Westinghouse transfers technology to China

Highrad — Fri, 14 Sep 2007 12:32:00 GMT

This news from an AP article is a couple months old, but I thought I would comment on this “new exchange of technology” to China.

Obviously, this is a multibillion deal for Westinghouse but do they need to give away the farm? Westinghouse technology for their new AP1000 plants should be kept close to the company and treated as intellectual property. It is like selling their patents. The decades of experience designing and maintaining these plants is invaluable in new plant designs and construction.

In the article, Westinghouse’s President Steve Tritch states "We will transfer basically the complete technology to allow the Chinese to eventually become self-sufficient and eventually apply this technology themselves within China." He said the “complete technology” not just some with the key information left out.

So let me get this straight…Westinghouse is bought by Toshiba and friends and then sells its’ intellectual property to China who is known to copy everything, cut costs & quality, and resell it cheap.

Asked whether Westinghouse was concerned that such transfers might help China develop into a competitor in export markets, Tritch said, "not really." He said demand for technology is forecast to be so robust that Westinghouse will have plenty of orders. I interpret “not really” as another way of saying “probably not soon but down the road they probably will”.

Does anyone remember the numerous news accounts of China selling technology to other countries that are not so friendly to the US? Sure, they sold weapons technology to North Korea, Iran, Russia, among others. So why won’t they sell this technology too?

Mistake? History will determine.

Simplicity Rules!

Highrad — Sat, 05 May 2007 13:42:00 GMT

With all of the talk about building new nuclear plants in the Untied States, I was wondering which design you thought was in the lead?

The “lead” could mean many things to different people. It could mean technically advanced designs with all of the bells and whistles. It could mean the lead in sales of their new design…does it mean they are just a low bidder??? It could mean the lead in MWe performance?

I have always been a big supporter of the KISS theory of design (Keep-It-Simple-Stupid). The KISS theory of design is always less expensive and minimizes future costs in the long run. Advanced technology can be a good thing to have but can create problems if not totally proven. From what I have read about these new plant designs is that the designers have learned from their past design mistakes, such as promoting a standard plant design (cookie cutter theory...another good $$$ saving theory).

As a contractor at many of these plants, you’re amazed about how every plant layout / design is different. How do you get to the personnel hatch? Where is the elevator in the containment building? Sure the major components are relatively the same but the maze of the other support equipment is different in every plant. Have you ever tried to go to the steam generators in Catawba vs. Point Beach? Then you know what I am talking about.

Here are some links to some of the new plant designs in the industry:

Westinghouse AP100

General Electric ABWR & ESBWR

Areva NP

General Atomics GTMHR

PBMR

AECL Advanced CANDU Reactor

Got a favorite? Any Comments?

New Nuclear Plant Designs

Westinghouse transfers technology to China

Simplicity Rules!