January 2010 Responses

We are considering the creation of a minor in nuclear energy. What are your thoughts on the viability of this new minor?

RESPOND | HAVE YOUR RESPONSE REMOVED

I’m writing in response to your recent request for comments on the possible addition of a minor in nuclear energy at SEAS. I recommend against that course of action because I don’t believe that pursuing nuclear energy is in the best interest of our nation or our world. Thus, it follows that it isn’t in the best interest of UVA or SEAS either. Your efforts are better spent elsewhere.

When I was in engineering school (1979-1983), a book by E. F. Schumacher entitled “Small Is Beautiful – Economics as if People Mattered” was required reading in humanities class. I still have my copy and I recently reread it. Although it was written in 1973, its arguments are still perfectly valid today. Part II, Chapter 4 is called “Nuclear Energy – Salvation or Damnation?” I strongly recommend that you get a copy of this book and read the chapter before encouraging the development of nuclear energy. The book makes clear the folly of nuclear energy far more eloquently than I could. Keep in mind that this book was written before the Three Mile Island or Chernobyl accidents. It was also written before the threat of terrorists obtaining and using nuclear materials was as real as it is today. These developments add further ammunition to the argument against the use of nuclear energy.

If the full costs of nuclear energy are accounted for, it’s not economically viable. In fact, it’s not even close to being economically viable. The disposal and storage of nuclear waste is very costly even for the small amount of waste we currently generate. Securing the fuel, the reactors and the waste add significantly to the cost. Environmental costs can be huge, especially if there is even one accident like Chernobyl. There are national security and foreign policy implications as well. The situation with Iran is a great example.

The list of arguments against nuclear energy goes on and on and is easy enough for voters to understand. Therefore, I believe that government subsidy of the nuclear industry will stop. We simply can’t afford it! Without government subsidy, the nuclear energy industry is dead.

Then there is the moral argument. As engineers at UVA, we were taught to consider the implications of our work. Just because technology enables us to do a thing, it doesn’t mean that we should do it. I’ve always been proud of that. It’s part of what made an engineering education at UVA unique. As an alternative to pursuing nuclear energy, I propose that you provide the leadership to pursue solar energy. Specifically, I’d like to see SEAS focus on improving distributed power generation via photovoltaics. Drive innovation in the development of the “smart grid.” Drive innovation in the creation of more efficient solar cells. Help Senator Bernie Sanders of Vermont put solar panels on 10 million rooftops as he proposes in the Ten Million Solar Roofs Act. These are the things that would truly benefit the University of Virginia, our nation and our world!

W. Alan Chapman (EE ’83)

As a 1975 nuclear engineering alumnus, I was very disappointed when the NE department was shut down, but I think I understand the reasons behind that decision.  At that point in time, the number of NE students was getting too low to support the department and justify the costs.  But now the nuclear energy business is again gearing up for growth, as evidenced by several developments within Virginia.  These include the AREVA/Newport News Shipbuilding joint venture to build a large manufacturing facility for major nuclear power plant components as well as the Center for Advanced Engineering Research in Bedford described in the January 2010 E-News.  Those of us in the nuclear industry are working hard to make the next wave of nuclear plant construction a reality in the near future.  As the current mature workforce retires, the expanding industry will require a new generation of young engineers.  Therefore I believe demand will be strong for engineering graduates with a minor in nuclear energy.  My sense is that such graduates could compete well with graduates of other schools with NE majors.  A nuclear energy minor paired with a BS in chemical, civil, mechanical or electrical engineering would be viewed as strong undergraduate preparation for work in the nuclear industry. 

Mark H. Geiger (Nuc.’75)

I understand that the Engineering Dept. is considering the creation of a minor in nuclear engineering. I graduated in 1979 in mechanical engineering and nuclear engineering was a major available at that time. We even had a small reactor on site. It appeared that the "nukes" took all the same classes as the mechanicals up until 4th year. I think a
nuclear minor makes sense with the new interest in nuclear energy.

Beverly C. Wade (ME ’79)

Nuclear Engineering was a full degree program when I attended SEAS.  As an Applied Math major, I took the Introduction to Nuclear Engineering class, and it made a lasting impression on me.  It was one of the most challenging and enjoyable classes I took (probably due having a passionate professor on the topic) and probably had some of the biggest real-world impact on me.  Over the years, as nuclear technology and energy are discussed, I always think back to that class.

