Stories
Slash Boxes
Comments

SoylentNews is people

posted by janrinok on Tuesday February 14 2017, @09:34AM   Printer-friendly
from the it's-not-what-you-know... dept.

A large majority of geeks are enamored with nuclear power -- it's very cool technology after all. The problem of course, is that a nuclear power plant is a complex piece of machinery and successfully building one to operate safely is a delicate task, a lesson Toshiba learned the hard way:

Those troubled projects in the American South are now threatening the Japanese icon's foundations. The value of Toshiba shares has been cut in half over the last six weeks, wiping out more than $7 billion in market value.

It appears a huge part of the problem stems from reliance on a pipe supplier. James Bernhard Jr. bought a pipe fabrication business ("Shaw") for $50k in a bankruptcy deal and then used his awesome dealmaking ability to parlay that into becoming Toshiba's plumber. Of course, in the modern world being a great businessman means sucking money down like a frat boy at a keg, and Bernhard went on to sell Shaw for $3.3 billion even while screwing up all the pipes (from TFA linked above):

After Westinghouse hired Shaw to handle construction in 2008, it wasn't long before the company's work came under scrutiny. By early 2012, NRC inspectors found steel in the foundation of one reactor had been installed improperly. A 300-ton reactor vessel nearly fell off a rail car. The wrong welds were used on nuclear modules and had to be redone. Shaw "clearly lacked experience in the nuclear power industry and was not prepared for the rigor and attention to detail required,'' Bill Jacobs, who had been selected as the state's monitor for the project, told the Georgia Public Service Commission in late 2012.

So there you have it. The reason some geeks (me for example) oppose nuclear power has nothing to do with the technology, and absolutely everything to do with the morons who run it. Businessmen being in charge of this technology means it will never achieve its potential and that it will always be dangerous, because by the time something goes wrong, they'll be spending their billions on hookers and blow in some remote private tropical island paradise, far far away from any consequences of any kind.


Original Submission

 
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.
Display Options Threshold/Breakthrough Mark All as Read Mark All as Unread
The Fine Print: The following comments are owned by whoever posted them. We are not responsible for them in any way.
  • (Score: 4, Interesting) by Geezer on Tuesday February 14 2017, @02:21PM

    by Geezer (511) on Tuesday February 14 2017, @02:21PM (#466945)

    The only incredibly safe nuclear reactors I have direct personal experience with (Westinghouse A2W and C1W) were built and maintained with an enormous amount of government oversight (military: NavSea Code 08, civilian: AEC/NRC), ruthless profit-seeking notwithstanding. However, these were military projects overseen by one of the most demanding engineers who ever slid a slide rule, Hyman Rickover.

    I do agree that the more generalized trend in large "manufacturing" enterprises toward out-sourcing everything but the profits has unfortunate effects on the quality of the end product as you describe, and an obfuscated accountability chain that makes liability enforcement a real challenge.

    Starting Score:    1  point
    Moderation   +2  
       Interesting=2, Total=2
    Extra 'Interesting' Modifier   0  
    Karma-Bonus Modifier   +1  

    Total Score:   4  
  • (Score: 4, Interesting) by linkdude64 on Tuesday February 14 2017, @07:16PM

    by linkdude64 (5482) on Tuesday February 14 2017, @07:16PM (#467065)

    A highly relevant quote on the topic from the man himself.

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hyman_G._Rickover#Three_Mile_Island [wikipedia.org]