Gordian Knot News

Gordian Knot News explores solutions and challenges in the nuclear power sector, focusing on the economics, regulatory impacts, and safety paradigms of nuclear energy. It critiques current regulatory practices, proposes reforms, and discusses the broader implications of nuclear power on global warming, energy policy, and societal costs.

Nuclear Power Economics Regulatory Systems and Reforms Safety and Risk Management in Nuclear Energy Nuclear Power and Environmental Policy Historical Perspectives on Nuclear Energy Radiation Health Effects Energy Policy and Global Warming

The hottest Substack posts of Gordian Knot News

And their main takeaways

SNT: Frequently asked questions.

95 implied HN points • 02 Mar 25
🔬 Science Health Biology Toxicology Radiation Engineering
  1. The SNT model divides radiation exposure into daily doses for better tracking of cancer risk. This helps in understanding how each day's exposure can affect long-term health.
  2. SNT is considered conservative in its estimates, as it tends to predict higher cancer risks compared to other models. This is seen as useful for safety regulations.
  3. There is resistance to SNT in the scientific community, with many experts favoring a different model called LNT. This makes it challenging to implement a new standard for evaluating radiation risks.

The NRC's Abuse of PRA

139 implied HN points • 27 Feb 25
🇺🇸 U.S. Politics Regulation Government Public Policy Compliance Energy
  1. The NRC claims to calculate the probability of a release using PRA, but this is misleading. They only look at certain paths and ignore many other possible scenarios.
  2. There are countless ways a release could happen, and focusing only on a few higher probability paths does not guarantee safety.
  3. The core issue isn't the method of reliability analysis itself, but how the NRC misuses it in their approach.

Lies, Damned Lies, and Probabilistic Risk Analysis

139 implied HN points • 26 Feb 25
🔬 Science Risk Analysis Engineering Public Safety Regulatory Compliance
  1. Probabilistic Risk Assessment (PRA) tries to predict safety risks in nuclear power, but it often fails to represent real-world risks accurately. It can miss important events and rely on unclear data.
  2. Making complicated systems with many backups can create unexpected problems. While it seems safer, this complexity can lead to more failures instead of preventing them.
  3. Claiming that nuclear accidents are highly unlikely can harm public trust. It's better to acknowledge that accidents might happen and focus on minimizing their impact.

A Letter to Elon

461 implied HN points • 15 Feb 25
🇺🇸 U.S. Politics Government Regulation Energy Science Public Policy
  1. The Hanford Reservation is wasting huge amounts of taxpayer money on cleanup efforts that don't actually reduce radiation. The cleanup costs could reach up to $600 billion without making real progress.
  2. The Low Dose Hypothesis (LNT) is questioned because it's believed that our bodies have strong systems to repair damage from radiation. Many people think LNT isn't necessarily true and might even be outdated.
  3. If a new, more accurate model for radiation harm was used, it could save money and allow for cheaper and safer nuclear power. This change could help nuclear energy reach its full potential.

What if tanker crew deaths are intolerable?

783 implied HN points • 14 Jan 25
💼 Business Economics Regulation Manufacturing Safety Productivity
  1. When building ships, having clear rules helps keep everything running smoothly. If everyone knows the guidelines, they can work together to create quality ships on time.
  2. Bringing in third parties like the Ocean Safety Directorate can disrupt the process. Their focus on preventing accidents leads to extra paperwork and slowed productivity.
  3. If the rules are too strict or unclear, it can result in delays and lower quality. Maintaining a balance between safety and efficiency is key to successful shipbuilding.
Get a weekly roundup of the best Substack posts, by hacker news affinity:

Why is INPO a far better regulator than the NRC?

146 implied HN points • 10 Feb 25
🇺🇸 U.S. Politics Nuclear policy Regulation Legislation
  1. INPO is better at regulating nuclear plants than the NRC because it focuses on practical safety and shares best practices among plants. This leads to higher safety standards and improved performance across the industry.
  2. However, INPO has issues because it is too focused on avoiding lawsuits and is controlled by big utility companies, which can lead to inefficiencies. It doesn't really have to compete with others, making it more bureaucratic.
  3. To improve regulation, some suggest that INPO should report directly to insurers and allow plants to choose their inspection services. Making the system more competitive can help reduce costs and make nuclear energy more viable.

