Retooling the Workforce for Small Modular Reactors
Dec25

Retooling the Workforce for Small Modular Reactors

Smaller reactors have many advantages, but in order to be cost effective in competitive energy markets a typical small modular reactor (SMR) will need to operate with a much smaller workforce than today’s large commercial nuclear energy facilities.  This will mandate a retooling of existing nuclear training programs to align with the knowledge and skills needed by the SMR staff. As opposed to fossil-fueled power plants in which the majority of operating costs are associated with the fuel they burn, the majority of the costs of generating electricity from nuclear energy are associated with the costs of capital to build the plant, and the ongoing cost of people needed to operate and maintain (O&M) the plant.  The capital costs, determined by construction & financing costs, are generally fixed during the first decades of operation.  The O&M costs, however, vary over the life of the plant and are highly dependent on overall labor costs; the number of people required and their salaries and benefits, contracted labor costs, and the cost of out-sourced services. For this reason the long-term economic viability of nuclear energy facilities relies upon maintaining capacity factors high and labor costs reasonable and predictable.  Obviously, the balance sheet also depends on the structure of the energy market in which the facility is located. Anti-nuclear groups understand this connection between labor costs and economic viability.  For years their strategy has been to convince nuclear regulators of the need for ever-tougher standards resulting in larger and larger staff sizes and thus tighter profit margins.  They are, in a very deliberate way, working to regulate nuclear energy out of business.  Coupled with lower electricity market prices brought about by falling natural gas prices, these higher labor costs mean some smaller nuclear plants are finding it increasingly difficult to maintain profitability. Utilities planning to deploy SMRs can expect these same anti-nuclear groups to push for regulations to limit their ability to operate with the smaller staff sizes needed. Using “ball park” numbers, today’s large 1000 MWe nuclear plants typically employ a staff of about 700 people, or about 0.7 people per megawatt. At this ratio a 100 MWe SMR would employ only about 70.  Under today’s paradigm of division of labor within a nuclear plant, separate groups of specialized workers perform various functions; operators operate the plant, maintenance technicians maintain and repair the equipment, chemists monitor and control the chemistry within plant systems, planners and schedulers do the planning and scheduling, and radiation protection technicians monitor radiation levels and help ensure everyone works safely.  The staff size enables economies of scale; in this case specialization is efficient because the amount of work...

Read More

Will Exelon Job Cutting Derail Future Recruiting?

This past Monday an Exelon representative at the ANS Annual Conference in Atlanta provided a compelling description of efforts they have underway to attract and retain nuclear talent.  Three days later the company announced they will eliminate 500 jobs, including 400 from their corporate staff.  It raises eyebrows because the company is viewed by others in the industry as already “lean” and very effective at corporate oversight of their nuclear operations. Having been through several reorganizations in three different nuclear companies, I certainly understand the need to periodically reassess and adjust the structure and size of an organization.  On the other hand, I can’t help but wonder how the layoffs will be viewed by the company’s workforce development partners and by potential new employees who may be considering careers with one of the industry’s largest employers. Fortunately, there are plenty of opportunities out there for displaced Exelon employees.  A quick look at just one job posting board revealed more than 50 openings. The company also stated they intend to reduce pay and freeze executive salaries to yield a savings of $350 Million next year which is about 3.5% of their operating and maintenance budget. While Chairman and CEO John Rowe blamed the economic slowdown on the need to cut jobs, it’s tough not to consider how the cost-cutting might be related to Exelon’s attempt at a hostile takeover of NRG Energy. Addition 6/26/2009 – Sources at Exelon stated that the layoffs announced earlier in the week would be focused in corporate suppport functions and would not affect nuclear technical functional...

Read More