Sponsored by SurfShark VPN. Although nuclear energy is reliable, powerful,
and a clean energy source, it’s still not considered the go-to solution in the big energy
transition we’re experiencing right now. Solar, wind, and hydro are getting all the
attention. Nuclear reactors are big, expensive, and take a long time to build, even longer
to get permitted and there’s also the nuclear perception issue to overcome. What if we could
make them smaller, portable, cheaper, and safer. Small modular reactors are getting
a lot of interest with the first versions coming online in China and new locations popping
up in Canada. As well as ex-Space X engineers that have made things even smaller … to
a micro reactor scale. Could this be the future of nuclear energy?
I’m Matt Ferrell … welcome to Undecided.
In December 2020, I published a video exploring one of the rising stars of modern nuclear
technology, small modular reactors (SMRs). At that time, we still hadn't seen any SMR-based
power plants in commercial operation. Several projects were being developed around the globe,
but have been running into roadblocks. The Oregon-based NuScale, which has spent millions
in SMR development, is facing regulatory issues in their project involving a 12-module, 540
MW power plant. , there have been several updates and new projects that are worth touching
on, like the Chinese SMR demonstration project I explored in 2020. At the time it hadn't
gotten off the drawing board, but the project finally kicked off construction in July 2021.
Ex-Space X engineers have also been making some news, but first let's quickly review
what SMRs are and why so many people keep pushing for nuclear as the solution to our
energy problems. I see it all the time in my video comments.
SMRs operate based on nuclear fission, just like traditional nuclear reactors, where neutrons
split atoms releasing energy. As the atoms split into smaller atoms, a few extra neutrons
are released, which in turn split more atoms feeding the chain reaction and maintaining
this cycle.
There are basically two designs of SMRs: thermal-neutron reactors and fast-neutron reactors. The difference
between the two is the same as traditional nuclear reactors, which (you might have guessed
by the word “fast” in the name) is the speed of the neutrons' flow. Neutrons of thermal-neutron
reactors move at a speed of 2.2km/s and contain an energy amount equal to 0.025eV, where eV
means electronvolts, which is the kinetic energy gained by a single electron speeding
up through a potential difference of one volt in vacuum. On the speedier side, fast-neutron
reactors operate with a neutron flow at speeds around 50,000km/s and an energy amount in
the MeV scale --- where MeV stands for megaelectronvolt, That’s 1 million electron volts, so yeah
… it’s got a bit more punch. Fast-neutron reactors utilize liquid metal for cooling
and don't require a moderator; thermal reactors usually use water for cooling and do need
a moderator. However, what really sets SMRs apart from traditional nuclear reactors is
(again, it’s right in their name) their smaller size and power capacity. While conventional
reactors are huge, built on-site, and can produce up to gigawatts of power, SMRs are
much smaller, generate less than 300MW, and can be built off-site.
The enormous size of conventional reactors makes the construction of nuclear power plants
complex and slow, taking about 6 years to be completed, which also results in higher
costs. SMRs can be built much faster, requiring less staff for location assembly, maintenance,
and operation. Their modularity, smaller size, and the possibility of in-factory construction
opens up opportunities for the installation of multiple units on the same site, as well
as simpler component transportation and standardizing manufacturing. When you can commoditize manufacturing,
the prices will drop.
When it comes to safety, manufactured SMRs include the latest safety features and security
requirements. SMRs have smaller cores, which opens up space for the integration of more
components into a single vessel, like the nuclear steam supply system. Their modular
design results in simplified and safer systems, implying reduced severe failure modes, shielding
requirements and reduced offsite emergency planning zones. NuScale's SMR, for example,
can passively cool itself utilizing natural water circulation without needing additional
coolant or power supply. On top of that, its design is immersed in water to assist in cooling
the reactor during unusual conditions, not to mention the specific valves that instantly
release heat from the reactor vessel during an emergency.
That all sounds great, but what about putting that into practice? Well, there’s been some
interesting developments recently.