Visit to Bataan NPP, 2013-09

124 implied HN points • 11 Feb 25
🕹 Technology Energy Nuclear Infrastructure Environment Urban planning
  1. The Bataan Nuclear Power Plant was nearly finished but never started due to political issues. It had been built during Marcos' regime but was halted after his overthrow.
  2. The plant has been neglected since the 1980s, meaning it suffers from damage and requires significant investment to be operational again. Some believe it could be revived in the future with the right leadership.
  3. Despite being outdated in some ways, the plant's control systems are considered reliable since they don't have software vulnerabilities. There's a discussion about improving monitoring without losing the existing analog system.

An Apology to the Insiders

131 implied HN points • 08 Feb 25
🔬 Science Nuclear Energy Environmental Policy Systems theory Technology Ethics
  1. Some people in the nuclear industry feel offended by criticisms, believing the blame is directed at them rather than the broken system. It's important to clarify that the focus should be on changing the system, not attacking individuals.
  2. The author reflects on their experience in a flawed system, sharing a personal story about a report they wrote that was ignored to protect jobs. This shows how systems can trap people into doing the wrong thing.
  3. The author wants to apologize to those in the industry for any misunderstanding, emphasizing that the real problem lies in the system that has led to negative outcomes, not in the people who worked within it.

The Two Lies that killed Nuclear Power 2.0

300 implied HN points • 26 Jan 25
🔬 Science Nuclear power Radiation Energy Policy Environmental Impact Public Health
  1. Nuclear power has been hurt by two major misconceptions: that major accidents are unlikely and any release of radiation would be disastrous. Both ideas oversimplify complex realities.
  2. The belief that all radiation exposure is harmful has led to expensive safety measures in nuclear plants, making them less competitive against cheaper energy sources like oil and coal.
  3. Evidence shows that our bodies can repair some damage from radiation and that low-level exposure doesn't necessarily lead to serious health issues, challenging common fears about nuclear safety.

The Case for 2 mSv/day. 2.0.

139 implied HN points • 04 Feb 25
🔬 Science Radiation Health Biology Environment Nuclear
  1. The historical dose limit for radiation exposure was set at 2 mSv per day, based on a time when no harmful effects were clearly detected. This suggests that at this level of exposure, there might not be significant health risks.
  2. Our body has a strong system for repairing DNA damage caused by radiation and natural processes. Most DNA issues are fixed quickly, which means low-level radiation may not lead to serious health problems.
  3. If we accept that 2 mSv per day is safe, it could change how we manage nuclear power. It may allow for safer operations and reduce unnecessary evacuations, ultimately making energy cheaper and more sustainable.

The Second Miracle

212 implied HN points • 28 Jan 25
🔬 Science Nuclear Energy Environmental Impact Resource Management Technological Innovation
  1. Humanity has faced many challenges, but we've been lucky to discover amazing solutions like fossil fuels and nuclear energy that have helped us thrive. These discoveries have led to huge improvements in our quality of life.
  2. Nuclear energy is powerful and produces less pollution, but it comes with risks like radiation exposure. Thankfully, we also have a natural DNA repair system that helps protect us from some of this damage.
  3. As we move forward, it's important for us to embrace nuclear power responsibly while being aware of its challenges. If we hadn't recognized its potential, we could have faced serious problems in our civilization.

The Illusory Learning Curve

241 implied HN points • 23 Jan 25
🕹 Technology Nuclear power Engineering Regulation Productivity Manufacturing
  1. There is not much of a learning curve when building ships or power plants. Each project is unique, so little efficiency is gained from past projects.
  2. Regulation plays a big role in increasing costs for nuclear power plants, making them expensive to build. Regulations can limit the benefits of any learning curve.
  3. Despite claims of future savings, history shows that costs for nuclear plants often do not decrease significantly with experience. The actual savings are minimal.

A modest proposal for resolving our differences on CO2.

95 implied HN points • 01 Feb 25
🌞 Climate & Environment Climate Policy Environmental Economics Energy Sources Sustainability
  1. Everyone has a personal view on the social cost of CO2, which can vary widely. It's important to recognize that even if you aren't sure about your view, it still exists.
  2. The trade-off between CO2 emissions and energy consumption is crucial for making decisions about energy sources. Finding a balance is more effective than choosing a source and adjusting to its costs later.
  3. To resolve disagreements on energy and CO2 impacts, we could gather opinions on the best balance and use the majority choice to guide our energy planning.

