ADOPTION OF SMALL MODULAR REACTORS

Posted on by

Britain’s new Labour government has said small nuclear plants will play an important role in helping the country meet its net-zero targets.

Britain’s Office of Nuclear Regulation (ONR) said the Rolls-Royce SMR 470 megawatt (MW) Small Modular Reactor (SMR) design had completed stage two of its three-step generic design assessment (GDA) – the formal process for approving a new reactor.

“The team will move directly into Step 3 of this rigorous independent assessment of our technology – ideally positioning us to deliver low-carbon nuclear power and support the UK transition to net zero,” said Helena Perry, Rolls-Royce SMR’s Safety and Regulatory Affairs Director.

The overall duration for the Rolls-Royce SMR GDA is expected to be 53 months, reaching completion in August 2026.

A unique approach

According to Paul Stein, Chairman of Rolls-Royce SMR, “The UK SMR heralds a new approach to the cost of nuclear power by broadly rethinking the manufacturing and construction methods and by the extensive use of digital twinning, keeping the physics package exactly the same. The SMR uses a pressurised water reactor, a type we know and love.”

The production will utilize commercially available, off-the-shelf components from within the UK supply chain, injecting revenue into the British economy and avoiding high-risk, complex construction principles.

Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development (OECD)

The second volume of The NEA Small Modular Reactor Dashboard is another milestone in the ongoing efforts of the OECD Nuclear Energy Agency (NEA) to comprehensively assess the progress toward commercializing and deploying SMR technologies. It is important to note that the present publication is not an update to the complement of reactors assessed in Volume I. Instead, the work extends the same methodology to a further 21 SMR designs worldwide to evaluate their progress toward commercialization and deployment as of 21 April 2023.

Australia is a member of the OECD and has access to the publications of its Nuclear Energy Agency on SMR’s and would be aware that the widespread use of SMRs is underway.

Notable public announcements, even in the intervening months since NEA published Volume I in March 2023, now reflect technology choices and plans by chemical manufacturers, oil companies, and copper mine owners. Market signals suggest that this trend will only continue to accelerate as awareness grows about the potential for SMRs to provide alternatives to fossil fuels for both power and non-power industrial applications.

Nuclear Energy allows us to use the existing transmission lines and infrastructure, which is extremely important in Australia with a widely distributed, small population in a large country. The proposal submitted by the Liberal Party for replacing cold fire power stations with SMRs and larger-scale nuclear reactors utilizes the existing transmission lines so is a cost-efficient option.

Wind and Solar in remote locations means a whole new transmission infrastructure to get the power to where it is needed. Moreover, they only work when the wind blows and the sun shines, so the power output is unreliable.

Blocking nuclear is a major setback for Australia’s industrial sector. In the past with our own coal and natural gas Australia provided industry with comparatively cheap energy that will change dramatically without nuclear. Also, Australia has the world’s largest economic demonstrated resources of uranium. In 2021, it was the world’s 4th largest uranium producer. However, Australia has only one commercial nuclear power plant therefore, it has limited domestic uranium requirements. It has and will continue to provide excellent export income.

ALBANESE HAS BEEN WARNED BY DR ADRIAN PATERSON: HE SAYS, NUCLEAR WILL PROVIDE THE LOWEST ENERGY COST

Posted on by

Why is Dr Adrian Paterson, the former chief executive of the Australian Nuclear ­Science and Technology Organisation (ANSTO), which operates the Lucas Heights reactor in Sydney being ignored.

Dr Paterson has written to Prime Minister Anthony Albanese demanding urgent action to keep the nation’s lights on.

Paterson asks: “Why are we as a modern democracy banning nuclear at the federal and state level when low-carbon nuclear provides the cheapest consumer costs? Nuclear would transform an electricity grid which is getting … less reliable plus getting very, very expensive.

“Your electricity plan, for a massive expansion of the grid with wind and solar sources is deeply flawed and expensive. It will fail to deliver quality, 24-hour electricity,” Dr Paterson warned.

Dr Paterson said nuclear energy production stands apart from wind and solar because it doesn’t require a “massive expansion” of the grid – the cost of which would easily fund the first nuclear power plants.

