only bad attitude causes economic loss in peaceful use of atomic power plants
rolschwarz, I appreciate where you are coming from on the safety issue. And by the way, the Navy has felt the budget squeeze too. I believe it was the Scorpion (it may have been Thresher, I forget.) that the Navy tried to run through an abbreviated overhaul saving several million dollars in the yard, only to loose the sub on it's first deployment after the overhaul. while nobody can unequivocally point to lack of maintenence as the cause (everybody who knows what happened are dead at the bottom of the north atlantic), it is certainly one possibility.
I do not believe anyone with any intelligence would be willing to knowingly run that sort of risk. there is too much money at stake after all. if the reactor is shut down for any length of time, the company looses millions. but that sword cuts both ways, taking it offline to service it costs money too. but ultimately it costs less to service it than it does to run it to failure. and besides, isn't it the NRC's job to make sure that maintenence is kept up? Corporate greed just makes sure it gets done.