The political feasibility of UCert.

58 implied HN points • 06 Feb 25
🇺🇸 U.S. Politics Nuclear policy Legislation Regulation Public Perception
  1. UCert is a proposed solution to deregulate nuclear power. It aims to make nuclear energy more politically acceptable.
  2. Belief in the safety of nuclear power is crucial to support UCert. Supporters need to reject the idea that nuclear energy is extremely harmful.
  3. UCert could be politically feasible because it requires changes to only one law and affects a small area, making it easier to implement than broader reforms.

The N-stamp

109 implied HN points • 24 Jan 25
💼 Business Nuclear Energy Quality Assurance Construction Regulations
  1. The N-stamp certifies a vendor's quality assurance process but doesn't guarantee the actual quality of their products. It's more about paperwork than real product inspection.
  2. In shipbuilding, multiple independent inspection teams check quality because they want to avoid costly mistakes. This extra layer helps ensure that ships meet the specifications and are delivered on time.
  3. The nuclear industry's reliance on the N-stamp allows vendors to skip necessary inspections, leading to poor quality products. This system could result in very high costs due to failures in quality control.

All models are wrong, but some are tragically misleading

183 implied HN points • 30 Dec 24
🔬 Science Nuclear Radiation Health Environment Policy
  1. Evacuating people from the Fukushima area was delayed, and some evacuation decisions may not have been based on the actual risk levels involved. This led to unnecessary stress for many residents.
  2. A lot of the radiation exposure from the Fukushima disaster was less harmful than initially thought. Some areas had low radiation levels that people were advised to evacuate from, leading to disruption in their lives.
  3. Models predicting cancer risks from radiation exposure can be misleading. In some cases, the predicted health impacts did not match what real-life studies showed.

The Total Dose Cult

124 implied HN points • 06 Jan 25
🔬 Science Radiation Health Risk Assessment Nuclear Biology
  1. Total dose of radiation can be misleading. It's not just about how much radiation someone gets, but also how quickly they receive it.
  2. People exposed to radiation over a long time can have different health risks compared to those who are exposed quickly. The way their body processes radiation can vary.
  3. When discussing radiation harm, it's important to consider the rate at which people are exposed. This helps to get a clearer understanding of potential risks.

RERF experts claim their bomb survivor solid cancer mortality data is non-linear

87 implied HN points • 08 Jan 25
🔬 Science Cancer Research Health Effects Statistical Analysis Public Health
  1. RERF experts found that solid cancer mortality data from bomb survivors shows a non-linear pattern. This means that higher radiation doses lead to differing effects on cancer rates than previously thought.
  2. They noticed an upward curve in cancer risk among both men and women, but the effect was more significant for women. This is important to understand how radiation impacts different sexes.
  3. The researchers also highlighted a 'High Dose Effect' where fewer cancers seem to occur at very high radiation doses. This challenges some existing theories about radiation and cancer risk.

Is it time for BEIR VIII?

153 implied HN points • 17 Dec 24
🔬 Science Radiation Epidemiology Health Risks Genetics
  1. The BEIR committee, which studies the health risks of radiation, hasn't updated their findings in nearly 20 years. There are new studies and data that could change our understanding of these risks.
  2. Omitting data from certain populations, like radium dial painters, can lead to misleading conclusions about radiation exposure and cancer risk. It's important to consider all relevant groups when assessing risks.
  3. A new BEIR report should include a balanced committee and a clear model for understanding radiation's effects. This would help improve how we manage and regulate nuclear power.

The NRC's Mission Statement

95 implied HN points • 23 Dec 24
🇺🇸 U.S. Politics Legislation Nuclear policy Regulation Government Public Health
  1. The NRC needs to update its mission statement to promote more efficient and less restrictive use of nuclear energy while still focusing on public safety.
  2. The ADVANCE Act didn't really change much beyond the mission statement, and it doesn't force the NRC to consider the benefits of nuclear power.
  3. To really fix the issues with nuclear energy regulation, a new system that balances benefits and risks is necessary instead of just changing mission statements.