From my perspective, I think a Nuclear Energy minor would be a valuable program.  Any program that encourages discussion about any and all viable energy resources would be valuable.  Given the negative connotation that nuclear energy elicits for many, educating more people on it and what it actually means can only be a good thing.

Tracie Scott (APMA '90)

That is probably a reasonable step at this point.  As recent political developments show, physics will eventually trump politics.  Absent a $100 billion rebuild of the grid and invention of practical large scale energy storage, renewables simply will never contribute significantly to bulk power generation.  Most of the engineers on nuclear projects and at operating plants are mechanical or electrical, since only the core design and fuel management functions need nuclear engineering expertise.  A minor should be fine for those interested in that career path. 

That said, you should lobby to avoid major structural changes to the reactor building.  I believe it would still be possible to install a modern TRIGA research reactor there.  Depending on the timing of the decision, a significant income stream from producing medical isotopes could be available from a research reactor.  If legislative changes occur in the next Congress to move the NRC from their current ‘negligible risk’ standard to a ‘reasonable risk’ standard, and exempt small reactors from security and emergency planning requirements, we could see a big surge in plant orders and demand for nuclear engineers.  The costs of maintaining a research reactor would also be more reasonable.  That’s definitely not a done deal, but is starting to look possible. 

Dwight E. Baker (EE ’77, ’78)

As a Nuclear Engineer, now retired, it is my belief and hope that we will see significant growth of nuclear power and the need for professionals to support the industry.

Will Haltiwanger (Nuc. '71)

I worked in the nuclear power industry for 20 years and saw the demise of the industry in the US in the 1980's.  My generation of engineers, who had hands on experience in this industry, is gone and I don't think there is any will to replace that lost expertise.  If the US embarks on a new program, there will certainly be a need for a new generation of engineers, not scientists, to design and build these new plants. I would be glad to discuss this with you personally.

John Gurley (ME '57)

Nuclear energy provides the largest amount of clean energy in the US utility sector.  I am proud to have been a part of the industry since my graduation from UVA with a degree in Nuclear Engineering in 1972.  I even returned to Charlottesville in 1995 to make a plea to the Board of Visitors to not cancel the undergraduate Nuclear Engineering program in 1995.  The reason then was that the industry was entering the license renewal period and that we would need nuclear engineers to support the operation of nuclear plants in the extended period, mainly from2017-2037.  Now there is an even greater need for nuclear engineers due to what the industry is calling the Nuclear Renaissance.   Several new plants are planned for operation by 2018, including ones in Virginia, Maryland, and Georgia.  It is critical that the East Coast Universities staff up to supply the critical resources.

David J Firth (Nuc ’72)

I'm not sure I can speak on the viability of this idea, but I can speak on my interest. If Nuclear Energy had been available as a minor when I was studying Electrical Engineering at U.Va., I am fairly certain I would have sought after it. Once I was a couple years into my major, several friends and myself realized that we were really interested in the power and energy side of EE, including nuclear, but practically nothing was available (unless we wanted to go to Va. Tech.). We talked to a couple of professors about it, and were basically told that the E-school had decided there wasn't enough demand or need for it and got rid of the program several years ago. Even the Undergraduate Record listed power-related classes that interested me (such as a 400-level Power lab), until I found out the courses hadn't been taught in years. I guess if anything, I was able to amaze the engineers during my internships with power companies with how much I did not know about the power industry. This varied from large things, such as power distribution, to small things, such as relays, both of which were never mentioned or taught during my time in the EE program. I know it is difficult to fit so much into a 4-year program, but it would have been nice to have a power and/or nuclear focus available while I was a student.

Ryan Tanner (SEAS 2009)

I think you never should have canceled the nuclear engineering degree in the first place. Nuclear engineering enrollments have been on the rise since the mid-nineties. Nuclear engineering departments are now among the largest engineering departments in schools like Texas A&M, Penn State, and the University of Wisconsin. Starting salaries for nuclear engineers have skyrocketed. And with the number of nuclear power plants and nuclear-related businesses in the region, it's long been a black eye for UVA that we can't supply the employees they need. Virginia Tech and VCU realized this several years ago and started their own programs.

