The following is
an interview with Ted Delgaizo, who is President and CEO of Main
Line Engineering of Exton, Pa and a client of Bovarnick and
Associates. He has been an engineering and technical consultant
to the nuclear-electric generation industry for more than thirty
years. Ted also spent fourteen years as a US Navy
submarine officer, where he was a veteran of both the Vietnam War and
the Cold War.
Why did you start Main Line Engineering?
My
two partners and I were working for an engineering consulting firm
that, in 1986, was bought-out by a
larger firm, with minimal engineering capabilities. We got our own work, did the work,
and invoiced the work, except that the profits went elsewhere. We decided we didn't
need the parent company so we quit and started Main Line
Engineering. In addition, our
responsibilities in the larger firm were mostly managerial
in nature and we preferred to stay more directly involved in the
technical work. By starting
our own business, we stay involved in the technical (engineering)
aspects of our business.
What services do you offer?
We
offer mechanical, nuclear, electrical, instrumentation and controls,
and structural engineering.
Our business is divided into two
divisions. One division
focuses on nuclear-electric generation plant support and
engineering. The other division designs and engineers industrial gas
production facilities (such as oxygen, nitrogen, and specialty
gases like nitrogen-tri-fluoride). Some of our engineers work in both
areas but for the most part, our staff is in one division or the
other.
What types of companies do
you work with?
In
the nuclear business, our customers are primarily nuclear utilities
(like Public Service of NJ or Exelon Corp.). In the nuclear area, we also
provide engineering services to the US Nuclear Regulatory Commission
through a long-term subcontract with a firm in Washington DC. In the industrial gas business, our
customers tend to be large gas companies (such as BOC Gases or
PRAXAIR) and also industrial gas users, like
chemical companies (such as Formosa Plastics of Taiwan
and Hyosung Corporation of South Korea).
One of your firm's areas of
expertise is nuclear power; do you see nuclear growing as an energy
source?
Nuclear
power is in a major resurgence in the USA. An act of congress in 2005 provided
several financial incentives for utility companies to begin building
a new generation of nuclear plants.
Because of this Act and the constantly increasing price of
foreign oil, several new plant applications have
recently been submitted to the NRC. These plants will
be built in the USA over the next 5 or so
years. Republican
administrations are typically more nuclear friendly than Democrats.
There is a concern in the industry that a Democrat
administration in 2009 could inhibit the nuclear resurgence. However, since nuclear power is not
a greenhouse gas emitter, even the Democrats and several
environmental groups are re-looking at nuclear. In view of the concern with global
warming and greenhouse gases, major objections to nuclear power are
likely to diminish.
Many people think nuclear
power is unsafe. Is that
misunderstanding on the public's part because we don't
know enough about it?
It's
a major misunderstanding. The
1979 accident at Three Mile Island is the worst accident anywhere in
the USA
and no one was hurt or died.
The greatest problem was the anxiety felt by the general public (particularly the plant neighbors)
due to the unbalanced and over-hyped press coverage. Coal miners die every year, not
counting those lost to black-lung. No one dies in the nuclear
industry. Furthermore, the new
generation of reactors that are being planned in the current
resurgence are even more safety conscious than the original
generation of reactors.
Nuclear is safe and reliable.
The
Chernobyl accident in the Ukraine
caused a bad release of radioactivity but it will not happen
here. The Chernobyl reactors didn't even have a containment building, which
shows that the Soviet industry was much less safety conscious than in
the West. The French generate
up to 80% of the electric needs from nuclear. In the USA, the number is closer
to 20%. If we want to get free
of foreign oil, we need to follow the French lead. Furthermore, the French recycle
nuclear fuel to greatly cut down on waste
issues. Recycling of nuclear
fuel in the USA
has been prohibited since the Carter
Administration, over concerns that terrorists would obtain weapon
grade uranium, but this is not a good solution to either the waste
problem or the terrorist problem.
Is the issue over not having
enough engineers in the US overblown or should
there be a real concern?
Engineering schools in the USA
are dominated by foreign students. If the graduates stay here in the USA, it's probably not a major problem. If they go back to their countries
of origin, then we will end up outsourcing our engineering work which
would be a definite problem going forward. Only a very few colleges (Penn State being one) have retained
their nuclear engineering programs in the interim since 1979 when the
industry stopped building new units.
However, I suspect these programs will be
restarted if the resurgence is sustained.
Where do you see your firm
going over the next five years?
We
should grow over the next five years because there is a definite
shortage of engineering firms in the nuclear business. Although other firms will be
started, its a hard business to penetrate
without experience. We need to
leverage our experience by hiring young engineers and training them
in what we have done over the twenty years that we have been in
business. The gas business
should also remain strong, although much of the business will be
overseas as it has been in the past several years. The USA industrial gas
business is pretty well saturated with exception of the specialty
gases that are used by electronic chip makers. The specialty gas business continues
to provide opportunities for innovation.
