Alarm over shortage of nuclear experts

[Dogmudgeon]

No nukes. No nuclear scientists. No kidding.

http://www.boston.com/news/nation/washington/articles/2010/04/03/alarm_over_shortage_of_nuclear_experts?mode=PF">Alarm over shortage of nuclear experts
US races to draw interest in field

By Bryan Bender, Globe Staff | April 3, 2010

WASHINGTON — The United States is facing a critical shortage of nuclear scientists and engineers, even as demand rises for their expertise in managing an aging US arsenal, monitoring dangerous weapons stockpiles around the world, and operating new nuclear power plants, according to the latest government figures and independent studies.

The decades-long loss of nuclear know-how, the result of the attraction of other disciplines perceived as more relevant or challenging, is most acute at the Department of Energy agency that maintains America’s nuclear warheads and combats nuclear proliferation, according to internal agency documents.

...

To narrow the gap, the Obama administration is proposing to boost a series of programs — including cash bonuses and tuition reimbursement — to persuade a new generation of students to earn degrees in nuclear physics, engineering, and other related disciplines and choose a career in weapons work, according to budget documents. The nuclear security agency has also established guidelines requiring contractors that run its weapons laboratories — currently on the order of 30,000 — to recruit and train more workers.

...

After the nuclear energy industry stagnated for decades, many universities dropped degree programs in nuclear science and engineering, according to a study by the American Physical Society.

According to Sekazi Mtingwa, a professor of nuclear physics at MIT, the study found that the number of graduates with doctorate degrees in nuclear chemistry — a critical skill needed in military and civilian programs — had “dwindled down very close to zero.’’

“It was so bad that the National Science Foundation dropped it as a category’’ in its annual tracking of scientific disciplines, Mtingwa said.

...

http://www.boston.com/news/nation/washington/articles/2010/04/03/alarm_over_shortage_of_nuclear_experts?mode=PF">Read the entire article at The Boston Globe (single-page print format)

If the "Human Life Amendment" passed early in the Reagan years, I imagine that obstetrics and gynecology would be in a similar state now.

--d!

[Liberation Angel]

1. 30 years ago there was already a shortage of qualified inspectors for nuke plants

When I attended hearings as a Congressional staffer some years back i remember clearly that the DOE/AEC/NRC folks were dismayed that they could not get enough qualified inspectors in the plants as early as 1980 and thus operating them was more risky than it should be.

This has been a chronic failure of the industry and because it is a dinosour technology which is deadly to boot, the likleihood of getting qualified folks to go into that industry is not very good. I suppose we could hire Iranians and North Koreans and Indians and Chinese, etc, but is that really smart?

This is a dying industry. let it die for the benefit of all of us.

As for the weapons issues etc, THAT I support as we must have ways to protect ourselves from errors and we need experts for that - but not to promote death and destruction of new nuke plants.

[bananas]

3. People were leaving the industry in the mid-70s

reactors orders collapsed in 1974 and cancellations for existing orders took off.
Demand destruction from the 1973 oil embargo,
increased construction costs as safety problems were discovered,
increased opposition because of proliferation, waste, and safety issues,
whistleblowers coming forward,
the murder of Karen Silkwood, etc.

A lot of nuclear engineers went into Star Wars during the 1980s,
even though they knew it wouldn't work, it was a gravy train.

[Liberation Angel]

2. 30 years ago there was already a shortage of qualified inspectors for nuke plants

When I attended hearings as a Congressional staffer some years back i remember clearly that the DOE/AEC/NRC folks were dismayed that they could not get enough qualified inspectors in the plants as early as 1980 and thus operating them was more risky than it should be.

This has been a chronic failure of the industry and because it is a dinosour technology which is deadly to boot, the likleihood of getting qualified folks to go into that industry is not very good. I suppose we could hire Iranians and North Koreans and Indians and Chinese, etc, but is that really smart?

This is a dying industry. let it die for the benefit of all of us.

As for the weapons issues etc, THAT I support as we must have ways to protect ourselves from errors and we need experts for that - but not to promote death and destruction of new nuke plants.

[bananas]

4. There was a time when posts like that weren't allowed in the EE forum

Part of the nuclear industry PR campaign was to pretend that there was no relationship between nuclear energy and nuclear proliferation. The moderators had been so befuddled by this nuclear industry propaganda they would move posts about nuclear proliferation out of the forum. I'm glad to see that even pro-nukes are now posting articles about the close association between nuclear weapons and nuclear energy.
:applause:

[Dogmudgeon]

5. Your subject line says it all

In reality, there was never a time when "posts like that" weren't allowed in the EE forum. Nuclear energy isn't a progressive litmus test, nor has it ever been.

As for the continued whining about the Moderators -- that's not particularly good form. You DO know that some of them actually ARE opposed to nuclear energy, too, right?

The anti-nukes' inability to deal with those who have differing ideas is not a particularly progressive trait. If you want an ideologically homogeneous forum, I'm sure there are plenty where you will encounter no disagreement.

--d!

[bananas]

7. Posts about proliferation were moved out of this forum - that's reality.

So I made a series of posts explaining that nuclear proliferation was both an environmental problem as well as a problem with nuclear energy, and since then posts about proliferation made in EE have stayed in EE.

[bananas]

9. And it just happened again the other day

Original post was moved: http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=115x241214
I asked the moderators why it was moved, they did not respond, so I reposted it.
The repost was not moved: http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=115x241559

[Nihil]

10. Hah! You can't blame me for that one!

I was off at the time but was glad to see that someone else was
on the ball for your constant deliberate FUD-spreading.

I'm surprised that your repeated spamming (both of the article
in question and of your whining complaint) hasn't been cleared up
but maybe people are just too busy.

:shrug:

[joshcryer]

8. Certain posters on this forum *are* trying to make nuclear energy a "progressive litmus test."

They're failing because most of their arguments are dishonest or outright disinformation.

[One_Life_To_Give]

6. Wasn't long ago "we" decided not to hire new NucEng's

Instead of hiring fresh young NucEng's to mentor under the designers of the previous generation. IIRC DOE opted to collect the combined wisdom of these experts onto video etc. Incase it was needed at some time in the future. Guess that future wasn't so far off. So now we want book trained NucEngs to take over with what additional electronic data was put away for them.

Can't see where the learning curve for a fresh group of kids is going to be cheaper than had we actively pursued hiring and having NucEngs properly mentored a decade ago.