Tritium fuel cannot be fully replenished. The deuterium-tritium reaction is favored by fusion developers because its reactivity is 20 times higher than a deuterium-deuterium fueled reaction, and the former reaction is strongest at one-third the temperature required for deuterium-only fusion. In fact, an approximately equal mixture of deuterium and tritium may be the only feasible fusion fuel for the foreseeable future. While deuterium is readily available in ordinary water, tritium scarcely exists in nature, because this isotope is radioactive with a half-life of only 12.3 years. The main source of tritium is fission nuclear reactors. …[cont.]

            • [cont.]
              “If adopted, deuterium-tritium based fusion would be the only source of electrical power that does not exploit a naturally occurring fuel or convert a natural energy supply such as solar radiation, wind, falling water, or geothermal. Uniquely, the tritium component of fusion fuel must be generated in the fusion reactor itself.
              “The tritium consumed in fusion can theoretically be fully regenerated in order to sustain the nuclear reactions. To accomplish this goal, a lithium-containing “blanket” must be placed around the reacting medium—an extremely hot, fully ionized gas called a plasma. The neutrons produced by the fusion reaction will irradiate the lithium, “breeding” tritium.

              “But there is a major difficulty: The lithium blanket can only partly surround the reactor, because of the gaps required for vacuum pumping, beam and fuel injection in magnetic confinement fusion reactors, and for driver beams and removal of target debris in inertial confinement reactors. Nevertheless, the most comprehensive analyses indicate that there can be up to a 15 percent surplus in regenerating tritium. But in practice, any surplus will be needed to accommodate the incomplete extraction and processing of the tritium bred in the blanket….[cont.]

              • [cont.]
                “Replacing the burned-up tritium in a fusion reactor, however, addresses only a minor part of the all-important issue of replenishing the tritium fuel supply. Less than 10 percent of the injected fuel will actually be burned in a magnetic confinement fusion device before it escapes the reacting region. The vast majority of injected tritium must therefore be scavenged from the surfaces and interiors of the reactor’s myriad sub-systems and re-injected 10 to 20 times before it is completely burned. If only 1 percent of the unburned tritium is not recovered and re-injected, even the largest surplus in the lithium-blanket regeneration process cannot make up for the lost tritium. By way of comparison, in the two magnetic confinement fusion facilities where tritium has been used (Princeton’s Tokamak Fusion Test Reactor, and the Joint European Torus), approximately 10 percent of the injected tritium was never recovered.

                “To make up for the inevitable shortfalls in recovering unburned tritium for use as fuel in a fusion reactor, fission reactors must continue to be used to produce sufficient supplies of tritium—a situation which implies a perpetual dependence on fission reactors, with all their safety and nuclear proliferation problems. Because external tritium production is enormously expensive, it is likely instead that only fusion reactors fueled solely with deuterium can ever be practical from the viewpoint of fuel supply. …[cont.]

                • [cont.] "This circumstance aggravates the problem of nuclear proliferation discussed later.
                  “Huge parasitic power consumption. In addition to the problems of fueling, fusion reactors face another problem: they consume a good chunk of the very power that they produce, or what those in the electrical generating industry call “parasitic power drain,” on a scale unknown to any other source of electrical power. Fusion reactors must accommodate two classes of parasitic power drain: First, a host of essential auxiliary systems external to the reactor must be maintained continuously even when the fusion plasma is dormant (that is, during planned or unplanned outages). Some 75 to 100 MWe (megawatts electric) are consumed continuously by liquid-helium refrigerators; water pumping; vacuum pumping; heating, ventilating and air conditioning for numerous buildings; tritium processing; and so forth, as exemplified by the facilities for the ITER fusion project in France. When the fusion output is interrupted for any reason, this power must be purchased from the regional grid at retail prices.

                  “The second category of parasitic drain is the power needed to control the fusion plasma in magnetic confinement fusion systems (and to ignite fuel capsules in pulsed inertial confinement fusion systems). ….[cont.]