But before I get to that, I’d like to thank Surfshark for sponsoring today’s video.
I always recommend using a VPN when using public Wifi, but VPNs can be very useful even
when you’re home. A lot of online services use some pretty sophisticated commercial targeting
and tracking ... a VPN can protect you from that. SurfShark’s CleanWeb does a great
job blocking ads, trackers, and malicious websites making it safer to use the internet
even at home.
And you can even make it look like your IP address is coming from a completely different
country. This can come in handy if you want to stream a video that’s only available
from a specific location.
One of the best parts of SurfShark is that it’s easy to set up on all your devices,
whether that’s iPhone or Android, Mac or PC. SurfShark is the only VPN to offer one
account to use with an unlimited number of devices.
Use my code to get 83% off plus 3 extra months for free! SurfShark offers a 30-day money-back
guarantee, so there’s no risk to try it out for yourself. Link is in the description
below. Thanks to Surfshark and to all of you for supporting the channel. Now back to the
latest developments in SMRs...
At the end of 2021, the world’s first commercial onshore SMR was started up in China after
nine years. The 200MW unit 1 reactor manufactured by China Huaneng Group Corporation (CNNC)
was connected to the grid in northeast China’s Shandong province. This is the world's first
pebble-bed modular high-temperature reactor cooled with helium gas, instead of liquid
water. Using a gas as the reactor coolant allows the core to heat up to about 1800ºF,
which can't be achieved using water. Helium is extremely stable and non-flammable, so
it’s a great coolant.
The company already has a second unit scheduled for 2023, but the project's cost hasn’t
been disclosed. According to Tsinghua University research, the commercialization process should
cut the cost of each reactor by roughly 60%.
Just this past December, GE Hitachi Nuclear Energy (GEH) and Ontario Power Generation
(OPG) in Canada, are working on the new Darlington nuclear site. The plan is to use a BWRX-300
SMR for the project, which uses passive safety features and is cooled by natural water circulation.
OPG had also considered Terrestrial Energy's Integrated Molten Salt Reactor and X-Xe-100
energy's high-temperature gas-cooled reactor. The BWRX-300, a name that rolls right off
the tongue, is projected to have up to 60% less capital cost per MW when compared with
a typical water-cooled SMR. In addition, it can be built in 2 to 3 years when combining
its modularity with the use of open-top building techniques, which results in a 90% volume
reduction in plant layout. The open-top technique is pretty much what it sounds like; the walls
of the containment facility are built out first, but the top is left open. This makes
it easier to use large capacity cranes to lower the components in from the top.
According to a study developed by the Conference Board of Canada, a 300 MWe grid-scale SMR
could result in thousands of direct and indirect jobs from project development all the way
through decommissioning after 60 years of operation. In addition, a report from PwC
Canada estimates that the project could generate CAD1.9 billion (USD1.49 billion) in labor
income, more than CAD750 million (USD588 million) in federal, provincial and municipal tax revenue,
and CAD2.3 billion (USD1.8 billion) in gross domestic product (GDP) over its lifespan.
The project is expected to be completed as early as 2028.
Comparatively, a report made by Hatch Ltd. showed that by using Terrestrial energy IMSR400
power plant, which is composed of two integral molten salt reactors and generators that could
deliver 390MW of power, could generate nearly CAD6.6 billion (USD5.19 billion) of GDP for
Ontario and CAD7.9 billion (USD6.22 billion) of GDP during its lifespan. However, the design
and construction of their model would take 9 years.
While these are small, what about going even smaller? Another alternative to conventional
nuclear power plants that’s been gaining attention recently is microreactors. This
compact type of reactor can generate from 1MW to 20MW, being able to operate either
connected to or islanded from the grid, or as part of a microgrid. They’re 100-1,000x
smaller than a traditional nuclear reactor, and have power rates from 10-100x times lower
than an SMR. If SMRs can be easily transported by trucks and ships to their final destination,
imagine what this technology can bring to the table.