Of course, I'm personally invested. I entered UVA in 1995: the year the nuclear engineering major was canceled for undergraduates. I spent the next five years constructing the closest thing I could find: pursuing a mechanical engineering degree, taking every nuclear course still left, and working at the reactor with the graduate students. I went on to grad school in nuclear engineering, went on to work in nuclear engineering, and still remain extremely involved with nuclear engineering students (I'm the chair of the Student Sections Committee for the American Nuclear Society). And the entire way I've watched nuclear engineering enrollments grow and grow - new programs starting up at schools around the country, hiring frenzies at companies, research grants from many sources, scholarship money being shoveled at students who have the word nuclear anywhere on their transcript...

In short: creating a minor in nuclear energy is long overdue. I urge you not to limit it to nuclear energy, but to include courses focused on nuclear safety, nuclear materials, nuclear chemistry, and nuclear systems (all critical needs, and in most cases more in demand than reactor designers!). And when you do, let me know - I'll be first in line to recruit your graduates. Or even apply for a teaching position.

Darby Kimball (ME ’00)

I was a third year when it was announced that the Department of Mechanical and Aerospace Engineering was becoming the Department of Mechanical, Aerospace, and Nuclear Engineering (MANE), but that the plan was to absorb the existing Nuclear Engineering students, then phase out the Nuclear program, at least on the undergrad level (I don’t remember the details).

At the time, as nuclear reactors were still considered out of fashion (Three Mile Island and Chernobyl being far too fresh in everyone’s memory).  As the reactors seem to be making a comeback in popularity with the push for moving closer to an oil-free economy (or at least a reduced dependency on oil), I think it is vital that SEAS responds accordingly, and I think that an undergraduate minor in Nuclear Engineering is a highly appropriate response.

Charles Chopin (ME ’93)

I would strongly encourage you to establish a minor in Nuclear Engineering.  I graduated from UVA with a MNE in '63 and ScD in NE in 66.  I'm now retired after spending my entire career working for Dupont, Westinghouse, Battelle at DOE sites and running a university foundation in South Carolina.  All of my work was associated with Nuclear Engineering and environmentally related activities.

While I am clearly prejudiced toward nuclear and the clear need to grow the generation of electricity by nuclear power, the Nuclear Engineering minor will produce an engineer with broad capabilities because of the breadth of needed courses.  Nuclear power will be going through major growth and there will be a significant need for engineers with a nuclear engineering background.  This need is already apparent since the starting salaries of new NE graduates is at the top of engineering salaries.  Nuclear power is already a major industry in the Southeast.  In South Carolina where I now live approximately 50% of our electricity comes from nuclear power.  I believe Virginia also has a much higher percentage of nuclear power generated electricity than the national average of 20%.

Interestingly, I asked Dr. Casteen about 2 or 3 years ago about a possible rebirth of NE at UVA and he said it was under serious discussion at that time.  I do not think you should delay any longer creating this minor, since it is clearly needed in the region and the country.

Joe Spencer (Physics '61, Nuc. '63, '66)

I believe that nuclear energy has a very strong possibility of re-emerging in the USA.  However, such re-emergence is unlikely to happen unless US engineers are ready to lead the revival. 

A nuclear energy minor should help more UVA engineers understand the range of concepts underpinning the nuclear energy industry – from control of complex systems, to corrosion engineering, to efficient energy conversion, to thermal and nuclear degradation of materials, to system and facility security, and more.  By adding such a minor, UVA will be positioning more engineers to take leadership roles in a possible resurgence of nuclear energy and in the operation, management, and optimization of our existing nuclear energy infrastructure. 

So, as you might have guessed from what I wrote above, I believe that UVA would be well served by, and would well serve its students and the country by, instituting a nuclear energy minor.

Dr Wm A (Bill) Carpenter (ChE’70, Applied Math’80)

I think it's a great idea that UVA, once a world leader in nuclear engineering academics, would consider bringing it back, even as a minor.  Let's recognize the importance of nuclear energy as a non-polluting, non-CO2 emitting, cost-competitive and safe source of large scale power production.  The future is not in the wind, it's in nuclear energy.  Instead of being paralyzed by the problems of nuclear, we need a new generation of engineers to solve them.

