Discussion about this post

User's avatar
New Thinks's avatar

I agree - but I think the answer is a mix. One advantage of SMRs is where and when they can be deployed. For example, many factories need process heat. For deep carbonization to occur this process heat needs to be replaced. Currently we use natural gas and coal, and wind and solar can't really replace this. Large nuclear reactors can supply process heat inefficiently, but SMRs are ideal for this purpose. A single SMR could provide all the process heat and electricity for a large chemical plant, for example.

We need SMRs whether they provide commercial electricity or not. In addition, this might be, by far, the cheapest way to supply process heat to factories.

I'm also a little leery of saying SMRs are unproven. the nuclear navy have been using what are essentially SMRs for decades in their ships. We have millions of operation hours with these units; hence the risk is fairly low.

Expand full comment
Kenneth Kaminski's avatar

APRs all the way, proven design and years of operational experience is key to safely and reliably operating these machines,

Trust me, I know, 42 years in nuclear plant operation, maintenance and engineering. The US industry has a 90%capacity factor for mainly one reason, operational experience, OE.

We have learned how to operate and maintain these large plants. We have zero operational experience with SMR’s. that’s a problem.

Expand full comment
9 more comments...

No posts