I like these proposals but I find one flaw. What mechanism exists within this framework to compare the risks of nuclear power with the risks of other forms of electrical generation? And how are these other methods of generation to be held economically accountable? And every form of generation has risks. I believe honest comparison would result in nuclear energy coming out on top.
During an ASME N Stamp recertification effort roughly 6 years ago, my colleague and I had a similar idea - namely that we should be implementing an independent (i.e., non-governmental) certification process for the design and construction of a nuclear power plant. We have discussed this idea for several years but do not know what to do with it. Your article is a much more complete concept that I find very compelling.
I attended this past winter's American Nuclear Society Winter Conference and there was a presentation session dealing with how to license reactors in countries that do not have nuclear regulatory bodies. I attended this presentation, and while no one presented on the concept my colleague and I discussed there was a presentation from one of the TUV organizations (I believe it was TUV Sud) that spoke to something akin to your concept. Suffice to say, others are thinking similarly.
Currently, there are several different legislative proposals to help the NRC change itself. While all indications are that these will not work, it does point to a growing realization that what we are currently doing is not working and that a change is needed. I'd like to work with you to help bring your ideas to a broader audience. Is this something you would be interested in doing?
I can confirm they the TÜV are a massive PIA, which is exactly what you want in this situation. Nice set of proposals!
I like these proposals but I find one flaw. What mechanism exists within this framework to compare the risks of nuclear power with the risks of other forms of electrical generation? And how are these other methods of generation to be held economically accountable? And every form of generation has risks. I believe honest comparison would result in nuclear energy coming out on top.
Jack,
During an ASME N Stamp recertification effort roughly 6 years ago, my colleague and I had a similar idea - namely that we should be implementing an independent (i.e., non-governmental) certification process for the design and construction of a nuclear power plant. We have discussed this idea for several years but do not know what to do with it. Your article is a much more complete concept that I find very compelling.
I attended this past winter's American Nuclear Society Winter Conference and there was a presentation session dealing with how to license reactors in countries that do not have nuclear regulatory bodies. I attended this presentation, and while no one presented on the concept my colleague and I discussed there was a presentation from one of the TUV organizations (I believe it was TUV Sud) that spoke to something akin to your concept. Suffice to say, others are thinking similarly.
Currently, there are several different legislative proposals to help the NRC change itself. While all indications are that these will not work, it does point to a growing realization that what we are currently doing is not working and that a change is needed. I'd like to work with you to help bring your ideas to a broader audience. Is this something you would be interested in doing?
Ryan