One Blog, One Ranger

Posted:  2/22/08

The Nucl'r B'ness

As I look around The Business, I see some exciting things and some disturbing things. Exciting are the plans to build more units, something we knew 30 years ago would inevitably occur.  More young people are looking at nuclear as a potential career.  Exciting is the fact that nuclear energy is now being seen as a clean source of power and potential savior of our way of life.  It is ironic, yet gratifying to see groups like the Sierra Club coming over to our side.  The old anti-nukes have lost most of their punch in the face of facts.

But there are some things that remain concerns to us all.  The current industry management does not seem to fully appreciate the need to retain talent for the near future.  The tendency to put the experienced, higher paid nukes out to pasture to save short term money and impress their boards is just bad business. The aging nuclear work force is retiring fast enough without any help.  The first wave was led by seasoned experts coming out of the naval and national lab programs.  The next wave must be led by those who have been running and supporting nuclear stations for the past 30 years or so, if they are still around.  The expectations and scrutiny are much more stringent now than they were in the '60's and '70's when we built the current generation.  Revival will not happen with new graduates, even if there are enough, without mentors to show them the ropes.  Folks who have stood the boards, learned from the mistakes, and solved the problems are going to be the ones to provide the knowledge for a resurgence.  We can't afford to pay for 40 years of accrued wisdom all over again.

Some of the other current business pressures in the industry must be handled carefully.  For example, the "short outage fever" that struck about 8 years ago is in my view causing a lack of respect for reactivity management.  There is also a disturbing preference these days for blaming human error for bad equipment performance when in many cases the problem is really the failure to spend the money and time needed to maintain and replace aging equipment.  It is easier to do this than to risk recrimination by pushing back on budget pressures from above. I submit that one half of the typical CEO's annual incentive would cover the yearly capital budget of most units.

Of course, the politics will always be there, and we depend on the government (unfortunately) to come through in many areas:  licensing efficiencies, low and high level waste disposal, reasonable security rules, and many others.  The results of the upcoming election may in fact determine how much government support (or resistance) there will be in this crucial period.  The utilities will not risk their stockholders' money or their executive compensation packages on a crap shoot.

Keep the faith.                                                   BACK to HOME

Ken

There ya go lad, keep as cool as ya can.  Face piles of trials with smiles.  It riles them to believe that you perceive the web they weave.....      (The Moody Blues - "In the Beginning," On the Threshold of a Dream)

Note: The sentiments expressed in this blog are strictly the personal opinions of Ken L.Walker and refer to no specific person or entity.