https://spectrum.ieee.org/the-forgotten-history-of-small-nuc...
Or just this recent summary on how all modern SMRs tend to show promising PowerPoints and then cancel when reality hits.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XECq9uFsy6o
Simply look to:
- mPower: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/B%26W_mPower - NuScale: https://oregoncapitalchronicle.com/2024/10/29/the-rise-and-f...
And the rest of the bunch adding costs for every passing year and then disappearing when the subsidies run out.
Not sure why you would want to fill storage with extremely expensive nuclear power when we might as well just use cheap renewables.
https://www.gevernova.com/nuclear/carbon-free-power/bwrx-300...
Which is especially true considering how renewables and storage is plummeting in cost seeing incredible growth.
You know, just like Flamanville 3 was back in 2005 before they had a 7x cost over run and 13 year delay on a 5 year project.
Try get them to sign a fixed price contract for delivery at said competitive price. We all know they will run scared from the room because otherwise they would be selling their product using that method.
Today they are relying on absolutely enormous government subsidies, where the government both subsidizes the electricity and takes on the project risk.
I wish SMR gets more attentions and focus. The UK has more Wind resources to power all four nations and it is on course to double its current 30% electricity from Wind to 60% by ~2030. I dont see why it cant be 90%+ by 2040 barring policy, politics and human factors.
All we need then are SMRs for base loads, while we work on energy storage that could be battery or Dams.