A Better SNT?

146 implied HN points • 14 Nov 24
🔬 Science Radiation Health DNA Cancer Repair
  1. The SNT model can be improved by making the DNA repair period depend on the dose rate of radiation. This means that higher doses would take longer to repair, which fits better with the observed data.
  2. There seems to be a limit to how much cancer can result from radiation, especially at high doses. Cells that are too damaged can't repair themselves, which might prevent cancer from developing.
  3. Understanding how radiation affects the body is important for safety, especially for workers in nuclear plants. We need more data to ensure the current models aren’t overly cautious, which can lead to unnecessary costs.

Will space travel force us to think dynamically about radiation harm?

124 implied HN points • 15 Nov 24
🔬 Science Radiation Health Biology Physics
  1. Space travel could change how we understand radiation harm. Instead of just focusing on the total dose of radiation, we might need to consider how our bodies repair damage over time.
  2. Current models for analyzing radiation risk might not be suitable for space conditions. This means we may need new methods to ensure astronaut safety during missions.
  3. NASA's practices suggest that the traditional ideas about radiation limits might be too strict. If we can adapt these rules, it could help both space travel and the use of nuclear energy on Earth.

Why the NT in SNT?

95 implied HN points • 11 Nov 24
🔬 Science Radiation Medicine Health Risk Assessment Nuclear policy
  1. The term 'No Threshold' in radiation discussions is important because it highlights that there is always some risk from radiation exposure, even at low levels. It's a reminder that we can't completely eliminate risk, just like every time we leave our homes.
  2. The current thinking on radiation risk, called Linear No Threshold (LNT), suggests that even small doses are harmful. However, real-life examples, like workers who handled radium, challenge this belief and show that low doses may not cause significant harm.
  3. Critics of LNT often focus on proving a specific threshold for safety, but this can weaken their argument. The idea that there’s a threshold is seen as a tactic that allows LNT to persist, even though it might not hold up against real evidence.

The Fukushima Workers, Part 2

95 implied HN points • 06 Nov 24
🔬 Science Radiation Nuclear Health Research Environmental
  1. The Fukushima workers faced very high radiation levels, especially near the damaged reactors, sometimes exceeding 100 mSv/h. Despite this, they showed remarkable bravery to manage the crisis.
  2. Research on the health of over 5,000 Fukushima workers found no significant health issues by the end of 2019. This suggests that the body's systems are good at repairing damage from radiation exposure.
  3. Distance from a radiation source is crucial for safety. Being more than 2 kilometers away from a nuclear release greatly reduces the risk of harm, similar to how staying a safe distance from fire keeps you safe.

Nuclear Power not only should be cheap; it was cheap: 3 cents/kWh cheap.

307 implied HN points • 10 Feb 24
🔬 Science Nuclear power Regulation Economics
  1. In the 1960s, nuclear power was as cheap as coal, at about 3.2 cents per kWh in 2024 dollars.
  2. Nuclear power plants require significantly less material and labor compared to coal plants, making them potentially cheaper to build and operate.
  3. High regulatory costs, escalating material and labor expenses, and a misdirected regulatory system have contributed to making nuclear power more expensive than it should be.

LNT is prudent.

205 implied HN points • 27 Feb 24
🔬 Science Radiation Regulation Risk Assessment Public Health Nuclear power
  1. Pursuing safety in a cost-effective way is crucial to prevent harm and save lives.
  2. The Linear No-Threshold (LNT) model, while used for regulatory purposes, can come with enormous costs to humanity due to its over-conservatism.
  3. Focusing solely on minimizing radiation exposure without considering other costs may lead to unnecessary harm and consequences, such as deadly evacuations and ruined lives.

Blame the Crew

190 implied HN points • 01 Mar 24
💼 Business Management Construction Regulation
  1. In industries like shipping and nuclear power, there is a tendency to blame the crew or contractors for mistakes rather than holding the owners or regulatory systems accountable.
  2. There is a disparity in performance between building coal plants and nuclear plants, with the nuclear contractor performance often not meeting expectations.
  3. The main difference in performance is attributed to the regulatory system rather than any lack of special technical skills in building nuclear plants.

