Uncoordinated Decisions by the US Energy department and supply chain impact

A New York Times article (May 28, 2011) describes one department selling the helium-3 gas as fast as the other department worked to build up stocks, thus creating a shortfall.  The gas is helium-3 that is cited as a “byproduct of the US nuclear weapons program”, as the number of weapons declined, so did the gas produced.  This decline in inventory was kept a secret. Thus, while the gas generation was declining, another division was sponsoring technology that used this gas to detect nuclear weapons smuggling.  The result is a potential shortage in helium-3 thus causing a scramble for new supplies.  Should the focus be to permit sharing of such information, despite the security risks that the information pose ? Should newer technologies be sponsored that use gases other than helium-3, albeit at a higher cost ? Or is the culprit the apparently naive demand estimation method used i.e., counting the telephone logs of requests for material ?

Unknown's avatar

About aviyer2010

Dean and H. William Lichtenberger Chair in Management at the School of Management, University at Buffalo, State University of New York.
This entry was posted in Collaboration, Operations Management, Supply Chain Issues and tagged , , , , . Bookmark the permalink.

Leave a comment