Skip to main content

In Small Packages

udall The plausibility of using small nuclear reactors in situations where a full-scale reactor might be seen as overkill is an idea pushed, as you would imagine, by vendors with such reactors in their portfolios. In fact, a group of those vendors travelled around Washington during the early fall months scaring up as much interest in their wares to anyone who wanted to listen. Not just think tanks, but the NRC has hosted a presentation on small units.

NRC Chairman Gregory Jaczko told the NRC forum on small reactors in mid-October that his agency needs to ensure it has adequate resources to plan for detailed review of small and medium reactors. Among the issues needing resolution is focusing on specific technical designs.

“We need to hear from the industry about the demand for these reactors, and the industry’s development and deployment priorities,” Jaczko said.

Rod Adams has a terrific discussion of the NRC forum up at Atomic Insights.

Jaczko sounds measured but open, about what one would expect. It’s not exactly kick the can, but the can still ended up in the offices of Sen. Mark Udall (D-Col.) who decided to move the conversation forward a bit. He’s submitted an amendment to the Energy Act of 2005 to allocate $250 million to the Department of Energy to investigate ways to lower the cost of building new reactors.

Now, the small reactors are not the meat of the bill. Here’s how he describes its purpose:

To amend the Energy Policy Act of 2005 to require the Secretary of Energy to carry out a research and development and demonstration program to reduce manufacturing and construction costs relating to nuclear reactors, and for other purposes.

And here’s what he wants to be researched:

(A) modular and small-scale reactors

(B) balance-of-plant issues [that is, the elements of electricity generation not including nuclear reactors – things like turbines];

(C) cost-efficient manufacturing and construction;

(D) licensing issues; and

(E) enhanced proliferation controls.

So a bundle of thing, but this is the first mention of small reactors we’ve seen in legislation to date.

---

Interestingly, stories we’ve seen about this and the speech Udall gave on the floor of the Senate introducing it all fasten on the small reactors, though he didn’t mention them at all in his speech.

According to a report in the examiner, Colorado's senior U.S. senator has proposed a bill that would give the federal government authority to research whether small-scale, modular nuclear reactors are a feasible contributor to the nation's energy supply.

That’s from Nuclear Street. Our friend Dan Yurman over at Idaho Samizdat also focused on it:

Colorado Senator Mark Udall, has introduced a bill to authorize federal R&D for small, modular reactors. Udall said in a speech on the Senate floor he believes nuclear energy is an important part of the nation's response to global warming.

Here’s video of his speech if you want to take a listen.

---

It seems churlish to talk of small reactors and not provide a way for you to learn about them. So visit NuScale Power, Babcock & Wilcox, even the still-incubating TerraPower. That’ll get you started.

Sen. Mark Udall. We suspect every western politician has photos like this.

Comments

Popular posts from this blog

Fluor Invests in NuScale

You know, it’s kind of sad that no one is willing to invest in nuclear energy anymore. Wait, what? NuScale Power celebrated the news of its company-saving $30 million investment from Fluor Corp. Thursday morning with a press conference in Washington, D.C. Fluor is a design, engineering and construction company involved with some 20 plants in the 70s and 80s, but it has not held interest in a nuclear energy company until now. Fluor, which has deep roots in the nuclear industry, is betting big on small-scale nuclear energy with its NuScale investment. "It's become a serious contender in the last decade or so," John Hopkins, [Fluor’s group president in charge of new ventures], said. And that brings us to NuScale, which had run into some dark days – maybe not as dark as, say, Solyndra, but dire enough : Earlier this year, the Securities Exchange Commission filed an action against NuScale's lead investor, The Michael Kenwood Group. The firm "misap

An Ohio School Board Is Working to Save Nuclear Plants

Ohio faces a decision soon about its two nuclear reactors, Davis-Besse and Perry, and on Wednesday, neighbors of one of those plants issued a cry for help. The reactors’ problem is that the price of electricity they sell on the high-voltage grid is depressed, mostly because of a surplus of natural gas. And the reactors do not get any revenue for the other benefits they provide. Some of those benefits are regional – emissions-free electricity, reliability with months of fuel on-site, and diversity in case of problems or price spikes with gas or coal, state and federal payroll taxes, and national economic stimulus as the plants buy fuel, supplies and services. Some of the benefits are highly localized, including employment and property taxes. One locality is already feeling the pinch: Oak Harbor on Lake Erie, home to Davis-Besse. The town has a middle school in a building that is 106 years old, and an elementary school from the 1950s, and on May 2 was scheduled to have a referendu

Wednesday Update

From NEI’s Japan micro-site: NRC, Industry Concur on Many Post-Fukushima Actions Industry/Regulatory/Political Issues • There is a “great deal of alignment” between the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission and the industry on initial steps to take at America’s nuclear energy facilities in response to the nuclear accident in Japan, Charles Pardee, the chief operating officer of Exelon Generation Co., said at an agency briefing today. The briefing gave stakeholders an opportunity to discuss staff recommendations for near-term actions the agency may take at U.S. facilities. PowerPoint slides from the meeting are on the NRC website. • The International Atomic Energy Agency board has approved a plan that calls for inspectors to evaluate reactor safety at nuclear energy facilities every three years. Governments may opt out of having their country’s facilities inspected. Also approved were plans to maintain a rapid response team of experts ready to assist facility operators recoverin