Matthew Marzano brings valuable education and experience to his potential role as NRC Commissioner 1

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Subscribe to Comments:

8 Comments

  1. Rod, this is very compelling insight. When I read Ted Nordhaus’ recent piece opposing Marzano, I found it fairly convincing and was wondering how he had become the final candidate for the commission, when Biden and his clean energy team are clearly keen on seeing real transformation at the NRC. Your precision analysis pokes so many holes into Nordhaus’ far more generalized fears, you make him look like a hack—although I know he isn’t—but he’s jumped to his hasty conclusions by not having a fine enough appreciation of the breadth of actual nuclear training and work experience underpinning Marzano’s qualifications. Thank you for helping those of us without that type of rarified training understand why he’s such a strong nominee.

  2. Thank you Rod, I read Ted’s article and was a little convinced by it. I did wonder why he he kept discounting Marzano’s experience. Your clear expansion on Marzano’s answers helps me a great deal.

  3. Thank you, Rod Adams. The technically thorough and personally convincing case you present should be read widely. The poor record of leadership by the US NRC on important occasions in the past has dismayed those in the wider world who want to embrace US leadership. Perhaps Ted Norhaus might be persuaded to respond. The reform of the NRC has further to go and the regulatory questions will continue to need open discussion by independently minded persons, internationally as well as nationally. .

  4. Thanks Rod – Good article. You inform people like me long out of that industry as to what is now happening. I chuckled as I read your endorsement. I saw the man being a fellow Florida man and the Navy connections, but you freely acknowledged them at the end.

    From my telescopic view it seems as though what I would term “progress” in the US nuclear realm slowed greatly after the AEC was split into the NRC and the DOE. I am not anti government, but it does seem as though the NRC has stifled innovation. Putting a practical well educated man as you have described in charge seems to be a necessity for an acceleration of this “progress.”

    Both load growth and global warming provide necessities to get get the right man into this job. The added idea of using nuclear heat for industrial processes makes your preferred candidate a good choice.

  5. He’s kinda young, but I guess this passes for merit in our 2024 ‘meritocracy’. CV only goes back 15 years.

    1. @Michael

      I’ve heard the age complaint a number of times. It’s not terribly convincing to a former Naval Officer. Submarine commanding officers are approximately the same age. They are independently responsible for a multi-billion dollar vessel, and for all aspects of the lives of 150 crew members.

      An NRC commissioner shares responsibilities that are arguably more impactful over time, but they don’t have independent decision-making authority – unless their name is Jaczko.

    2. I don’t know enough about Matthew Marzano to know what his basic philosophy is toward needed areas of change. I wish I did. However, I have some hope because in the book “Built to Last” Jim Collins and Jerry Porras point out that people brought up through a lasting company were able to lead significant substantial change because they understood the external challenge in front of them (outside the company conditions) and the internal challenge in front of them (leading change within their current company culture). A person in their early 40’s is ideal for leadership. They have enough physical energy and health to work long hours, they have enough experience to understand pitfalls, and they have enough hope to see a very good future, they are usually not yet deeply cynical. As I get older, the need for physical stamina becomes clear. It takes HOURS to lead well. It takes energy to withstand criticism. It takes a healthy body to think clearly and consistently about problems.

      Would Alexander the Great be qualified on the basis of his age? It’s Matthew’s intelligence, basic philosophy, good judgment and ability to motivate others to make complex changes that are important. Of these, basic philosophy is the most important. Next would be the ability to motivate others. The ability to motivate can be taught. Good judgment comes with mistakes and in the process. We need to get rid of the Aircraft impact rule and I think the current congress will be friendly to that move. I also think we need to remove ALARA and replace it with a specific, unchanging measurable standard of radiation exposure beyond which the NRC says the words “Safe Levels.” That phrase is VERY important to reassure the majority of the public who hardly know anything about what is actually dangerous. Honestly I don’t think the public can process LNT, Hormesis, or any other way of thinking about the effect of radiation. They are listening to the “expert authority” to say “SAFE” and when the “expert authority” says “not safe enough, we need more” they are frightened. Bloggers and social media influences can help but we NEED the NRC commission to use the phrase “SAFE” when referring to a power reactor. I hope and pray that Matthew can help the commission move to BOTH simply the processes and say the word SAFE when that process is done.

  6. Given the point that David raised about ALARA etc.
    I recently read arguments that LNT is nonsense, especially in that it ignores biological repair of radiation damage, so that it only pays attention to the *cumulative* dose and not the *dose rate*.

    I found these arguments convincing, but as a proper skeptic I want to know what the best arguments are *for* LNT.
    Can anyone point me to a book or website that lays out any evidence for LNT?

Recent Comments from our Readers

  1. Avatar
  2. Avatar
  3. Avatar
  4. Avatar
  5. Avatar

Similar Posts