Pat Donohue (Nuc. ' 77)

Nuclear is a major part of current and future power generation.  The close proximity of the Lake Anna reactor and nuclear energy research at the new CAER facility in Bedford, Va. could be packaged into a terrific experience for future students.

You know TJ would want it.

Owen J. Karickhoff (Nuc.’85)

I think an energy major is a good idea, and perhaps nuclear energy as well. As someone who tried to learn as much about energy (solar specifically) starting more than 20 years ago, I would like to see the University become a leader in this field. I read just about everything that I can in the energy field, and it worries me that our nation has dropped the ball in this area.

"Energy systems" is a not the best way, though. What we need, IMHO,is a major for the very tech-competent. This could be an option for people who would otherwise be mechanical engineers but want to go beyond the heat transfer realm.
Now more than ever, we have national polcies on energy being created by people who have absolutely no idea of how energy is even generated. They just listen to a few "experts" and then we spend billions of dollars.

A while back, I saw a speaker on some TV news show talking down nuclear energy, and one of his comments during the debate was along the lines of "Do you even know what a nuclear reactor does? All it does is make steam..."

No duh.

And all of this time I thougth it was a type of internal combustion engine.

Unfortunately, most of the people who were at that presentation likely were impressed by this nugget of knowledge.

I would like to be involved in any further discussion of this topic. I live in Charlottesville, so I would be more than happy to meet with Messrs. Aylor, Haj-Hariri, etc.

Scott Tumperi (ME '87, '89)

I think this is a great idea.  I graduated from UVa with a B.S. and M.E. in Nuclear Engineering, and have worked in the Nuclear Industry ever since.  We have a real need for engineering graduates that either have a degree in Nuclear Engineering or who are well versed in the basics of Nuclear Engineering.  While the nuclear renaissance  appears to be in a ‘stop and go’ mode while we work through financial issues, it is underway and staffing for this renaissance is a real challenge.

I am willing to help UVa in any way I can with this challenge.

Lenny Azzarello (Nuc.’78,’79)

As a software/systems engineer, I don't have a lot of insight into this, but I would recommend scouring the job sites of major U.S. corporations to gauge the demand for graduates with this skill.  Energy is a new priority in today's government, and therefore a new priority in my company; if not "nuclear" energy per se, perhaps some kinda of "energy" engineering??

Jeff Lewis (CS '03)

I think that this is an EXTREMELY good idea. I received my bachelors and masters degrees from UVa in nuclear engineering, back before the research reactor was decommissioned, and so as you might guess I was very disapointed when the program dissapeared. In terms of need and justification for such a program, my current work at the OECD Nuclear Energy Agency (an international, intergovernmental organisation) tells me that throughout the world there is a shortage of qualified scientists and engineers in nuclear engineering and radiation protecection, and that all of the NEA's 28 member governments (including the United States) are concerned that this could result in safety problems not only for whatever future reactors may be built, but for the current fleet of over 450 operating reactors throughout the world (104 in the US). So, I STRONGLY SUPPORT the recreation of this degree path at UVa. I would also support your considering a parallel program in radiation protection (health physics as it is called in the US), where a shortfall of qualified experts has also been identified.

I would also suggest that in this program, and perhaps in other engineering programs that deal with "socially contentious" topics (e.g. chemical production, biomechanical topics with ethical considerations, even civil engineering where large-scale construction may provoke social discussion) should be supported by studies in stakeholder engagement. So many of us came through school learning a solid techincal basis, but learning little about communication (with our management let alone with the public or elected officials). As such, and particularly in some sensitive topics the "only" way to achieve a sustainable, accepted decision is to engage with "stakeholders" (not just the public, but any organisation or governmental office with interest in the choice). But this is not so obvious in terms of communication and listening skills, public speaking, writing for non-technical audiences, assessment of possible concerns, stakeholder engagement and disussion approaches, etc. If this type of support program does not already exist at UVa, I recommend that you consider developing such a course to at least give students a flavor of what may lie before them.

Thank you VERY much for this question, and I would be VERY interested in any follow-up discussions.

Ted Lazo (Nuc.’78,’80)

I graduated from U.Va. in 1978 with an M.E. in Nuclear Engineering. I was quite saddened with the discontinuation of advanced degrees in Nuclear Engineering, and would very much support establishing a minor in Nuclear Engineering. The information received from U.Va. when I attended was quite useful in my career in the U.S. Naval Nuclear Power Program for 24 years.

