ADVANCED REACTORS | COVER STORY
Left: Terrestrial Energy has designed a Gen IV high temperature reactor
and significant supply chain overbuild. A five-year delay in scaling the industrial base would require 20+ GW per year to achieve the same 200 GW deployment by 2050 and could result in as much as a 50% increase in the capital required. A 200 GW figure for advanced nuclear is used as a benchmark as it is a mid-point from modelling exercises that appears ambitious yet achievable, the DOE says.
Go big, go small, or go home The report notes that advanced nuclear includes a range of proven and innovative technologies in two major categories: Generation III+ and Generation IV. Gen III+ reactors are similar to the conventional reactors and use water as a coolant with low-enriched uranium (LEU) as fuel. However, Gen IV reactors will use novel fuels, such as high-assay, low-enriched uranium (HALEU), and coolants that have not previously been used by the conventional US nuclear fleet. The report also states that advanced nuclear is generally grouped into three main size categories: large reactors (~1 GW), small modular reactors (50-300 MW), and microreactors (50 MW or less). Small modular reactors (SMRs) can provide more certainty of hitting a predicted cost target and are likely to play an important role in the early scale-up of nuclear power. However, while scaling the industry to a full 200 GW of new nuclear capacity may require large nuclear reactors as well, the DOE notes that advanced nuclear provides a differentiated value proposition for a decarbonised grid. To unlock deployment at scale, Nth-of-a-kind (NOAK)
advanced nuclear overnight capital costs may need to approach ~$3,600 per kW. While the estimated first of a kind (FOAK) cost of a well-executed nuclear construction project is ~$6,200 per kW. The DOE also notes that recent nuclear construction projects in the US have had overnight capital costs over $10,000 per kW though. Delivering FOAK projects without cost overrun would
require investment in extensive up-front planning to ensure the lessons learned from recent nuclear project overruns are incorporated. Subsequent nuclear projects would be expected to come down to ~$3,600 per kW after 10-20 deployments depending on learning rate; this cost reduction would largely be driven by workforce learnings and industrial base scale-up.
However, the report cautions that the nuclear industry
today is at a commercial stalemate between potential customers and investments in the nuclear industrial base needed for deployment. This is putting decarbonisation goals at risk. Utilities and other potential customers recognise the need for nuclear power, but perceived risks of uncontrolled cost overrun and project abandonment have limited committed orders for new reactors, the DOE report observes.
Phased development to overcome challenges According to the report, full-scale advanced nuclear
deployment will occur in three overlapping phases: ● Committed order books of 5-10 deployments of at least one reactor design are needed to encourage commercial scale deployment in the US. These deployments will help suppliers make capital investment decisions and establish proven capital cost reductions.
● Project delivery for FOAK projects will also need to be reasonably on-time and on-budget in order to generate steady demand for NOAK projects.
● Industrialisation of advanced nuclear power would require the workforce, fuel and component supply chains, and licensing to be scaled up too. This phase will need to occur once commercial momentum is gained and new projects are being deployed.
In generating a committed order book for 5–10 deployments of a single reactor design, the primary challenge is overcoming the nuclear industry’s commercial roadblock between potential customers and the value chain needed to deploy those projects. This poses a significant risk, the DOE says. If demand does not materialise for a critical mass of reactors, supply chain development will be less efficient and it will not be possible to move down the learning curve with repeated deployments. Further, achieving 200 GW by 2050 at 13 GW per year would require more than ~40 SMRs or ~13 large Gen III+ reactors coming online annually. With a projected two-year licensing period and 3–5 years of construction, “waiting to see” the results of the first deployments would likely lead to missing decarbonisation targets and missing out on opportunities for establishing a strong US nuclear industrial base.
www.neimagazine.com | June 2023 | 41
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 |
Page 48 |
Page 49
