Fast Track

[unclesyd]

Would if be possible to put a number of new nuclear plants on a fast track. Thinking on the lines of the Manhattan Project. I don't know where the likes of Groves will come from but there has to be someone that can move some bureaucrats.

I got to thinking about this after talking with an old acquaintance that retired from a state agency that deals with new power plants either fossil or nuclear. He stated that it was his groups policy to age any requests for permits at least 9 months. If nuclear the aging would even be longer. He stated the reasoning for this was to see if anyone came forward with any arguments against same. They policy was setup to prevent them for allowing something and at any future public hearing be confronted with any negative comments that might make their decision look bad.

 

[davefitz]

what makes you think the main schedule issue is the bureacracy?

There is only one foundry ( on the island of Hokkaido)on the planet earth that can forge the large pressure vessels needed for most of the approved designs for large reactors- the schedule for getting thru that one choke point is beyond the influence of bureacrats.

Then there is the acute shortage of trained nuclear engineers to design review, approve and execute the new contracts.

 

[jpankask]

The NRC has made several improvements to their process that will "fast track" the approval process for constructing a new nuclear plant. The early site permit and combined construction/operating license are designed to do this. During construction of the current generation of reactors, a licensee had to obtain a construction license, construct the plant and then obtain the operating license. While obtaining the operating license, it could be held up by any number of things, including objections from anti-nuclear groups opposed to the plant, for whatever reason. With an early site permit in hand, an approved construction/operating license (COL) and choice of a pre-approved design, there is very little that can delay or stop the construction and startup of a new plant.

The NRC has a specific timeline for review and approval of the ESP and COL applications and has stated that timeline will be improved after they have gone through the first few. That is part of the push behind the loan guarantees for the first few plants to be built, to entice a few companies to be the first to go through the process.

As davefitz has stated, though, at this point the ultra-heavy forgings are going to be the major holdup in the process. Several companies are already in line for the forgings required. Even if they decide not to build a plant, they will be able to sell their forgings at a nice profit, I imagine. The engineering programs have already been ramping up to produce more engineers. I just read yesterday about a company in India who is expanding to produce reactor vessel heads and other forgings required for the new plants. I'm sure others will come on line as well with the increased demand.

 

[Zogzog]

I hope the forging can be done in the US somewhere, we could use a boost.

 

[unclesyd]

My question was based among other things a recent statement that Florida had issued a permit for a new plant and had a request for a permit for another location. According to the the gentleman responding to a question of a time frame for the additional permit. His answer was it would take some time as there had to be feasibility study, site study, environmental study, job market study, along with a few others. What got me was the feasibility study and job market study. We need the clean power and I was told many years ago that if you build a plant and pay good money qualified people will come.

jpankask,

Do you know if this speed up process working?

Do you know if any American licenses have their forgings on order?

It is also sad that we don't have Groves's options like when he needed some thick SS plate and no mill could make it. He told the big three to build a mill if they had to. The existing rolls aren't big enough. Well then get some that are. We don't have the big three any more and Mesta is gone.

davefitz,
I realize that the lack of qualified engineers of all kinds is a legitimate problem and I haven't personally seen anything being done to alleviate this front end problem. Case in point in my grandson's graduating class there were two academically gifted people that interviewing engineering schools and there was no mention by any school of the nuclear option as possible line of study.

 

[jpankask]

There have been a few early site permits (ESP) issued and the timeframe for NRC review was, in my opinion, decent. Those are all for sites that already have a nuclear reactor, though. Each site is different, as opposed to the COL which will be fairly standard if the licensee chooses a pre-approved design. We really won't know for sure how will be process is working for the next 2-4 years. Review and approval of a COL by the NRC will take almost 3 years and they have said they will be able to get that down to around 26 or 27 months after the first few.

There are a few American utilities that have publicly stated they have taken their place in line for the forgings. None have actually announced they are going to build a plant, though with the activity in South Carolina and Texas, it's hard to imagine they won't actually go through with it.

Part of the reason, your schools may not have mentioned the nuclear option is that in the early to mid 90's, several schools either closed their nuclear engineering program or merged it with another program so that a BS in Nuclear Engineering was not attainable. In the case of my alma mater, students now get a BS in Mechanical Engineering and can take 4 nuclear classes with a "nuclear option." Not quite a Nuclear Engineeging degree. Those that still have a Nuclear Engineering program have been increasing their numbers, I just saw an article about the Purdue program growing by quite a bit in the last few years. What the engineering schools do not do a good job of, in my opinion, is advertising that nuclear power plants (and the NRC) need all kinds of engineers; mechanical, electrical, civil. In fact, the proportion of nuclear engineers to other engineers is very small. Couple that with the fact that the larger nuclear entities, like Exelong, Entergy, Duke, etc. probably do a lot of the nuclear engineering duties at their headquarters for the whole fleet.

I don't know that it's necessarily true anymore that if you build a plant and pay good money, qualified people will come. Most often, nuclear plants are built some distance away from large metropolitan areas. Our plant has lost many good employees because they or their spouse couldn't handle the fact everything in town shuts down by 9:00 pm or you have to drive 45 minutes to have more than 5 restaurants to choose from. Also, the lack of engineers in the industry is currently a problem and to be honest, I haven't really personally seen anything being done to alleviate it either. We seem to be taking the wait and hope approach. To be fair, my company has been bringing in a lot more coop students and hopefully most of them will keep coming back and take a full time position but we'll see.

I would sure like to see the American manufacturing base pick up and take up a lot of the needs we will have if the plants start building again. The economy would be booming if half of the money that will be spent on the new plants is spent in America. Unfortunately, at this point the infrastructure just isn't there. It has vaporized over the last 30 years when there was no demand.

 

[davefitz]

A recent review of the US nuclear engineering graduate rate, about 350 nuclear engineers graduate per year with a BSNE/ MSNE/ pHd NE. These graduates are shared amongst the college faculty, military, govt regulators, equipment vendors, and electric utilities. Perhaps a few also decide to be insurance agents, used car dealers,housewives, etc.

On the one hand, this is a small fraction of the number graduated in the 1970's , on the other hand, modern computer technology and modern engineering management practices increase the productivity of a single NE over that of the 1970's. But a large increase in new plants of a new design
combined with imminent retirement of all NE's that graduated in the 1970's suggests there will be a shortage of expertise exactly at a time when the expertise is needed.

While individual engineering tasks might be alternately completed by mech engs and nuc technicians, there is no substitute for a broadly educated and experienced NE to see the "big picture" in a large technical project, to forestall costly errors or worse.

 

[hokie66]

As a structural engineer, I would worry about the ability of my area of engineering to gear up for a new round of nuclear power plants. What happened to the structural engineers involved in the last nuclear plants in the US? Some retired, some dead, some working in other countries or on other industrial projects, I would imagine. But surely there is going to be a leadership issue, and this would probably be across the disciplines.

 

[wmta]

Lets go guys, i can not believe what i am reading.

Let build the plants we need and start now

Let solve the problem, if we have orders for 50 nuclear plants we could solve all these problems

Let's get started!!!!!!!!!!!