Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Subscribe to Comments:

3 Comments

  1. This bill sounds like excellent, excellent news that is much needed if the U.S. is going to be involved in deploying advanced nuclear reactors.

  2. Yes, I concur, it does sound like excellent news. After all, dealing with the U.S. nuclear regulatory regime, any news is good news! But it seems like people are listening.

    The category of “SMR” is now accepted through every level of the industry (governmental, commercial as well as R&D communities). This is something one should take time to pause and ponder. Whether it will make an actual difference in terms of building a robust deployment of this technology, at least in the U.S., is certainly open to speculation. We will see.

    What SMRs do, looking way out at least 2 decades (total speculation on my part) forward under the best possible outcome, is actually interesting. The SMR category covers both Gen III and Gen IV reactor tech. For purposes of this commentary, I’ll ignore the arguments over which is occurring or better. Rather, looking at the advantages of SMRs is rather a fun exercise and worth pondering. I don’t consider, at all, SMRs competing with utility-scale plus-1000MW units. Rather I see them as quite complementary to each other, allowing for a more leveled approach to financing and grid expansion. They will work hand in glove with each other, offer the ‘customer’ (PUCs, ISOs, Utilities, Industries relying on process heat, Deslination projects, regional and national energy planners, etc) an easier and more flexible way to increase generation incrementally if needed. One can position a SMR much closer to the load than a large utility-scale reactor (say placement at regional transmission substations). But there will still be a need for large 1000MW+ reactors for back bone base load.

    It is an exciting time to be a nuclear advocate.

Recent Comments from our Readers

  1. Rod Adams

Similar Posts