I would be especially glad to see the reemergence of this major since all of the different energy supplies the world has, have significant potential dangers to the environment or humanity, and our needs in the future will not be from any one source. The world's energy needs are constantly increasing, and show no trend for dropping. The United States has lost its lead in nuclear power that it once had, even though it has some of the largest reserves, design and material, in the world to draw upon. In the Navy, I have seen nuclear power first-hand, and firmly believe that it can, and should be, safely integrated with all of the other sources of power in our country so that we are never dependent on only one source. Not to do so endangers our collective national security in the future.

James L. Warren (Nuc.’78)

To be quite honest I'm not sure about the overall trend of nuclear energy in America.  It seems that nuclear power is more accepted in Europe than in America and for whatever reason we're not keen on using it.

I wonder if a more general energy science-type minor would be viable.  It seems that putting time and effort into that would prepare people for more opportunities in the future as well as doing a great service to Americans in the future.  I could see it being multi-disciplinary by bringing public policy into the picture.  It could also span topics like energy delivery/distribution and economics of energy sources.

I've probably gone way off topic.  This is just what I've understood from reading blogs and from a friend who works at Dominion Power.

Richard Yhip (CpE '01)

I am very interested in a Nuclear Engineering Minor. I'm a second year
Mechanical Engineer and am doing a summer internship this summer
with The Shaw Group designing nuclear power plants and am interested
in learning more about Nuclear Engineering. 

Alfred L. Rhyne (ME '12)

I think it is an excellent idea to offer Nuclear Energy education; my company is seeing quite a lot of project controls business opportunities in nuclear plant construction.  With the unusually large number of permit applications for new and renovations of nuclear plants, this sector will continue to grow.

Chris Carson (ME ’73)

As you are aware UVA SEAS had a Nuclear Engineering major undergraduate and graduate program when we were students. If there is interest by students and private funding for such a minor or major program then go for it. There will be new nuclear reactors built in our future and these graduates will be able to find jobs in these fields. French companies are going to be supplying these reactors to Baltimore Gas & Electric (Constellation Energy). The US Military also needs Nuclear Engineers with ROTC background. The space program will be using nuclear or fusion technology too in our lifetime.

Philip Krastman (EE’76)

The University of Virginia should definitely provide the opportunity for a minor in nuclear energy.  Nuclear power is the #1 means of generating electricity with no greenhouse gas emissions in the United States and worldwide.  Many countries are moving aggressively to expand their use of nuclear power, and the United States seems likely (but not certain) to do the same.  Local and regional employers are heavily involved in nuclear power.  Beyond the use of nuclear energy to generate electricity, nuclear technology has many essential applications in our society today.  In hindsight, the University’s decision to terminate its nuclear engineering program more than a decade ago was the wrong one, but hopefully not an irreversible one.

Steve Nesbit (Nuc. ‘80, ’82)

Great! Keeping up with the needs of the times is always better than keeping up with the politics of the times... who ever heard of a pc Engineer?

Bill Light (EE '63,'65, '68)

Being an ME who took his first engineering employment at Babcock & Wilcox’s Atomic Energy Division, I caution that the US is probably still not ready for nuclear power.  My employment was interrupted after six months by a two-year Army ROTC active duty commitment.  Contracts dried up while I was away and continuing in the field was not an option when I returned. 

I do not profess to know the issues, but I do not foresee alternatives that have the long term viability of nuclear energy.  However, I anticipate that it will be many decades before the public will accept it.

Bob Breeden (ME ’57)   

NO, no minor in Nuclear Engineering (NE) should be offered by UVA at this time and perhaps ever!!!  