                  • [cont.] "Magnetic confinement fusion plasmas require injection of significant power in atomic beams or electromagnetic energy to stabilize the fusion burn, while additional power is consumed by magnetic coils helping to control location and stability of the reacting plasma. The total electric power drain for this purpose amounts to at least 6 percent of the fusion power generated, and the electric power required to pump the blanket coolant is typically 2 percent of fusion power. The gross electric power output can be 40 percent of the fusion power, so the circulating power amounts to about 20 percent of the electric power output.

                    “In inertial confinement fusion and hybrid inertial/magnetic confinement fusion reactors, after each fusion pulse, electric current must charge energy storage systems such as capacitor banks that power the laser or ion beams or imploding liners. The demands on circulating power are at least comparable with those for magnetic confinement fusion.

                    “The power drains described above are derived from the reactor’s electrical power output, and determine lower bounds to reactor size. If the fusion power is 300 megawatts, the entire electric output of 120 MWe barely supplies on-site needs. As the fusion power is raised, the on-site consumption becomes an increasingly smaller proportion of the electric output, dropping to one-half when the fusion power is 830 megawatts. …"

                    • [cont.] "To have any chance of economic operation that must repay capital and operational costs, the fusion power must be raised to thousands of megawatts so that the total parasitic power drain is relatively small.

                      “In a nutshell, below a certain size (about 1,000 MWe) parasitic power drain makes it uneconomic to run a fusion power plant.

                      “The problems of parasitic power drain and fuel replenishment by themselves are significant. But fusion reactors have other serious problems that also afflict today’s fission reactors, including neutron radiation damage and radioactive waste, potential tritium release, the burden on coolant resources, outsized operating costs, and the increased risks of nuclear weapons proliferation.

                      “Radiation damage and radioactive waste. To produce usable heat, the neutron streams carrying 80 percent of the energy from deuterium-tritium fusion must be decelerated and cooled by the reactor structure, its surrounding lithium-containing blanket, and the coolant. The neutron radiation damage in the solid vessel wall is expected to be worse than in fission reactors because of the higher neutron energies. Fusion neutrons knock atoms out of their usual lattice positions, causing swelling and fracturing of the structure. Also, neutron-induced reactions generate large amounts of interstitial helium and hydrogen, forming gas pockets that lead to additional swelling, embrittlement, and fatigue.

                    • [cont.] "These phenomena put the integrity of the reaction vessel in peril.

                      “In reactors with deuterium-only fueling (which is much more difficult to ignite than a deuterium-tritium mix), the neutron reaction product has five times lower energy and the neutron streams are substantially less damaging to structures. But the deleterious effects will still be ruinous on a longer time scale.

                      “The problem of neutron-degraded structures may be alleviated in fusion reactor concepts where the fusion fuel capsule is enclosed in a 1-meter thick liquid lithium sphere or cylinder. But the fuel assemblies themselves will be transformed into tons of radioactive waste to be removed annually from each reactor. Molten lithium also presents a fire and explosion hazard, introducing a drawback common to liquid-metal cooled fission reactors.

                      “Bombardment by fusion neutrons knocks atoms out of their structural positions while making them radioactive and weakening the structure, which must be replaced periodically. This results in huge masses of highly radioactive material that must eventually be transported offsite for burial. Many non-structural components inside the reaction vessel and in the blanket will also become highly radioactive by neutron activation. While the radioactivity level per kilogram of waste would be much smaller than for fission-reactor wastes, the volume and mass of wastes would be many times larger.

                    • [cont.] "What’s more, some of the radiation damage and production of radioactive waste is incurred to no end, because a proportion of the fusion power is generated solely to offset the irreducible on-site power drains.

                      “Materials scientists are attempting to develop low-activation structural alloys that would allow discarded reactor materials to qualify as low-level radioactive waste that could be disposed of by shallow land burial. Even if such alloys do become available on a commercial scale, very few municipalities or counties are likely to accept landfills for low-level radioactive waste. There are only one or two repositories for such waste in every nation, which means that radioactive waste from fusion reactors would have to be transported across the country at great expense and safeguarded from diversion.

