Skip to main content

DOE Awards NuScale Second Small Reactor Grant


Let’s see what’s behind the headline, via the AP:
The U.S. Department of Energy said Thursday that it has awarded an Oregon company a grant to help it design and obtain federal approval for a kind of nuclear power plant - small modular units that can be built in a factory and shipped to installation sites.
That Oregon company is NuScale, a startup company with strong ties to Oregon State University The first DOE award went to the mPower small modular reactor design being developed by long-established Babcock & Wilcox, a company that has been building small reactors for the U.S. Navy for decades. NuScale’s technology approach is unique and allows capacity additions in 45 megawatt increments. In addition, its safety features directly address the lessons learned from the Fukushima Daiichi accident. It’s a pressurized water reactor – as is mPower – with a lot of new ideas regarding safety.
[NuScale offers] a smaller, scalable version of pressurized water reactor technology with natural safety features which enable it to safely shut down and self-cool, with no operator action, no AC or DC power, and no external water. Each NuScale Power Module is 45 MW and has a fully integrated, factory-built containment and reactor pressure vessel.
NuScale lists its attributes:
  • The ability to safely shut down and self-cool, indefinitely, with no operator action, AC or DC power, and no additional water, with NuScale's Triple Crown for nuclear plant safety™ .
  • Seven barriers, between the nuclear fuel and the local community and environment, as compared to three for commercial plants currently in construction and operation.
  • A complete containment and reactor vessel module that can be shipped in segments, by rail, truck, or barge, for quick installation at the plant site.
  • Below grade operating bays for the NuScale Power Modules that are enclosed in an aircraft-impact-resistant seismic Category 1 reactor building.
  • Natural circulation, coolant flow residual heat removal and emergency core cooling systems are powered by natural forces, gravity.
  • A common pool that provides seismic dampening and radiation shielding for the NuScale Power Module.
  • A 60-year plant life
  • A projected capacity factor of >95%
Much of this describes the potential benefits of small reactors in general. But some of it, especially its approach to safety, leverages a patent portfolio NuScale has been building. I asked Paul Genoa, NEI’s senior director for policy development, about this:
“Just to be clear,” Genoa said, “all U.S. nuclear facilities exceed the stringent safety regulations of the Nuclear Regulatory Commission. However, just like the new Westinghouse AP-1000 plants under construction in Georgia and South Carolina, these new small reactor designs being supported by DOE are increasingly using innovative and elegant approaches to ensuring that safety.”
So there you go.
NEI offers a very good description of the implications of the DOE award:
DOE’s selection criteria focused on reactor technologies that have unique and innovative safety features to mitigate the consequences of severe natural events similar to those at Japan’s Fukushima Daiichi. NuScale’s press statement noted that its design’s “unique and proprietary break-through technology” using natural forces of gravity, convection and conduction will allow “safe and simpler operations and safe shutdown.”
And why this is different from the B&W award:
By contrast, DOE’s first solicitation focused on small reactor designs similar to certified large reactors that had the potential to be brought quickly to design certification and licensing. Late last year DOE selected a team consisting of Babcock & Wilcox, Bechtel International and Tennessee Valley Authority to deploy B&W’s 180-megawatt mPower small reactor design by 2022.
You’ll notice the team aspect of the mPower project. That’s true of NuScale, too: it is working with Rolls-Royce (yes, the car people, but they also produce small reactors for the British Navy-see the link), Fluor and Energy Northwest.
More from the AP, with some key dates moving forward:
The company hopes to have the design certified by 2019 and the first commercially operational project working by 2023 at the Idaho National Laboratory in Idaho Falls, Idaho, [NuScale Chief Commercial Officer Michael] McGough said.
This is spectacular news. We’ve been hearing about small reactors for years. Now, here they are.

Comments

jimwg said…
Throwing seed money is one thing (failed "green" startups have been thrown so much more!); has the Fed government actually committed itself even in intent to actually purchasing more than one or two token production units -- forget putting its name on any major plants? I'm not throwing cold water on a hopeful project; we're dealing with an administration steeped on presenting hallow facades of fairness while throwing nukes peanuts while lavishing its true fave pet projects of its Green constituency. I'd like to be wrong, but that Russian "shame on me" proverb keeps popping up...

James Greenidge
Queens NY
SteveK9 said…
I guess these days we even have to celebrate a plan for 6 years to achieve certification from the NRC.
whglid said…
One minor comment - the Rolls-Royce company identified is not "the car company". The rights to the Rolls-Royce car name are presently with BMW and have nothing to do with the Rolls-Royce who will be working with NuScale.

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