Microreactors can be easily integrated with renewables in microgrids, used to restore
power cuts from natural disasters, and can be simply moved from one site to another.
In addition, when compared to current commercial reactors, microreactors use low-enriched uranium
with uranium-235 in higher concentration. These reactors run for up to 10 years without
refueling and, due to extremely small reactor volume, they are safer to operate.
In the US, former Space-X engineers have launched the startup Radiant. They’re developing
a micro nuclear reactor rated at 1MW that could provide power for 1,000 homes without
needing an external water supply. The micro reactor uses helium for cooling and has remote
monitoring & maintenance functions, which reduces the risks of damage.
Radiant has received $1.2 million from private investment. However, the technology is patent-pending,
so there isn't much technical information and specifications available to the public
yet.
So as exciting as all of that is … what’s holding it back? Why not just “go nuclear.”
The main challenges surrounding the SMR market are related to complicated licensing and regulatory
guides, codes and standards of practice, and legal frameworks around the globe. But beyond
the regulatory challenges, there’s also the cost.
While conventional nuclear power has a Levelized Cost of Electricity, or LCOE ranging from
$131/MWh to 204/MWh according to Lazard’s Levelized Cost of Energy Analysis—Version
15.0, SMRs have an LCOE of $120/MWh for a typical market in the U.S, Europe, or Japan.
This figure is lower than traditional reactors but still much higher than the LCOE for Thorium
reactors, which reach $53.51/MWh with a 30-year lifespan. On the flip side, the ability to
incrementally add modules to an installation reduces both upfront investment and capital
risk of SMRs compared to other nuclear technologies. However, compared to solar, wind, and hydro,
you're looking at something in the range of $26 to $50/MWh. Even wholesale solar + battery
systems are in the range of $85-$158/MWh, so nuclear isn’t a slam dunk there either.
Finally, the biggest issue with nuclear power is how to dispose of waste. What do we do
with the radioactive waste from nuclear power plants, which can be extremely dangerous for
thousands of years? Just here in the US, for example, 90,000 metric tons of nuclear waste
is waiting to be permanently disposed of, but there aren't any permanent geological
repositories in operation yet. In the meantime, the containers storing all of that radioactive
material degrade.
A more permanent solution proposed by scientists is to vitrify nuclear waste so that the mixture
provides some shielding against radioactive leakage. However, this process is complex
and still has uncertainties. This is where Thorium reactors can contribute to nuclear
waste storage. As I explored in my video revisiting Thorium reactors, their waste is radioactive
for about 500 years, while the waste from conventional nuclear reactors is still radioactive
for thousands of years.
Not to sound like I’m banging the “nuclear is scary” drum too much, it’s an extremely
safe power source. When we look at safety data from power sources, nuclear power has
considerably lower death rates from energy production per TWh when compared to other
power sources. While nuclear power has a death rate from accidents of 0.07/TWh, widely used
energy sources like coal and oil have 24.62/TWh and 18.64, respectively, which is yet another
reason we have to move beyond them quickly.
Although SMRs and microreactors can address several problems of conventional reactors,
and the SMR market is expected to grow at a CAGR of 15.8% until 2030, there are still
many challenges to overcome. There’s been some good progress over the past couple of
years, and some exciting ones on the horizon, but whether SMRs and microreactors will be
the mainstream technologies for nuclear power isn't a sure thing.
So what do you think of SMRs? Will they gain a foothold and become part of our energy mix?
Jump in the comments and let me know. And if you have knowledge on this, or work in
the industry, please share your experience so we can learn more together. You can also
join my Discord server and talk to other members of the community. The link is in the description.
And thanks as always to my patrons and a big welcome to new Supporter+ member Glen Campbell.
All of your direct support really helps with producing these videos and to reduce my dependence
on the almighty YouTube algorithm. Speaking of which, if you liked this video be sure
to check out one of the ones I have linked right here. And subscribe and hit the notification
bell if you think I’ve earned it. Thanks so much for watching and I’ll see you in
the next one.