Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Westinghouse Files for Bankruptcy, in Blow to Nuclear Power

nytimes.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

41–50 of 398 posts

Re: Westinghouse Files for Bankruptcy, in Blow to Nuclear Power

#41

Post by detritus »

CodeWriter23 wrote: post #23
maxfurman wrote: post #3

This is terrible news. Nuclear power, while not perfect, is one of the best alternatives we have to carbon-emitting power plants. If there are no companies left to build them, the already impossible task of fighting climate change will get that much harder.

This narrative holds only so long as one completely disregards the potential extinction-level event that continues at Fukushima. The simple fact of the matter is no technology exists to adequately and safely address the worst-case failure scenarios. We would do better to pump more CO2 into the atmosphere, whilst reversing deforestation during a transition to solar than to build even one more nuclear plant.

"extinction-level event"?

I agree that Fukushima could get hella messy if not dealt with right over the next decades.. but 'extinction level' seems a tad dramatic?

Re: Westinghouse Files for Bankruptcy, in Blow to Nuclear Power

#42

Post by killjoywashere »

LordKano wrote: post #32
killjoywashere wrote: post #5

The real concern here is making sure the existing nuclear plants have a clear glide slope toward end-of-life. Nuclear power is an extremely tight community. On the nuclear carrier I was on (powered by Westinghouse plants), there was a valve (a valve!) malfunctioning and the tech rep flown out from the company took one look at it and said "This bit's in backward". "How do you know?" "I designed it". Which means the sa…

Last year, I interviewed with one of the companies that was born by Westinghouse shedding units a couple of decades ago and they still do this kind of thing. If a Naval unit has an issue, they'll attempt to reproduce it and develop a solution at a remote location. If they can't, they'll send an engineer across the planet to evaluate and fix it. They do this even for not "critical" systems. I was impressed at that lev…

If you can, take that job. You will not regret it. Consider this: that tech rep probably had a resume that a dozen companies would kill for, and he's still at Westinghouse. Flying across the planet, landing on aircraft carriers.

Re: Westinghouse Files for Bankruptcy, in Blow to Nuclear Power

#43

Post by LordKano »

dalyons wrote: post #15
freehunter wrote: post #4

I find the headline weird, "a blow to nuclear power". I feel like nuclear power is possibly the most attacked form of energy that exists, and that includes coal and petroleum, both of which are still heavily used despite any public outcry. Westinghouse has made some bad deals, sure, but the real "blow to nuclear power" has been the massive refusal by both citizens and governments to build new plants, and the few nota…

After reading years and years of discussions like this, it seems like the citizen opposition and (somewhat unfair) demonisation of nuclear power is endlessly repeated as the reason we don't have nukes anymore, despite them being a great source of clean(ish) energy. However it seems the real reason, as in all things, is economics. They're just too damn expensive to build and run, and the expected returns on investment…

However it seems the real reason, as in all things, is economics.

Who's going to invest a billion dollars to build a new facility when they know that at any step along the way, some half-wit celebrity can decide that they want to buy property in the area and they don't want to live near a nuclear power plant, start protests and cause the project to be delayed or scrapped.

Continuing to run an old design is a very big part of how we ended up with the current situation with Fukushima.

Re: Westinghouse Files for Bankruptcy, in Blow to Nuclear Power

#44

Post by stephenr »

hackuser wrote: post #25
stephenr wrote: post #19

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The huge risks (both financial type and "boom" type) with building and supporting nuclear reactors seems like pretty solid evidence that they are not "one of the best alternatives".

"best" is relative; what is better, that can scale up sufficiently to meet the world's energy demand? Perhaps renewables can scale up, but last I heard that wasn't realistic on the time scale humanity needs. Does anyone have good information on that question?

> what is better, that can scale up sufficiently

The article specifically mentions that pretty much every major builder of nuclear plants outside of China are in trouble and/or downsizing/restructuring in big ways.

So, tell me again how "nuclear can scale up"?

Re: Westinghouse Files for Bankruptcy, in Blow to Nuclear Power

#45

Post by kpil »

hackuser wrote: post #20
dalyons wrote: post #15

Earlier quoted context omitted.

After reading years and years of discussions like this, it seems like the citizen opposition and (somewhat unfair) demonisation of nuclear power is endlessly repeated as the reason we don't have nukes anymore, despite them being a great source of clean(ish) energy. However it seems the real reason, as in all things, is economics. They're just too damn expensive to build and run, and the expected returns on investment…

> it seems the real reason, as in all things, is economics The economics might be different if we paid for the real cost of carbon-based energy, instead of imposing that cost on the world as an externality.

The total cost for storing and securing shit for 100.000 years is also 'externalized.'

Both costs are more or less impossible to establish upfront.