                      “To reduce the radiation exposure of plant workers, biological shielding is needed even when the reactor is not operating. In the intensely radioactive environment, remote handling equipment and robots will be required for all maintenance work on reactor components as well as for their replacement because of radiation damage, particle erosion or melting. These constraints will cause prolonged downtimes even for minor repairs.

                      “Nuclear weapons proliferation. The open or clandestine production of plutonium 239 is possible in a fusion reactor simply by placing natural or depleted uranium oxide at any location where neutrons of any energy are flying about…

                    • [cont.] "The ocean of slowing-down neutrons that results from scattering of the streaming fusion neutrons on the reaction vessel permeates every nook and cranny of the reactor interior, including appendages to the reaction vessel. Slower neutrons will be readily soaked up by uranium 238, whose cross section for neutron absorption increases with decreasing neutron energy.

                      “In view of the dubious prospects for tritium replenishment, fusion reactors may have to be powered by the two deuterium-deuterium reactions that have substantially the same probability, one of which produces neutrons and helium 3, while the other produces protons and tritium. “Because tritium breeding is not required, all the fusion neutrons are available for any use—including the production of plutonium 239 from uranium 238.

                      “It is extremely challenging to approach energy breakeven with deuterium-deuterium reactions because their total reactivity is 20 times smaller than that of deuterium-tritium, even at much higher temperatures. But a deuterium-fueled “test reactor” with 50 megawatts of heating power and producing only 5 megawatts of deuterium-deuterium fusion power could yield about 3 kilograms of plutonium 239 in one year by absorbing just 10 percent of the neutron output in uranium 238. …[cont.]

                    • [cont.] "Most of the tritium from the second deuterium-deuterium reaction could be recovered and burned and the deuterium-tritium neutrons will produce still more plutonium 239, for a total of perhaps 5 kilograms. In effect, the reactor transforms electrical input power into “free-agent” neutrons and tritium, so that a fusion reactor fueled with deuterium-only can be a singularly dangerous tool for nuclear proliferation.

                      “A reactor fueled with deuterium-tritium or deuterium-only will have an inventory of many kilograms of tritium, providing opportunities for diversion for use in nuclear weapons. Just as for fission reactors, International Atomic Energy Agency safeguards would be needed to prevent plutonium production or tritium diversion.

                      “Additional disadvantages shared with fission reactors. Tritium will be dispersed on the surfaces of the reaction vessel, particle injectors, pumping ducts, and other appendages. Corrosion in the heat exchange system, or a breach in the reactor vacuum ducts could result in the release of radioactive tritium into the atmosphere or local water resources. Tritium exchanges with hydrogen to produce tritiated water, which is biologically hazardous. Most fission reactors contain trivial amounts of tritium (less than 1 gram) compared with the kilograms in putative fusion reactors. But the release of even tiny amounts of radioactive tritium from fission reactors into groundwater causes public consternation….[cont.]

                    • [cont.]
                      “Thwarting tritium permeation through certain classes of solids remains an unsolved problem. For some years, the National Nuclear Security Administration—a branch of the US Energy Department—has been producing tritium in at least one Tennessee Valley Administration-owned fission power reactor by absorbing neutrons in lithium-containing substitute control rods. There has been significant and apparently irreducible leakage of tritium from the rods into the reactor cooling water that’s released to the environment, to the extent that the annual tritium production has been drastically curtailed.

                      “In addition, there are the problems of coolant demands and poor water efficiency. A fusion reactor is a thermal power plant that would place immense demands on water resources for the secondary cooling loop that generates steam as well as for removing heat from other reactor subsystems such as cryogenic refrigerators and pumps. Worse, the several hundred megawatts or more of thermal power that must be generated solely to satisfy the two classes of parasitic electric power drain places additional demand on water resources for cooling that is not faced by any other type of thermoelectric power plant. In fact, a fusion reactor would have the lowest water efficiency of any type of thermal power plant, whether fossil or nuclear. With drought conditions intensifying in sundry regions of the world, many countries could not physically sustain large fusion reactors….[cont.]

