There has been a lot of speculating and theorizing about how few new nuclear power plants one can realistically plan on completing per year. The more the matter is pondered, the less capable we seem to become. So, in line with my policy of tackling political and theoretical questions by drawing on events in the real world, let's look at what we actually produced in the Naval Reactors program, in building the first, large-scale power reactors, first for ship propulsion, and then for the world's first fully commercial nuclear power station under President Eisenhower's Atoms for Peace Program. .
Yes, today we lack much of the manufacturing capability we had then, but we had almost none of the relevant knowledge and materials, and none of the experience. Without arguing the point, can't we get some inspiration from what we demonstrated could be done, with enough determination and organizational skill? That's what the French did, after the OPEC oil embargo of 1973. They decided to go nearly all nuclear, and they just did it. They did it safely and reliably, and they've been selling nuclear electricity at a profit ever since.



Ted - great summary of the amazing progress made at NR during a period when engineers used slide rules and drafting tables. Would you mind if I produced reproduced your document as a blog post? Putting it in that form makes it easier for the search engines to find compared to a Word document download.
Rod Adams
Posted by: Rod Adams | April 16, 2010 at 05:35 AM
I disagree that we lack the manufacturing capability that we had in the past. The manufacturing employment level in the US has decreased however the manufacturing productivity has increased through the use of more efficient processes and automation. Here is a blog article regarding the topic
http://blog.american.com/?p=8593
Posted by: Josh b | April 22, 2010 at 03:07 PM
Josh b commented that our lack of manufacturing capability is greatly exaggerated, and backed it up with data.
Josh:
Thanks VERY much for this important info. The nuclear industry (and probably others) has talked itself into stand-still. They complain that they don't have the manufacturing capabilities, so they can't built new plants. Yet, I read that companies that could be building new heavy machinery say they can't be sure there's a demand, so they're reluctant to commit the necessary large funds.
The same is true of workers: The potential nuclear plant owners say they can't be sure they can get the needed workers, but the union leader involved, says "That's MY job. Tell me what you need, and by when, and I'll train the people. But you won't commit."
And, of course, all this reluctance affects potential lenders, which drives up interest rates. I can cite more specifics, if needed.
I'd like to see any more info anyone has on this subject. I'll play it up on my blog. But I urge you to get the word around. There are a lot of people who need to hear it.
Thanks again,
Ted Rockwell
Posted by: Ted Rockwell | April 23, 2010 at 01:26 PM
I'd like to see any more info anyone has on this subject. I'll play it up on my blog. But I urge you to get the word around. There are a lot of people who need to hear it.
Posted by: pandora collier | April 26, 2011 at 01:27 AM
If you would go up high , then use your own legs! Do not let yourselves carried aloft; do not seat yourselves on other people's backs and heads .
Posted by: Ed Hardy Outlet | July 28, 2011 at 03:06 AM
I can not believe in any word here. This article is nonscientific, and I am so outraged with it!
Posted by: online jobs | July 28, 2011 at 10:04 AM
It's so nice to have you do all of the research for us. It makes our decision making so much easier!! Thanks.
Posted by: MBT Online | August 11, 2011 at 06:49 AM
Nice little cup of life, protection of the environment so they can make a lot of contribution! Cool!
Posted by: Chinese Jade | August 31, 2011 at 05:35 AM