search.noResults

search.searching

saml.title
dataCollection.invalidEmail
note.createNoteMessage

search.noResults

search.searching

orderForm.title

orderForm.productCode
orderForm.description
orderForm.quantity
orderForm.itemPrice
orderForm.price
orderForm.totalPrice
orderForm.deliveryDetails.billingAddress
orderForm.deliveryDetails.deliveryAddress
orderForm.noItems
Left: A rendering of Holtec’s SMR-160 design


an upper limit of 300 MWe on the reactor rating and the 300 MWe designation also means some of the more elderly conventional designs, such as India’s PHWR, are included in IAEA SMR listings. The IAEA’s ARIS list has seven distinct types of technology


at an early or late stage of design, with designs varying within each class. A dozen are versions of light water reactors that might be considered closest to the PWRs and BWRs that currently form the majority of working reactors. Seven are based around lead coolant, nine around sodium coolant and five around lead bismuth coolant. Six have helium coolant and five are based around fluoride and graphite. Two combine a graphite moderator with a molten salt coolant. Reducing costs by replication requires ‘learning by doing’ – ie building the reactors. That requires several issues to fall into place: a well-understood design, ideally with an operating track record, and a pipeline of sites that gives the supply chain confidence to invest. Where has the SMR industry reached in that process?


Licensing An SMR barrier that is not faced by many other types of electricity generation is the nuclear licence. This requires both a licence for the technology and for the site and it is a bottleneck that each technology has to pass through. The first to do so was NuScale, which won design approval for the six-module VOYGR variant from the Nuclear Regulatory Commission in January this year. However, design approval for the technology does not necessarily mean it can be installed at a chosen site. The US NRC approval for NuScale allows a utility or other operator to reference the design, but the operator has still has to apply for a combined licence to build and operate it as a nuclear power plant anywhere in the USA. Likely to be the next to receive design approval is the GE Hitachi’s BWRX-300, which “leverages the design and licensing basis” of GEH’s US NRC-certified ESBWR. It was entered into the US NRC licensing process in 2020. BWRX-300 has already completed phases one and two of the Canadian Nuclear Safety Commission’s (CNSC) vendor design review process and in December 2022 GEH announced that it has submitted it into the UK’s Generic Design Assessment (GDA). The UK’s Office for Nuclear Regulation (ONR) also last


year took on GDA of a new reactor from the UK’s Rolls Royce SMR. The reactor is described as an SMR by the company, although at 440 MWe it is considerably above the IAEA’s upper limit to meet that definition.


All three of these designs are based on well-known


nuclear technology that has been deployed and has a track record of operation. Although the SMR version has numerous differences, these designs are likely to have the familiarity needed for mass rollout.


In the lead What has been the progress towards choosing sites for the potential SMR fleet? In contrast to large nuclear units, which are necessarily much more influenced by site characteristics, the key requirement for SMRs is replication. That means the site should be able to host several units or there should be a large number of potential sites available. It is no surprise that the technologies that have passed furthest through the design licensing process have a head start when naming sites for deployment. NuScale’s progress through the licensing process has given it a strong position in raising potential buyer interest. It is selling its 77 MWe NuScale plant in three, six or 12 unit versions branded as ‘VOYGR™


’ and it is working with


Utah Associated Municipal Power Systems (UAMPS) on a combined licence application for a six-module plant to be sited at the Idaho National Laboratory. The application will be submitted to the US Nuclear


Regulatory Commission (NRC) next year and is targeting units to start up in 2029 and 2030. The UAMPS consortium recently reapproved the project despite cost increases. UAMPS said a new budget plan “will move the small modular nuclear reactor project into an aggressive 2023 workplan, which focuses on completing the preparation of the application to construct and operate the plant, to be submitted to the Nuclear Regulatory Commission in January 2024.” This year it will also procure long lead material – NuScale Power has already placed an upper reactor pressure vessel order with Doosan Enerbility – and will develop a more detailed construction estimate. NuScale has signed agreements with two other utilities


that could open the door to more deployment. They are via Dairyland Power (which serves Wisconsin, Minnesota, Iowa and Illinois) and Associated Electric Cooperative Inc (which serves 2 million people in Missouri). In addition, NuScale Power has also unveiled a large number of Memoranda of Understanding with potential site owners in other countries. The most advanced is Romania’s RoPower Nuclear, which is owned equally by S.N. Nuclearelectrica and Nova Power & Gas, and which signed a contract with NuScale Power for front-end engineering and design (FEED) work in December. Phase 1 of the FEED U


www.neimagazine.com | April 2023 | 17


Page 1  |  Page 2  |  Page 3  |  Page 4  |  Page 5  |  Page 6  |  Page 7  |  Page 8  |  Page 9  |  Page 10  |  Page 11  |  Page 12  |  Page 13  |  Page 14  |  Page 15  |  Page 16  |  Page 17  |  Page 18  |  Page 19  |  Page 20  |  Page 21  |  Page 22  |  Page 23  |  Page 24  |  Page 25  |  Page 26  |  Page 27  |  Page 28  |  Page 29  |  Page 30  |  Page 31  |  Page 32  |  Page 33  |  Page 34  |  Page 35  |  Page 36  |  Page 37  |  Page 38  |  Page 39  |  Page 40  |  Page 41  |  Page 42  |  Page 43  |  Page 44  |  Page 45  |  Page 46  |  Page 47