                    • [cont.]
                      “Numerous alternative coolants for the primary heat-removal loop have been studied for both fission and fusion reactors, and one-meter thick liquid lithium walls may be essential for inertial confinement fusion systems to withstand the impulse loading. However, water has been used almost exclusively in commercial fission reactors for the last 60 years, including all of those presently under construction worldwide. This circumstance indicates that implementing any substitute for water coolant such as helium or liquid metal will be impractical in magnetic confinement fusion systems.

                      “And all of the above means that any fusion reactor will face outsized operating costs.

                      “Fusion reactor operation will require personnel whose expertise has previously been required only for work in fission plants—such as security experts for monitoring safeguard issues and specialty workers to dispose of radioactive waste. Additional skilled personnel will be required to operate a fusion reactor’s more complex subsystems including cryogenics, tritium processing, plasma heating equipment, and elaborate diagnostics. Fission reactors in the United States typically require at least 500 permanent employees over four weekly shifts, and fusion reactors will require closer to 1,000. In contrast, only a handful of people are required to operate hydroelectric plants, natural-gas burning plants, wind turbines, solar power plants, and other power sources….[cont.]

                    • [cont.]
                      “Another intractable operating expense is the 75 to 100 megawatts of parasitic electric power consumed continuously by on-site supporting facilities that must be purchased from the regional grid when the fusion source is not operating.

                      “Multiple recurring expenses include the replacement of radiation-damaged and plasma-eroded components in magnetic confinement fusion, and the fabrication of millions of fuel capsules for each inertial confinement fusion reactor annually. And any type of nuclear plant must allocate funding for end-of-life decommissioning as well as the periodic disposal of radioactive wastes.

                      “It is inconceivable that the total operating costs of a fusion reactor will be less than that of a fission reactor, and therefore the capital cost of a viable fusion reactor must be close to zero (or heavily subsidized) in places where the operating costs alone of fission reactors are not competitive with the cost of electricity produced by non-nuclear power, and have resulted in the shutdown of nuclear power plants.

                      “To sum up, fusion reactors face some unique problems: a lack of natural fuel supply (tritium), and large and irreducible electrical energy drains to offset. [cont.]

                    • [cont.] "Because 80 percent of the energy in any reactor fueled by deuterium and tritium appears in the form of neutron streams, it is inescapable that such reactors share many of the drawbacks of fission reactors—including the production of large masses of radioactive waste and serious radiation damage to reactor components. These problems are endemic to any type of fusion reactor fueled with deuterium-tritium, so abandoning tokamaks for some other confinement concept can provide no relief.

                      “If reactors can be made to operate using only deuterium fuel, then the tritium replenishment issue vanishes and neutron radiation damage is alleviated. But the other drawbacks remain—and reactors requiring only deuterium fueling will have greatly enhanced nuclear weapons proliferation potential.

                      “These impediments—together with colossal capital outlay and several additional disadvantages shared with fission reactors—will make fusion reactors more demanding to construct and operate, or reach economic practicality, than any other type of electrical energy generator.

                      “The harsh realities of fusion belie the claims of its proponents of “unlimited, clean, safe and cheap energy.” Terrestrial fusion energy is not the ideal energy source extolled by its boosters, but to the contrary: It’s something to be shunned.”

  • PlowboyGrownUp

    "Nuclear Power Plants Have a 'Blind Spot' for Hackers. Here's How to Fix That."

  • PlowboyGrownUp

    A Nuclear Reactor for Space Missions Passes Final Major Ground Tests

  • PlowboyGrownUp

    BBC news "Electricity output from the Hunterston B nuclear power station could fall by 40% this year after dozens of cracks were discovered in one of the reactors. "

  • PlowboyGrownUp

    "The plan calls for up to $300 million in annual subsidies to help keep three South Jersey nuclear units operating — or to put it more precisely, to keep profits fat enough for the owners, Public Service Enterprise Group (PSEG), to want to keep them open. But those subsidies could also go to Pennsylvania nuclear plants that supply energy to New Jersey."