The Breakthrough in Fusion We've All Been Waiting For

190 implied HN points • 19 Feb 24
🔬 Science Fusion Engineering Electricity
  1. 90 odd power plants in the country are n-U fusion reactors, creating electricity with an engineering gain of about 18.
  2. Operators of these fusion plants are advised to apply for a Section 30 license from the NRC quickly or contact their state regulatory agency if in an Agreement State.
  3. The breakthrough in fusion we've been waiting for involves the significant engineering gains of n-U fusion reactors, surpassing other fusion concepts in terms of proven efficiency.

Four Simple Questions

183 implied HN points • 24 Feb 24
🔬 Science Nuclear power Regulation
  1. Masking up with N95 masks can significantly reduce inhalation dose during a nuclear event, but pro-nuke advocates rarely mention this lifesaving tip.
  2. Spent nuclear fuel becomes significantly less dangerous over time due to radioactive decay, with minimal risk after 600 years. This valuable material can also be recycled and is not as hazardous as commonly believed.
  3. The Linear No Threshold (LNT) radiation model is flawed in its assumption of strictly additive harm. Challenging this model and proposing an alternative that considers our body's ability to repair radiation damage is key to advancing nuclear power safety.

The Trouble with Fusion

183 implied HN points • 18 Feb 24
🔬 Science Fusion Energy Technology Engineering Physics
  1. Fusion faces difficult technical challenges like damage to the first wall, intense heat transfer, and high maintenance due to activation of materials.
  2. Achieving economic viability in fusion is a major hurdle, with immense parasitic loads and a fusion gain ratio that can be a significant challenge to achieve.
  3. Standard fusion processes like using deuterium and tritium result in energy losses due to the need for high quality energy input, which makes fusion less self-sustaining than fission.

Kerala Cancer Data, 2021 Update

205 implied HN points • 09 Jan 24
🔬 Science Medical Research Data
  1. The Karunagappally cohort study in Kerala compared cancer rates in high dose villages
  2. Data from the study challenges the Linear No-Threshold model for radiation risk
  3. The updated study suggests low dose radiation exposure may have lower cancer risk than acute exposure

Underwriter Certification of Nuclear Power, 2.0:

124 implied HN points • 16 Mar 24
💼 Business Regulation Insurance Certification Market Energy
  1. Regulation of hazardous activities requires finding a balance between safety and economy to prevent both excessive harm and economic burden.
  2. Certification Societies, like those for ocean transportation and high-pressure steam, play a crucial role in setting industry standards, inspecting compliance, and ensuring safety.
  3. Underwriter Certification for nuclear power leverages market competition, government oversight, and insurance to provide a feasible and safe regulatory system for nuclear energy.

The Radium Dial Painters and SNT

175 implied HN points • 30 Dec 23
🔬 Science Radiation Nuclear power Risk Assessment
  1. SNT is proposed as a replacement to LNT in radiation harm modeling, with a focus on individual dose rate profiles.
  2. SNT shows potential inaccuracies in predicting cancer incidences at different dose rates compared to LNT.
  3. SNT, while simpler and more conservative than LNT, may lead to overcompensation in some scenarios.

Last word on LNT

139 implied HN points • 14 Jan 24
🔬 Science Research Data Analysis
  1. Linear No-Threshold (LNT) model in radiation exposure prediction is criticized for being inaccurate.
  2. Comparing different dose rate profiles with the same total dose is crucial to understanding radiation harm models.
  3. Dose rate is a critical factor in DNA damage repair, impacting cancer incidence predictions in radiation exposure.

The Gordian Knot News "A" List

168 implied HN points • 25 Nov 23
🕹 Technology Energy Regulation Nuclear Safety
  1. The Gordian Knot News focuses on the importance of cheap nuclear power for humanity's prosperity and environmental conservation.
  2. Understanding key features of radiation and where we went wrong in nuclear power are crucial to solving the issues in the industry.
  3. Proposing a new regulatory system and a radiation harm model are essential steps towards a better future for nuclear power.

Camp Century

183 implied HN points • 01 Nov 23
💾 History Military Science Technology Environment Nuclear
  1. Camp Century was a unique nuclear plant experiment in an extreme environment
  2. The project showed the potential of non-traditional approaches in nuclear power
  3. Camp Century contributed valuable insights into climate history and nuclear reactor technology