- After peaking at 18% of global electricity in 1996, nuclear power has been declining, crowded out primarily by natural gas and renewable energy.
- In fact, the latter beats all other fuels when it comes to capacity factor; it produces maximum power more than 93% of the time, compared to 57% for natural gas and 25% for solar energy.
- Furthermore, SMRs have reduced fuel requirements.
Small modular reactors have the potential to make nuclear energy more affordable to a wider range of countries, but its feasibility must first be proven on a larger scale as reported by GIS.
Nuclear power
In a world increasingly committed to reducing greenhouse gas emissions to net-zero by 2050, nuclear power could play a central role.
In most blueprints considered by the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) to keep global warming below 1.5 degrees Celsius, the share of nuclear power in electricity generation is modelled to increase.
That increase will be almost impossible to achieve.
Apart from hydroelectric dams, nuclear plants have the greatest amount and frequency of cost overruns among various electricity generation projects, one study found.
A simpler, smaller, more flexible version of the traditional nuclear plant could dramatically accelerate deployment.
This is what Small Modular Reactors (SMRs) are trying to accomplish.
Failure to relaunch
Although it has been nearly 70 years since the first nuclear plant began operating in Obninsk, Russia, today nuclear energy accounts for only 10% of the world’s electricity generation.
In fact, the latter beats all other fuels when it comes to capacity factor; it produces a maximum power more than 93% of the time, compared to 57% for natural gas and 25% for solar energy.
The consequence has been a further tightening of regulations in an already highly regulated industry.
Operations are closely scrutinized throughout the supply chain, from the mining of uranium to the safe disposal of radioactive waste.
Furthermore, the costs of a nuclear disaster are so high that virtually no private insurer is willing to cover them.
No wonder only 32 countries use nuclear power.
Thinking small
Conventional nuclear power plants typically have a capacity of 300-1,700 megawatts electric (MWe) and are primarily used for large-scale electricity generation.
Additional modules can be added if demand increases.
The so-called passive-safety or safety-by-design systems do not require an operator or control system action to shut down the reactor in case of emergency.
SMRs are not suitable for producing weapons-grade materials and uranium enrichment tends to be limited to 20%, so it is easier for them to comply with nonproliferation regulations.
Furthermore, SMRs have reduced fuel requirements.
As the CEO of Rolls-Royce recently said, with SMRs, “we have opened up a whole spectrum of customers.”
Conceptually attractive
At this stage, SMRs remain mostly a concept.
Economic competitiveness and general viability will be tested once a broader application is pursued.
For now, it is hard to get reliable data on the technology’s commerciality, making it difficult to accurately forecast its outlook.
The Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD) explains that the cost of SMRs depends on several factors: the size of the SMR market, scale of production, financing costs and regulatory requirements, among others – all of which are difficult to determine before a “handful of SMRs have been deployed.”
When experts refer to the low cost of SMRs, they mean in comparison to conventional nuclear power plants rather than as an energy source overall.
Controversy continues
Established nuclear technology providers are leading the SMR race, which in principle should support faster deployment given the preexisting expertise.
Other SMRs are under construction or in the licensing stage in Argentina, Canada, China, Russia, South Korea and the U.S. However, even if SMRs prove sceptics wrong about their commerciality, they still have to be accepted by societies and politicians, since they do not eliminate the risk of accidents and radioactive waste associated with nuclear energy.
The EC move, however, has led to backlash.
Clearly, technological progress has failed to dissipate the controversy that has surrounded nuclear energy for decades.
In most blueprints considered by the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) to keep global warming below 1.5 degrees Celsius, the share of nuclear power in electricity generation is modelled to increase.
That increase will be almost impossible to achieve.
Did you subscribe to our newsletter?
It’s free! Click here to subscribe!
Source: GIS