  • PlowboyGrownUp

    "The Department of Energy is scheduled to decide within days where plutonium parts for the next generation of nuclear weapons are to be made, but recent internal government reports indicate serious and persistent safety issues plague both of the two candidate sites.

    Some experts are worried about the safety records of either choice: Los Alamos National Laboratory in New Mexico, where plutonium parts have historically been assembled, and the Savannah River Site in South Carolina, where other nuclear materials for America’s bombs have been made since in the 1950s.

    An announcement by the Trump administration about the location is expected by May 11 in preparation for the ramped-up production of nuclear warheads called for by the Defense Department’s recent review of America’s nuclear weapons policy.

    Recent internal government reports obtained by the Center for Public Integrity have warned that workers at these plants have been handling nuclear materials sloppily or have failed to monitor safety issues aggressively.

    Personnel at Savannah River, for example, came dangerously close to a lethal nuclear accident in January 2015, when the stirring mechanism for a tank that held plutonium solution failed. Flecks of plutonium sank to the bottom of the tank, close enough for their neutrons to interact in a way that threatened to kick off a nuclear chain reaction – known as a criticality – that could have killed everyone in the room and spread radioactivity. https://amp

  • PlowboyGrownUp

    "San Francisco is so expensive that people are spending $1 million to live next to a former nuclear-testing site — now some residents are freaking out after learning the surrounding area may still be radioactive"

    • PlowboyGrownUp

      "SAN FRANCISCO — A firm accused in a lawsuit filed Tuesday of putting the lives of residents in San Francisco's Bayview and Hunters Points neighborhoods at risk by allegedly falsifying radiation cleanup data says the suit is baseless."

      • danger kitty danger kitty

        Wow, Plowboy, they're still working out of the nuker playbook. Same ploy as Santa Susana and Rocky Flats. Build them houses on questionable land put parks in the areas of high contaminatio That doesn't mean the residents are not exposed. Think of all the dust turned up by construction for the next decade!
        I'd also bet that the cleanup company probably shuffled soil around and buried it under the buildingfootprint or in the footings of the first homes to be constructed. And sold. Before the Navy caught on. I think San Onofre is doing the same thing, using their cask/containment assemblies of spent fuel on the beach to cover up some pretty bad contamination.
        The scummy developer probably structured the deal so that they can walk away at any point if things get sticky regarding the fake test. That kind of scummy developer always does have a contingency plan like that. In fact I can think of one sitting in a high government seat right now. And that brings up another point, since the EPA is involved in this investigation, odds are that they will pick the company that retests. Or maybe John Boy will just squash the Navy's investigation altogether. The Navy didn't look out for the crew of the Ronald Reagan, their own people. I can't see them having the stomach to stand up to the EPA. It will be instructive to watch, this same issue is going to come up again when Edison tries to hand off a disaster back to the Navy at San Onofre.

  • PlowboyGrownUp

    "The U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission has hit Westinghouse Electric with a safety violation after inspectors found the company didn't have proper procedures in place to prevent a nuclear reaction in one part of its atomic fuel plant. A nuclear reaction, also known as a "critical event,'' often is described as a burst of radiation or an explosion.

    Westinghouse failed to examine properly how it would ensure that radioactive, 55-gallon drums did not react with nuclear material leaking from a solvent extraction area, according to an April 25 letter from the NRC to Westinghouse.

    No accident occurred. But regulators are concerned whether the approximately 1,000 workers at the Westinghouse plant would have been exposed to radiation in the event of one."

    • Same to ya HHD…

      …in fact happy everything!

      Let's have some fun here for a change and make our picks for the derby…

      Who are your picks for the derby?

      I like…

      Always Dreaming at 4-1 in the 5 gate…

      Win place and show?

