Skip to main content

Westinghouse Goes to Toshiba

An event that had been talked about for a few weeks finally came about today, as Toshiba announced that it had completed an agreement with British Nuclear Fuels to acquire Westinghouse. The final price tag: $5.4 billion (U.S.):
``Given the potential we believe what we've paid is the correct price, there was a lot of competition,'' Atsutoshi Nishida, Toshiba president, said today during a press conference in London. The acquisition will triple Toshiba's nuclear energy business, he said.

Toshiba is seeking to expand its power plant operations as the company expects the market for atomic energy to expand by 50 percent by 2020. Westinghouse will give Toshiba the pressurized water reactor technology preferred by China, which may spend as much as $54 billion by that year building nuclear stations.

The price paid for the business, up from $3.2 billion during an auction three weeks before Toshiba was chosen last month as the preferred bidder, is almost five times the $1.1 billion the U.K. government paid for Westinghouse in 1999. Toshiba trumped bids from companies including General Electric Co. and Mitsubishi Heavy Industries Ltd.
Toshiba also announced that it would be selling portions of Westinghouse to a number of minority investors, but that Toshiba would still retain control of at least 51 percent of Westinghouse.

For more from Toshiba, read their official press announcement.

Technorati tags: , , , , , AP-1000

Comments

Anonymous said…
It's sad, in a way, to see another of these former industrial giants in the US, icons of a former role as leader of the world in manufacturing, being sold out in the foreign marketplace. Westinghouse Electric Co. was an innovator in many ways, being involved in the early development of AC power distribution, manufacturer of generators and steam supply systems, appliances, and other consumer goods. Today it is a shadow of it's former self. The business paradigm currently in vogue in this country, which seems to be sell everything out to foreigners to increase short-term "profits", lacks a long-term vision. Selling out for a quick buck often leaves nothing behind to build on.
Matthew66 said…
US companies are not backward in coming forward when it comes to buying foreign firms, so one ought not to complain too loudly when a foreign company buys a former US company. Westinghouse has been foreign owned since 1999 when it was purchased from CBS by British Nuclear Fuels Limited, which is wholly owned by the British Government. At least now it is not owned by a foreign government. It is also likely that Toshiba will sell minority interests to US companies.

General Electric bid for Westinghouse, although I suspect that even if it had been the highest bidder, GE would have lost on the grounds that a merger would significantly reduce competition for the supply of new reactors to the US market.
Anonymous said…
I think ABB owned it before BNFL. But it's true that it is kind of distrurbing to see these former giants of US industry being sold out to foreigners. It took a lot of hard work to build what we have (had). It's unfortunate that things have come to pass that Americans would rather sell out than build up.
Anonymous said…
It is sad to see a company such as Westinghouse that had such great potential -- be sold to a foreign-owned company. The top Management at Westinghouse did not do their job. They should have performed better and made the company what it should be -- U.S. owned. It is clear, that poor Management is the demise of Westinghouse today in the year 2006.
Anonymous said…
It is sad to see a company such as Westinghouse that had such great potential -- be sold to a foreign-owned company. The top Management at Westinghouse did not do their job. They should have performed better and made the company what it should be -- U.S. owned. It is clear, that poor Management is the demise of Westinghouse today in the year 2006.

Popular posts from this blog

How Nanomaterials Can Make Nuclear Reactors Safer and More Efficient

The following is a guest post from Matt Wald, senior communications advisor at NEI. Follow Matt on Twitter at @MattLWald.

From the batteries in our cell phones to the clothes on our backs, "nanomaterials" that are designed molecule by molecule are working their way into our economy and our lives. Now there’s some promising work on new materials for nuclear reactors.

Reactors are a tough environment. The sub atomic particles that sustain the chain reaction, neutrons, are great for splitting additional uranium atoms, but not all of them hit a uranium atom; some of them end up in various metal components of the reactor. The metal is usually a crystalline structure, meaning it is as orderly as a ladder or a sheet of graph paper, but the neutrons rearrange the atoms, leaving some infinitesimal voids in the structure and some areas of extra density. The components literally grow, getting longer and thicker. The phenomenon is well understood and designers compensate for it with a …

Why America Needs the MOX Facility

If Isaiah had been a nuclear engineer, he’d have loved this project. And the Trump Administration should too, despite the proposal to eliminate it in the FY 2018 budget.

The project is a massive factory near Aiken, S.C., that will take plutonium from the government’s arsenal and turn it into fuel for civilian power reactors. The plutonium, made by the United States during the Cold War in a competition with the Soviet Union, is now surplus, and the United States and the Russian Federation jointly agreed to reduce their stocks, to reduce the chance of its use in weapons. Over two thousand construction workers, technicians and engineers are at work to enable the transformation.

Carrying Isaiah’s “swords into plowshares” vision into the nuclear field did not originate with plutonium. In 1993, the United States and Russia began a 20-year program to take weapons-grade uranium out of the Russian inventory, dilute it to levels appropriate for civilian power plants, and then use it to produce…

Nuclear Is a Long-Term Investment for Ohio that Will Pay Big

With 50 different state legislative calendars, more than half of them adjourn by June, and those still in session throughout the year usually take a recess in the summer. So springtime is prime time for state legislative activity. In the next few weeks, legislatures are hosting hearings and calling for votes on bills that have been battered back and forth in the capital halls.

On Tuesday, The Ohio Public Utilities Committee hosted its third round of hearings on the Zero Emissions Nuclear Resources Program, House Bill 178, and NEI’s Maria Korsnick testified before a jam-packed room of legislators.


Washingtonians parachuting into state debates can be a tricky platform, but in this case, Maria’s remarks provided national perspective that put the Ohio conundrum into context. At the heart of this debate is the impact nuclear plants have on local jobs and the local economy, and that nuclear assets should be viewed as “long-term investments” for the state. Of course, clean air and electrons …