COMPLIMENTING CHANGE | COMMENTARY
A graphic of the Blykalla SEALER lead- cooled SMR concept, being developed in collaboration with firms like ABB. Source: Blykalla
This is not a reason for pessimism. It is the normal reality of delivering critical energy infrastructure. The nuclear power sector is highly regulated for good reason, and depends on safety, transparency and disciplined execution. The opportunity is to make sure regulatory frameworks, project models and technology partnerships evolve in a way that supports standardisation without compromising safety or compliance. Cost should be viewed in the same way. A single SMR is
expected to cost less in absolute terms than a gigawatt- scale plant, but the more important question is cost per unit of energy over the asset life cycle. The SMR model offers a clear path to competitive costs through factory production, repeat deployment, shorter construction schedules and fleet learning—advantages that grow more pronounced as projects scale and standardise. Supply chains will be equally important. SMRs could
create more predictable demand for standardised components, particularly if developers avoid excessive customisation. Regional supply chains may also play a growing role, reflecting local policy, resilience and customer needs. The key will be to balance local requirements with the repeatability that gives the SMR model its value.
Fleet viability Automation and digital systems will be central to this. For conventional nuclear, automation supports safe, reliable and efficient operation of large, complex plants. For SMRs, it may also help determine whether the fleet model is viable. If several modules are deployed on one site, or if multiple sites are eventually connected to a coordinated operating model, the control architecture needs to be scalable from the start. In other energy sectors, remote operations, predictive
maintenance, digital twins and advanced monitoring are already established. While the nuclear industry has adopted some of these technologies, there is further potential to expand their use. Implementation, however, must align with the industry’s stringent safety, security and regulatory requirements. There are significant opportunities in areas such as condition monitoring, cybersecurity, maintenance planning, operator training,
simulation, and system optimisation. Digital twins offer a valuable platform for validating concepts and testing operational improvements in a virtual environment before they are deployed in a licensed nuclear environment.
The opportunity So how should we compare conventional nuclear and SMRs? Conventional nuclear is well suited where a country or utility needs very large volumes of reliable power, has the policy and financing framework to support long construction periods, and can manage the complexity of major infrastructure delivery. It is also supported by decades of operational evidence. SMRs are more attractive where flexibility, modularity and phased deployment matter. They may be better suited to industrial sites, smaller grids, data centres, district heating or markets where a full-scale nuclear plant is too large for the system. Their promise is not simply lower cost. It is a different delivery model. The future nuclear system will likely include both LSRs and SMRs. Conventional nuclear can provide backbone capacity for national grids. SMRs can extend nuclear into new applications, new geographies and new customer models. Both will require collaboration across technology developers, utilities, operators, regulators, policymakers and supply chains. ABB, for example, is collaborating with Swedish-based nuclear power company Blykalla on automation, electrification and digital solutions connected to its SEALER lead-cooled SMR concept, including an electrical prototype that provides a valuable environment for testing approaches before they are applied in a licensed nuclear setting. Such partnerships reflect a consistent approach: engaging early with the developers and operators shaping the next generation of nuclear projects. Energy transformation needs dependable, low-
carbon power, and nuclear can provide it as part of a balanced, expanded energy ecosystem. The next phase of growth will be decided not by ambition alone, but by disciplined execution. Conventional nuclear and SMRs both have a future, provided the industry is clear about their differences and focused on the conditions required to make each one work. ■
www.neimagazine.com | October 2026 | 47
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 |
Page 50 |
Page 51 |
Page 52 |
Page 53