      1st: Always Dreaming

      2nd: Thunder Snow

      3rd: Gunnevera

      Longshot winner? Practical Joke

      Let's bet fake Cigars on the winner…

      But to make it more interesting…

      Let's bet days not posting (unless there is a nuclear or other power related emergency)…

      I'll bet 2 days not posting on Always Dreaming to win…

      3 days not posting on Gunnevera to show

      and 1 day on Classic Empire to place

      And 15 minuets not posting on the trifecta of…

      1st: Always Dreaming

      2nd: Thunder Snow

      3rd: Gunnevera

      Long shot bet?

      If Fast and Accurate wins I'll not post for 38 days if he doesn't win 1 day…

      So for each bet you have a day not posting…

      If you win any one bet plus and minus the difference, Get it?

      This could be real funny money fun here folks…

      Any takers? Taking all comers on this one….

      All bets must be posted in writing before post time (horses to the starting gate).


      ((LIVE)) churchill downs kentucky derby 2018:

      Life is supposed to be fun….

      Place your totally fake bets now folks…

      • This fake game is solely intended for entertainment purposes and has absolutely no influence on any possible future success in gambling with real money…

        Fun? Good for the soul…

        • iddqd

          A fake game isn't a game. So clarify. Secondly, fun is not good for the soul if it harms other souls. Though I guess that depends on your definition of good.

        • HillbillyHoundDog HillbillyHoundDog

          HippieNot, Don't reply to or under my posts. Do not address me. Take your games, diversions, insults and conspiracy to off topic. I consider you, your site and your comments to be inflammatory, abusive, harassing and malicious- knowingly and willful. You have conspired to degrade the anti-nuclear movement and this site and members and would do well to steer clear of me.

          • iddqd

            "You have conspired to degrade the anti-nuclear movement and this site and members and would do well to steer clear of me."

            Slipped a bit?

          • Well then you have confirmed yourself to be a fool….

            And I'll post wherever and whenever I wish…

            Grow a brain and get a life (yea right)…

            • iddqd

              You're gonna, at some point, have to explain the trump/republican hypocrisy and shit. I mean I don't have time for people who can be bought.

              • I'm a truly free man…

                Free from totally unnecessary debt, free from political he said she said crap… And totally free from crazy pills…

                I live and live well and pay my way…

                As far as the Trump BS, why waste my life on nothing but hearsay…

                I know the true score and it has little to do with the waste of time that bitching about nothing accomplishes.

                I post real information and see nothing in the way of so called activists jumping on board to combat the real problems…

                …but post a fun and interesting topic about a horse race and then get responses from mindless whining to lies about what I post.

                So the proof is in the pudding…

                I'm a degrader according to the degraders…

                Or a computer program or a fictitious paid dis creditor because I simply tell the obvious proven truth…

                Wowsers… So much for having fun predicting the race winner…

                Can't do it huh… But these same fools know all kinds of stuff as true that is actually false huh…

                So I'm a anti nuker and am as anti as it gets? NO MORE NUKES plain and simple!!! But the self proclaimed experts can't even glean that fact after 100's of posts by me that say NO MORE NUCLEAR IN ANY FORM!!!!

                Wowswers I apparently haven't made that point clear for more than 50 times already…

                Wanna promote a lie? Wrong place for that…

                Wanna get nuclear stopped in all forms NOW?

                There's a real goal that just doesn't work for the conspiricy theroist posting here…

                • iddqd

                  HD, virtually every 2nd post of yours has lies in it. Wtf dude? And you have the gall to claim you're not a liar? Bullshit. When does that end?

                  • You are full of shit and it's so truly sad that I won't waste anymore time with you fools…

                    There are no lies in my posts shill boy…

                    Point one out, that's what i thought…

                    The lier is you and the proven lie is just above this statement.

                    Funny how so called smart people don't know that the past posts are still here for all to read…

                    So prove it fool… Show me a lie that I have posted…

                    Oh and according to you…

                    "I think your death could be fun"

                    Dont ever threaten me you fucking igget…
                    …who's the true fool and lair here?

