The Fermi Chronicles - Part 15: The Nuclear Business Model

In my years as an engineering Professor, I have worked mostly with issues involving the auto industry, albeit my research has been more fundamental in nature and applicable to many applications. Grant money, however, came mostly from suppliers of the auto industry. In doing so, I was exposed to the business model in southeast Michigan, which can be summed up in one word - proprietary. It is a very competitive business. Nothing is shared. Everything is protected. In fact, several grants that I worked on specifically stated that I was not to publish any results whatsoever for X number of years. It made sense in that industry.

Nuclear power, however, is a different animal altogether. Within the industry itself, nothing is secret. Even the most minor glitches of any kind are communicated throughout the nuclear power industry. Not next week. Right now. Daily updates. This is known as the Operational Experience (OE). After the Three Mile Island accident back in the 1970's, the NRC gave INPO (Institute of Nuclear Power Operations) reign over nuclear power plants in the U.S. in seeing to it that information is shared so that one incident need not be repeated again. In a capitalistic society, this was initially resisted by some, although there is wisdom in this in the nuclear industry particularly. In essence, one accident makes the entire industry look bad. This is very different from the auto industry where the Ford/Firestone rollover fiasco of years ago gave certain Ford cars a bad name, but had no ill effect on the rest of the Ford fleet or on Chrysler or GM. From the INPO website:

Our mission at the Institute of Nuclear Power Operations (INPO) is to
promote the highest levels of safety and reliability – to promote excellence –
in the operation of nuclear electric generating plants.

We work to achieve our mission by:

• Establishing performance objectives, criteria and guidelines for the nuclear
  power industry
• Conducting regular detailed evaluations of nuclear power plants
• Providing assistance to help nuclear power plants continually improve their
  performance

INPO employees work to help the nuclear power industry achieve the highest
levels of safety and reliability – excellence – through:

• Plant evaluations
• Training and accreditation
• Events analysis and information exchange
• Assistance

These are the four cornerstones of INPO.

INPO has teeth, and INPO visits here remind me of ABET accreditation visits at OU. Not a lot of fun, but necessary. Although at OU no one gets hurt. It is far more serious here. After Chernobyl back in the 1980's, WANO (World Association of Nuclear Operators) was formed to share information globally. From the WANO website:

After the accident at the Chernobyl nuclear power plant in 1986, nuclear operators world-wide realized that the consequences had an effect on everynuclear power plant and international cooperation was needed to ensure that such an accident can never happen again.

WANO was formed in May 1989 by nuclear operators world-wide uniting to exchange operating experience in a culture of openness, so members can work together to achieve the highest possible standards of nuclear safety.

The culture of openness allows each operator to benefit and learn from others’ experiences, challenges and best practice, with the ultimate goal of improving nuclear plant safety, reliability and performance levels for the benefit of their customers throughout the world.

WANO seeks to assist members through its programmes of work;

• Peer Reviews
• Operating Experience
• Technical Support and Exchange
• Professional and Technical Development

When a WANO member participates in a WANO activity, they know that they will have highly experienced teams of experts from other nuclear power plants to help them improve safety and reliability at their own power plant.

One of the interesting aspects as I mentioned above is that even minor glitches are shared throughout the nuclear industry. I see daily emails detailing OE summaries from all over, including glitch title, date, location, significance, description, what was learned, etc. All in a great deal of detail. All of this is, of course, confidential as you just know someone outside the nuclear industry (read - the biased press) would get a hold of this and paint the nuclear industry a disaster-in-waiting. That would be quite the opposite of reality, but why ruin a long-standing, biased, media-driven narrative?

I will spend some time in the upcoming segments writing about significant nuclear events, what happened, the effect on the nuclear industry and what could be learned from them, with Chernobyl being the most serious in a short series of significant events since nuclear power has been harnessed to produce electricity.

Previously:
The Fermi Chronicles - Part 14: Neutron Moderation
The Fermi Chronicles - Part 13: Nuclear Reactor Types
The Fermi Chronicles - Part 12: Generating Electricity
The Fermi Chronicles - Part 11: Worldwide Uranium Availability
The Fermi Chronicles - Part 10: Utilizing Nuclear Reactions To "Breed" More Fuel
The Fermi Chronicles - Part 9: Nuclear Fission
The Fermi Chronicles - Part 8: Neutron Interaction
The Fermi Chronicles - Part 7: Radioactive Decay and Half-Life
The Fermi Chronicles - Part 6: Atomic Structures
The Fermi Chronicles - Part 5: Nuclear Waste Storage
The Fermi Chronicles - Part 4: Radiation Types and Radiation "Dose"
The Fermi Chronicles - Part 3: Radiation Types
The Fermi Chronicles - Part 2: A week of training
The Fermi Chronicles - Part 1: The alpha post