SPECIAL REPORT | NUCLEAR SYNFUELS
Right: Ford’s Nucleon, a nuclear-powered vehicle concept from the 1950s, could become a reality through nuclear synfuels Source: American Nuclear Society
synthetic fuels market valued at $15.3bn by 2030 and $600bn by 2050. Furthermore, the NIA says, based on a survey of eight leading analyst organisations, the average prediction of the market share that synthetic fuels could achieve is over 42% of the total 2050 aviation fuel market. Should nuclear be deployed at the scales envisaged to
replace liquid fossil fuels, it represents a massive market boost for nuclear deployment. As Forsberg says: “Ultimately, liquid hydrocarbon fuels could be the largest single market for nuclear energy.” With these kind of figures in mind the economic case
for nuclear synfuel becomes compelling. “Nuclear power plants that are already completely amortised have a low cost of electricity. Running the power plant for 8760 hours with an electrolyser supports cheap hydrogen. Our analysis suggests costs below EUR2.5/kg. At this cost, synthetic fuels are competitive against other fuels like ethanol or pure kerosene. More importantly, it is much cheaper than direct electrification of transport,” del Barrio explains, referring to the process of replacing technologies like internal combustion engines that use fossil fuels with technologies like motors that use electricity directly as a source of energy. He continues: “by using nuclear to produce synthetic fuels we are able to reduce the total cost of decarbonisation for consumers. Because we are using less resources it’s also going to be more efficient, cheaper, and quicker than other options. Nuclear synthetic fuel production will be an important part of the solution for decarbonisation because the cost is going to be lower than if we have to produce synthetic fuel with renewable energy sources,” concludes del Barrio.
Barriers to nuclear deployment Given the obvious advantages of nuclear-derived synfuels, their uptake has nonetheless been muted to date, although a number of small pilot nuclear hydrogen projects have already been launched. For example, in the US, Constellation Energy has launched a demonstration project at its Nine Mile Point Power Station in New York. Part of a $14.5m cost-shared project with the US Department of Energy (DOE), Constellation will use the hydrogen generated
24 | December 2023 |
www.neimagazine.com
on-site to help cool the power plant. The DOE supported the construction and installation of a low-temperature electrolysis system at the plant that leverages the facility’s existing hydrogen storage system. The system started production in February. Similarly, in the UK EDF’s Heysham 2 plant is set for a pilot solid oxide electrolysis cell (SOEC) that will produce hydrogen for use in the production of asphalt and cement for construction materials supplier Heidelberg Materials, formerly known as Hanson. Government funding is going toward final design with a possible construction start date sometime in 2024. Once the technology is proven it should be feasible
to gain both governmental and private sector financial support. Nonetheless, despite such highlights it is evident that some barriers remain to widespread roll out of nuclear hydrogen and with it the subsequent synfuels market. According to del Barrio, these barriers are largely not
technical issues but rather policy challenges, notably public concerns that relate to safety and waste management coupled with the historic cost and construction overruns for large reactors that have also curtailed nuclear in general. As del Barrio observes: “There is no major technical reason, rather it’s a political opinion.” There certainly are political considerations. Post-
Chornobyl and Fukushima, environmental campaigners argue that nuclear power is prohibitively dangerous as well as expensive and that plants take too long to build. Meanwhile waste management has always been contentious. Those attitudes are changing though as recognition of the looming climate catastrophe casts nuclear in a new light. In addition, with advances in small modular reactors
(SMR’s) some of the economic and timeframe arguments traditionally associated with large light water reactors become less significant. del Barrio notes that while some issues, such as waste
management, have served to impede the growth of nuclear, technical solutions are certainly possible. Further, he contrasts the remote risk of nuclear accident against the very real risk of catastrophic climate change, saying: “At the end of the day the risk of a nuclear disaster is small in
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
