Re:The First Small Modular Nuclear Reactor Was Just Approved...
by ksec on Saturday August 06, 2022 @11:18AM
(#32368852)
Thank You. I should have read the article more carefully. It does state the reactor "consists of a 76-foot-tall, 15-foot-wide cylindrical containment vessel that houses the reactor". Looks like NuScale's SMR doesn't fit my mental model of SMRs. I was thinking SMRs size that could easily fit within a 40ft container.
>particularly that factory infrastructure needs to come on line and site licensing need to happen, and then the plant needs to get commissioned after it is built (which takes longer for the first).
Oh Ok. So it is only the "design" that has been approved. ( Again I should have read it carefully ). No wonder why it is taking so long.
Thank you for the reply.
The NuScale VOYAGR, in particular, is a really big SMR in terms of [plant size]/[megawatt]. The economies of SMR come when you can reduce that footprint by making smaller safety systems or eliminating active safety features (because the plant is small enough not to need them) AND factory-build them with on-site assembly. Other SMR designs seem to have more promising ideas for doing both, but NuScale's is just too big. (There are also micro-reactors that optimize for replacing diesel engines and gas turbines with a very small footprint at the tradeoff of cost.)
>I was expecting SMRs, once approved could be built much more quickly. I was thinking in terms of 3 years with perfect project planning. But right now even the earliest ( and likely optimistic ) first SMRs site is 2030. Why does it take so long?
There's a lot going between "approved today" and "SMR online": particularly that factory infrastructure needs to come on line and site licensing need to happen, and then the plant needs to get commissioned after it is built (which takes longer for the first). It's very conceivable to me that the Nth SMR could be a ~3ish year project, but longer for the FOAK unit is almost inevitable.