Regarding a CSIRO report that claims nuclear will be too expensive, Paterson says: “CSIRO has no expertise in the cost of generation.

“What they do is take publicly available figures of the construction costs of nuclear power plants – usually in countries that have got regulatory environments that are kind of designed to stop nuclear – and convert them into a generation cost using an algorithm which is provided to them by a private sector firm that is not an expert in the nuclear industry,” he says.

“I’ve engaged the CSIRO for several years both directly and also through the press to say that we can work together to sort this out and they have no inclination to do it. People don’t know that to build all of the planned solar panels and wind turbines we’re going to have to double the size of the grid, which is 40 percent of electricity bills.

“The eastern grid in Australia is the most complex machine in the southern hemisphere. The policy of this government is to make it twice as big as it is and twice as complex if you have to integrate intermittent sources into it.

“How do people believe that we can create a grid that’s double the size with lower energy density and still have the current quality of life?

“The current policy is based on a failure to get proper engineers in the room. Engineers are being banned from giving talks as we speak,” Paterson says.

Commenting on his letter to the PM, Dr Paterson said Australians should be given a choice in how their electricity is generated.

“We shouldn’t be making decisions based on the personal preference of Anthony Albanese. This ‘Captain’s Pick’ mindset is stuck in the 80s when he was an antinuclear campaigner at Sydney University.

“It’s time Australia had the option to join the rest of the world, who are already using nuclear to stabilise the grid and power their economies.

“Why should Australia miss out on cheap, clean fuel? Why should Australians pay more to keep the lights on at home? Why not keep businesses doors open and unemployment low?”

Dr Paterson served as chief executive of ANSTO for 12 years, has degrees in chemistry and engineering, sits on the board of HB11 Energy, a company developing laser hydrogen fusion technology, and is now the principal and founder of energy advisory Siyeva Consulting.

UK GOING AHEAD WITH SMALL MODULAR NUCLEAR REACTORS

Posted on by

X-energy, working in partnership with Cavendish Nuclear, is planning a fleet of up to 40 of its advanced small modular Xe-100 power reactors in the UK, creating thousands of high-quality jobs in construction and operations. X-energy is also proposing to develop a £multi-billion 12-reactor plant at Hartlepool, to be ready by the early 2030s.

X-energy’s intrinsically safe advanced small modular reactor (“SMR”) and TRISO-X fuel greatly expand applications and markets for deployment of nuclear technology relative to other SMRs and conventional nuclear. Its high-temperature gas reactor (“HTGR”) technology can support broad industrial use applications through its high-temperature heat and steam output. In addition, it can integrate into and address the needs of both large and regional electricity systems through more efficient load ramping and can support intermittent renewable (solar and wind) and other clean energy options with reliable baseload generation.

“This is a huge opportunity for Teesside and the country as a whole.  There is a skilled nuclear workforce, with decades of experience of high temperature gas reactor technology, already in place at Hartlepool Power Station and the plant will be reaching the end of its life just as our project entered development and construction,” said Carol Tansley, X-energy’s Vice President of UK New Build Projects. “We can provide high quality local jobs and the broadest range of decarbonisation options for the area’s industrial base, and then use that experience to benefit similar regions across the UK.”

“Nuclear energy offers a major boost to industrial clusters seeking to rapidly reduce emissions and improve competitiveness by providing stable, local, low-carbon energy with long-term price certainty,” said Dr. Philip Rogers, Director at Equilibrion. “The opportunities on Teesside are clear, and with another five large industrial clusters around England and Wales, the potential national socio-economic benefits are huge, enabling long-term, economy-wide decarbonisation of transport and industry.”

Electricity use is responsible for less than a quarter of the UK’s annual carbon dioxide emissions, whereas demand from heat and transport represent more than twice the amount. 

X-energy already has a project underway on the U.S. Gulf Coast which will produce high-temperature heat and power for the Seadrift, Texas, manufacturing facility of the materials science company Dow. Construction on X-energy’s four-reactor project in Texas is expected to begin in 2026 and to be completed by the end of this decade.  The project is focused on providing the Seadrift site with safe, reliable, zero carbon emissions power and steam.

Surely the Australian government is aware of these developments and if so why are they not considering nuclear as part of our energy supply?