I can list a few reasons for this negative viewpoint:

1. UVA once had an excellent and nationally highly-ranked undergraduate and graduate program in NE which was terminated about a decade ago.  The then UVA administration (Engineering Dean & Provost, UVA President) decided amongst themselves not keep our NE program going during what I like to call "NE's Middle Ages" when US public and governmental support turned cold.
2. Despite the increasing need for nuclear engineering graduates nationally, the US has NOT committed itself to a nuclear power revival just yet.  First, the American government and public must feel in their pocketbook the shortcomings of the other "green" energy sources, wind and nuclear.  Influential politicians such as Pelosi from CA and Reed from NV will work hard to undermine competition from nuclear power to the present-day preferred energy sources. So, the deliberate and fully affirmed revival of the so-called nuclear option by our government may still be a decade or more away.
3. Other universities that kept their nuclear education programs going during the past decade will have the inside track to accommodate any modest short-term increase for NE graduates.  These universities should reap all rewards due to them for their tenacity and willingness to have "stood the course."   UVA has shown by deeds that it does not belong in that prestigious group of hard-core nuke engineering universities.
4. A lesson hopefully learned from our past national experience is that there should be but a few (about a dozen at most) "large" and therefore strong NE education programs in the US.  It was a mistake for the US to at one time have ~ 75 NE programs, all competing for scarce financial support from the state and federal government.  Were UVA to enter the fray again, it  would permanently weaken the existing and just-initiating NE programs.  IOW, UVA had its chance and now should let VCU in Richmond continue with its NE program fresh start and produce some of the NE graduates that VA and the US will need in the future.
5. UVa should do well to remember the reasons it gave for closing its once successful NE program:
1. The educational cost/NE graduate was/would be among the highest in the E School.  The NE alumni level of support to SEAS is not commensurate with this high educational cost.
2. Interest in NE by UVA engineering students is not sufficiently high.  Low interest levels usually indicate a weaker student "pool."
3. Even in its glory days, the UVA NE program was small. Only large engineering schools can afford such NE programs.
4. To have a strong minor program, NE nuclear labs and equipment should be made available to the students, and not just a few theory courses.  Startup and operating costs will be high, expensive security issues may arise, etc...  UVA governance stated a decade ago that UVA did not then have the funding necessary to bring its NE program to top-flight status.  What has changed in this respect during the past decade?
5. Upon closing down the NE program and the UVAR Facility, UVA Engineering School supposedly committed itself to focusing on a few key engineering areas to achieve national excellence.  That still is a valid goal for a permanently small engineering school that "cannot be everything to every student."
6. An Assistant Dean of UVA Engineering at the time of the closing of the UVA NE program stated once in an SEAS faculty meeting that he was certain that the US Nuclear Navy could produce the graduates that UVA would not be training.  I respect that opinion still. 
7. The World will not stop spinning just because UVA does not have an NE program.  UVA should find some truly new and original fields to set up new minors in.

Robert U. Mulder (Nuc.’76,’81)

Yes, teach nuclear engineering. If someone in the US doesn’t teach nuclear engineering, who will build he nuclear power plants the US is eventually going to need? The Navy still uses Nuclear Power. I think the South Koreans got the most recent contract to build a nuclear power plant. Where is the US going to get the nuclear engineers if we don’t train them locally? Where does Westinghouse get their nuclear engineers to build the nuclear ships at Newport News?

Walter A. King (ME ’61, Darden ’63)

When I was an Electrical Engineering student at UVA (1959-1964) the University had an operating reactor.  I never took the time to visit the facility, and I wish I had done so.  Of course, the reactor is long gone now.  I think adding a nuclear energy minor is a timely idea.  Nuclear energy is presently the only dependable, high volume, commercially viable,  low emission energy source we have.  Future years will probably (politics allowing) see the US return to the development of the technology.

I will always believe that if our federal government had made a massive commitment to nuclear fusion development back in the mid-1970’s (on a scale similar to President Kennedy’s man-on-the-moon commitment in 1961) we would have harnessed that technology before now.  I fear we have lost our pioneering spirit!  Our decision to bail out of the Superconducting Supercollider project is an example of this loss.

Richard Hardison (EE’64, Darden’66)

If we are to wean ourselves from fossil fuels, it is obvious that we need nuclear energy in the equation.  A minor in nuclear energy would be a good idea.  However, the big unknown is what the effect of the massive federal deficit will bring on our economy.  I'm guessing it will be disastrous!  

Just curious.  Is the old nuclear reactor still working that I saw back in the very early "60s?

Gordon Allison (Engr. Undeclared ’64)

It’s hard to believe that this world-scale and proven energy source would not have a minor and concentrated studies program at many more universities than it does, including UVa.

Chris Cullinan

Responses have been edited for clarity, grammar and length. Not all responses are posted.