Nuclear Plant Journal, July-August 2014 NuclearPlantJournal.com
27
competitive bidding on uranium sales into
the U.S. Russia competitively bids and can
win in an open market. Similarly, the sale of
nuclear fuel should be an open market for
countries that so choose.
4.
What is your vision for Westinghouse
for the next 5-10 years?
I hope that we continue to evolve into
a more global company. My vision is to
evolve Westinghouse from a Pittsburgh-
based company that sells globally to a
global company that is headquartered in
Pittsburgh. This is really an important
transition for this company. We love the
U.S. nuclear market - don’t get me wrong.
It is an absolute priority for us. We need it.
We’re going to service it. But because of the
U.S. market, we are able to innovate and
expand our new technologies to the rest of
the world.
In the next 10 years, I want to see our
accident-tolerant fuel come to fruition.
It is a game changer. The prospect of
finding models that work with ceramics,
for example, will enable us to change the
concept of a core damage frequency. Those
are the operational things I want to see
occur. What I really want Westinghouse
to do is to continually evolve as a truly
global company that has the highest safety
standards, the highest business ethics and
the best technology.
5.
What would you like to see the U.S.
government and Exim Bank and other
similar organizations do to promote export
of Westinghouse to other countries?
I think there are two parts to the
importance of the future of the nuclear
energy. We have to start building nuclear
plants again here in the United States on a
much grander scale.
We are fast approaching an energy cliff
in this country - and it has the potential for
a far bigger impact than any recent financial
cliff.
Although the current U.S. nuclear fleet
is robust, we face an aging infrastructure.
Coal plants face a similarly aging
infrastructure. Neither has enough new
construction to offset the rate at which the
aging plants reach the end of their lifecycle.
If the plants are not replaced, we
will be forced into gas and other sources,
creating a huge volatility in the price of gas.
You just cannot make enough gas.
Every time that I hear about a new
hundred-year supply of gas, 10 years
later it’s gone. Where did it go? Just this
year in shale, gas was trading for $4 to
$5 in Pennsylvania, and it was $90 in
New York City. They’re not that far apart
geographically. Gas always will be volatile
as long as its demand is drawn upon on a
regular basis.
If we do not build new nuclear units,
the demand for gas will go high, followed
by that high price. This will drive us right
back where we were in the 1980s with gas
that we cannot afford because the demand is
so high. Additionally, pipes are not in place
that can transport the gas.
In contrast, consider an AP1000
nuclear plant that creates an infrastructure
that offsets the same amount of gas as that
of the state of Maine. The AP1000 plant
provides a readily available supply of safe,
clean, abundant and affordable energy that
is scalable to meet long-term demand.
I think the U.S. must address its need
for a meaningful energy policy so that this
country can remain an exporter. In 20 to 25
years, we are going to face that energy cliff.
We need to begin building new nuclear in
the next five to 10 years. I think that it is
important for the government and policy
space to take a really hard look at the mix
of energy that’s going to happen if we do
nothing.
Over the next 10 or 15 years, we’re
going to be forced to a mix of energy that
is so volatile, our manufacturing will not be
able to afford it.
In a global perspective, I really believe
it is so important that we recognize that
countries today are going to get nuclear en-
ergy from somebody - from Russia, France
or another source - whether or not the U.S.
government likes it.
One example is when France’s
government permitted entrance into markets
that the U.S. government would not permit
Westinghouse to enter. The differing rules
lead to a playing field that is not level.
In reference to U.S. 123 Agreements
which set proliferation rules, the question
we in the U.S. need to ask is whether we
want some control over what happens when
a country chooses nuclear technology. I
liken our current situation to the story of Rip
Van Winkle, in that some of our politicians
believe we are still in the 1970s when only
U.S. companies offered nuclear technology.
That time is long gone. Today, it is a global
nuclear market.
A country has a choice of the source
of its nuclear technology. If that choice is
not from the U.S., then there is no control
over what happens with that technology. It
is so important that we look seriously at 123
Agreements to allow the U.S. government
to influence the use of nuclear technology
toward
creating
greenhouse-gas-free
electricity.
6.
Will the 123 Agreements help the US
vendors to sell to other countries?
U.S. 123 Agreements must be in place
for the U.S. to even enter global markets.
The other part of the equation is financing.
The U.S. Export-Import Bank is the
export credit agency that helps American
companies compete with government-
supported competitors worldwide. Without
it, U.S.-based companies like Westinghouse
are severely disadvantaged from tapping
into emerging economies around the world.
7.
Please share any concluding remarks.
My view on Westinghouse and nuclear
energy is that we are at a very critical time.
We are breaking into new markets. We are
continuing to grow and expand. The new
plant business is growing globally. And
Westinghouse is going to start hiring again
this year to support that growth.
Overall, we have weathered what I
would call the big storm. We still have some
small storms that we are going through. But
I really see that, as an organization, and
really as an industry, we are getting into that
global cusp.
We have a tremendous amount of
political and educational work to do in the
United States, and we are actively moving
in that direction.
It is critical that the U.S. understand the
need for a responsible baseload generation
and how nuclear must be a part of the
overall energy mix. Otherwise, we risk
walking off of the same cliff as Germany,
which overbuilt renewables and now faces
an energy crisis. Nuclear needs to be 20
to 30 percent of the U.S. energy mix. If
we do not get policy into place that helps
us prepare and move this country forward,
then we are going to be in a position from
which we cannot escape, including the loss
of industry to other countries. The U.S. is
a great place for industry - for the nuclear
energy industry in particular. Westinghouse,
in its role as the global technology leader in
the nuclear energy industry, can support the
country’s export needs, as well as help meet
the county’s own needs for safe, affordable
and reliable energy.
Contact:
Sheila Holt, Westinghouse
Electric Company, telephone: (412) 374-
6379 email:
.