                    Wow with the truth staring us in the face from your post above (written in your own hand) it must still be a mystery huh…

                    No wonder you have done nothing to save our children and parents. Fools…

                • iddqd

                  "NO MORE NUCLEAR IN ANY FORM!!!!"

                  Post of the decade, you cannot possibly say something more tarded. You've won the that award dude. There is no competing with that sort of bullshit. HD has claimed the ultimate bullshit trophy of the millenia award.

                  *clap* *clap*

  • So much for having some fun predicting a horse race but then these same mellon heads think they actually know what's going on the world?

    That a 1000000000000000 to 1 bet folks…

    I'd suggest you don't waste your time.

  • PlowboyGrownUp

    "People in New Mexico are gearing up for the fight of their lives– a fight to protect their land and water, and for environmental justice in their communities. Whether they win could affect the safety of communities throughout the country, including yours.

    Local officials of Eddy and Lea counties in New Mexico have teamed up with a corporation called Holtec to propose a massive junkyard for nuclear waste that can hold up to 100,000 metric tons of the most radioactive waste ever created.

    If this nuclear junk yard is built, it means nuclear waste will hit our roads, rails, and waterways before we know it. Thousands of multi-ton shipments would start criss-crossing the country, traveling hundreds to thousands of miles, exposing countless communities to radiation and other forms of danger." …

    Communities in New Mexico, Nevada, and Texas are all being targeted as nuclear waste dump sites, and all of these communities have two things in common–rural communities with large Latinx populations, or Indigenous in the case of the proposed Nevada site." Email from Nuclear Information and Resource Service.

    • danger kitty danger kitty

      Those nuclear power plant operators are a pretty sleazy bunch. Back in the 1970s, the folks that operate San onofre were quietly checking out Indian reservations, offering them peanuts to store nuclear waste on their reservations. Spent fuel rods.
      (personal communication w/ sovereign tribal chairmen)

      Once the nukers get what they wanted out of the fuel rods (only 5% burn up!, that's economical) they don't want anything to do with the waste. Somehow they think they're so elite that they don't have to be "man" enough to deal with their own waste. Just poison the brown people…

  • PlowboyGrownUp

    "Richland, WA
    The partial collapse of a radioactive waste storage tunnel at Hanford a year ago was not unexpected.

    It was a matter of "when", not "if", some Hanford nuclear reservation observers had speculated as other projects took higher priority.

    Hanford watchers said at the time it was a wake-up call. But whether the call has made a difference is up for debate."

  • PlowboyGrownUp

    Billboard "3% of U.S. Military Spending Could End Starvation on Earth"

  • PlowboyGrownUp

    "BOISE – A total of four barrels containing radioactive sludge at an eastern Idaho nuclear site were found to have ruptured, officials said Wednesday, after initially saying earlier this month that one barrel was leaking. "

  • UK's aging nuclear reactors have 'reached threshold limit'

    Nuclear plant operator EDF Energy is hoping to restart a reactor it had to close because of new cracks. Experts have warned against extending the lives of old reactors, saying operators are "gambling with public safety."

  • No one in the world is safe from nuclear accidents, spewing radioisotopes into the air from mining uranium, nuclear energy, reprocessing, refining, weapons production and weapons use in a nuclear war.

    The radiation circles the globe every 40 days.

  • HillbillyHoundDog HillbillyHoundDog

    General Electric: Selling The Nuclear Business Is Good For Investors

    May. 7, 2018

  • HillbillyHoundDog HillbillyHoundDog

    Law360 (May 4, 2018, 6:40 PM EDT) — The U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission has rescinded construction and operating licenses held by Duke Energy Florida LLC related to a $24.7 billion nuclear power plant, putting a lid on the company’s now-failed venture with bankrupt Westinghouse Electric Co.

    At the request of Duke, the NRC in a federal register notice on May 2 approved the termination of the two Levy Nuclear Plant operating licenses and a license to manufacture, produce, use or possess nuclear byproduct material.

You must be logged in to post a comment.