Small modular reactors: A comprehensive overview of their economics and strategic aspects

A key challenge for engineers and scientists over the coming decades is to develop and deploy power plants with sufficient capacity and flexibility to meet the growing demand for energy (mainly electrical) whilst simultaneously reducing emissions (primarily greenhouse gases). With fusion-based power plants not currently being considered viable for large-scale deployment for at least 40 years, other technologies must to be considered. Renewable and high efficiency combined gas-fired plants, along with nuclear solutions, are regarded as the most suitable candidates, with Small Modular Reactors (SMRs) developing as a favoured choice. However, two main impediments to the current deployment of SMRs exist: (1) safety concerns, particularly following the Fukushima accident, and (2) their economic models, with high capital costs only being available through a limited number of investors. The goal of this paper is to provide a review and a holistic assessment of this class of nuclear reactor, with specific focus on the most common technology: the Light Water Reactor (LWR). In particular, the paper provides a state-of-the-art assessment of their life cycle, along with a comparison of their relative merits with other base-load technologies. It is shown that SMRs are a suitable choice when the power to be installed is in the range 1e3 GWe and the social aspects of the investment, such as the creation of new employment positions, is a goal of policy makers. The paper thereby provides governments and stakeholders with key economic and social boundaries for the viable deployment of SMRs.

[1]  Giorgio Locatelli,et al.  Looking back to see the future: building nuclear power plants in Europe , 2012 .

[2]  Hisashi Ninokata,et al.  IRIS (International Reactor Innovative and Secure) , 2005 .

[3]  Giorgio Locatelli,et al.  Financial Case Studies on Small- and Medium-Size Modular Reactors , 2012 .

[4]  C. H. Chang,et al.  Progress in Nuclear Energy , 1957, The Yale Journal of Biology and Medicine.

[5]  Transport Safety Section Status of small reactor designs without on-site refuelling , 2007 .

[6]  Yutaka Tanaka,et al.  Major Psychological Factors Determining Public Acceptance of the Siting of Nuclear Facilities , 2004 .

[7]  Arnulf Grubler,et al.  The costs of the French nuclear scale-up: A case of negative learning by doing , 2010 .

[8]  Giorgio Locatelli,et al.  Impact of the external factors in the nuclear field: a comparison between Small Medium Reactors vs. Large Reactors , 2009 .

[9]  David Shropshire,et al.  Economic viability of small to medium-sized reactors deployed in future European energy markets , 2011 .

[10]  Giorgio Locatelli,et al.  Competitiveness of small-medium, new generation reactors: a comparative study on decommissioning , 2009 .

[11]  Giorgio Locatelli,et al.  Competitiveness of Small-Medium, New Generation Reactors: A Comparative Study on Decommissioning , 2010 .

[12]  A. James 2010 , 2011, Philo of Alexandria: an Annotated Bibliography 2007-2016.

[13]  Carlo Fiorina,et al.  Dimensional Effects in the Modelling of MSR Dynamics: Moving on from Simplified Schemes of Analysis to a Multi-Physics Modelling Approach , 2012 .

[14]  Minjun Peng,et al.  A Review on Specific Features of Small and Medium Sized Nuclear Power Plants , 2010 .

[15]  Steve Thomas,et al.  Nuclear Power in a Post-Fukushima World 25 Years After the Chernobyl Accident , 2011 .

[16]  Mario D. Carelli,et al.  IRIS ( International Reactor Innovative and Secure ) – Design Overview and Deployment Prospects , 2005 .

[17]  Hisashi Ninokata,et al.  The design and safety features of the IRIS reactor , 2004 .

[18]  Robert Rosner,et al.  Small Modular Reactors – Key to Future Nuclear Power Generation in the U.S , 2011 .

[19]  Giorgio Locatelli,et al.  Small-medium sized nuclear coal and gas power plant: A probabilistic analysis of their financial performances and influence of CO2 cost , 2010 .

[20]  Giorgio Locatelli,et al.  Generation IV nuclear reactors: Current status and future prospects , 2013 .

[21]  Giorgio Locatelli,et al.  Dealing With External Factors in the Electricity Generation Sector: Nuclear vs. Other Baseload Technologies , 2009 .

[22]  Hans-Holger Rogner,et al.  Market Potential for Non-electric Applications of Nuclear Energy , 2002 .

[23]  Brian S. Triplett,et al.  PRISM: A Competitive Small Modular Sodium-Cooled Reactor , 2012 .

[24]  Giorgio Locatelli,et al.  Economic features of integral, modular, small-to-medium size reactors , 2010 .

[25]  Mauro Mancini,et al.  Competitiveness of Small-Medium, New Generation Reactors: A Comparative Study on Capital and O&M Costs , 2008 .

[26]  Giorgio Locatelli,et al.  Large and small baseload power plants: Drivers to define the optimal portfolios , 2011 .

[27]  Steve Thomas The Pebble Bed Modular Reactor: An obituary , 2011 .

[28]  Giorgio Locatelli,et al.  The role of the reactor size for an investment in the nuclear sector: an evaluation of not-financial parameters , 2011 .

[29]  Daniel T Ingersoll,et al.  Deliberately Small Reactors and the Second Nuclear Era , 2009 .

[30]  Giorgio Locatelli,et al.  A framework for the selection of the right nuclear power plant , 2012 .

[31]  K. Small Using the revenues from congestion pricing , 1992 .

[32]  Vladimir V. Kuznetsov Options for small and medium sized reactors (SMRs) to overcome loss of economies of scale and incorporate increased proliferation resistance and energy security , 2008 .