Re: Westinghouse Files for Bankruptcy, in Blow to Nuclear Power

#46

Post by barkingcat »

mikeash wrote: post #12
barkingcat wrote: post #2

There was massive financial fraud at Westinghouse. Even though the nuclear industry is in a downturn, the troubles at Westinghouse are self inflicted - Toshiba bought them, but found out almost all of the unit's profits are misreported, leading to them spending money on "nothing" basically. The unit earned no money and was threatening to sink Toshiba the entire keiretsu. This is Toshiba trying to save itself by closi…

That's really interesting. How did Toshiba manage to acquire them without uncovering the fraud first?

Lying and coverup.

It's fraud - people refusing to tell or put things down on official financial reports, writing false statements, signing false financial reports, using non GAAP, unusual accounting methods, etc. Also, audits and due diligence didn't uncover the magnitude of the problem. It took a whistleblower to get the story out to upper management.

https://www.thestar.com/business/2017/02/14/toshiba-chairman...

this article outlines the contract issues, but there were other issues at play at the same time

http://www.reuters.com/article/us-toshiba-accounting-working...

Re: Westinghouse Files for Bankruptcy, in Blow to Nuclear Power

#47

Post by toomuchtodo »

LordKano wrote: post #43
dalyons wrote: post #15

Earlier quoted context omitted.

After reading years and years of discussions like this, it seems like the citizen opposition and (somewhat unfair) demonisation of nuclear power is endlessly repeated as the reason we don't have nukes anymore, despite them being a great source of clean(ish) energy. However it seems the real reason, as in all things, is economics. They're just too damn expensive to build and run, and the expected returns on investment…

However it seems the real reason, as in all things, is economics. Who's going to invest a billion dollars to build a new facility when they know that at any step along the way, some half-wit celebrity can decide that they want to buy property in the area and they don't want to live near a nuclear power plant, start protests and cause the project to be delayed or scrapped. Continuing to run an old design is a very big…

You keep saying its NIMBY, when it is apparent its shoddy construction, mismanagement, and cutting corners for cost savings.

Re: Westinghouse Files for Bankruptcy, in Blow to Nuclear Power

#48

Post by addicted »

pm90 wrote: post #24
dalyons wrote: post #15

Earlier quoted context omitted.

After reading years and years of discussions like this, it seems like the citizen opposition and (somewhat unfair) demonisation of nuclear power is endlessly repeated as the reason we don't have nukes anymore, despite them being a great source of clean(ish) energy. However it seems the real reason, as in all things, is economics. They're just too damn expensive to build and run, and the expected returns on investment…

I am not a Nuclear Engineer...but here, again it seems like the operating factor is scale. If you were building many nuclear reactors, cost per reactor would perhaps go down. Not to mention: recent advances in technology and automation might help better monitor and operate the reactors, increasing safety and decreasing cost. All of this is just armchair reasoning though. I have not the faintest idea what the most exp…

The problem with this is that nuclear has consistently displayed a negative learning curve over the last 4-5 decades.

It's only gotten more expensive as time has gone on.

Re: Westinghouse Files for Bankruptcy, in Blow to Nuclear Power

#49

Post by LordKano »

killjoywashere wrote: post #42
LordKano wrote: post #32

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Last year, I interviewed with one of the companies that was born by Westinghouse shedding units a couple of decades ago and they still do this kind of thing. If a Naval unit has an issue, they'll attempt to reproduce it and develop a solution at a remote location. If they can't, they'll send an engineer across the planet to evaluate and fix it. They do this even for not "critical" systems. I was impressed at that lev…

If you can, take that job. You will not regret it. Consider this: that tech rep probably had a resume that a dozen companies would kill for, and he's still at Westinghouse. Flying across the planet, landing on aircraft carriers.

I have noticed that people who get hired there retire from there.

I'll continue to consider it in the future.

Re: Westinghouse Files for Bankruptcy, in Blow to Nuclear Power

#50

Post by beamatronic »

headcanon wrote: post #31
cookiecaper wrote: post #10

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'd much rather deal with fossil fuels than the catastrophic risks uniquely posed by nuclear power generation. The excuse for incidents like Fukushima are "Well, they made these mistakes...". Personally, I'd rather not risk zero-notice forced evacuations, permanent quarantine zones, and making significant portions of populated land uninhabitable for centuries on some people not making mistakes. For those who write th…

In hindsight, yes they should not have built a nuclear power plant in an earthquake-prone area like Japan. But there are plenty of places that are completely safe to build nuclear reactors, and given the alternatives, we should lend the advantages credence. Hopefully the whole debate will be moot when either solar/wind gets to a certain point or we figure out nuclear fusion.

The earthquake wasn't nearly as much of a problem as the tsunami
Post reply on HN