A new report has assessed the feasibility of deploying small modular nuclear reactors to meet increasing energy demands around the world. The findings don't look so good for this particular form of energy production.

[T]he report’s executive summary certainly gets to the heart of their findings.

“The rhetoric from small modular reactor (SMR) advocates is loud and persistent: This time will be different because the cost overruns and schedule delays that have plagued large reactor construction projects will not be repeated with the new designs,” says the report. “But the few SMRs that have been built (or have been started) paint a different picture – one that looks startlingly similar to the past. Significant construction delays are still the norm and costs have continued to climb.”

  • Poayjay@lemmy.worldEnglish
    57·
    29 days ago

    I was a nuclear operator in the Navy. Here are the actual reasons:

    1. The designs are classified US military assets
    2. They are not refuleable
    3. They only come in 2 “sizes”: aircraft carrier and submarine
    4. They are not scaleable. You can just make a reactor 2x as big
    5. They require as much down time as up time
    6. They are outdated
    7. The military won’t let you interrupt their supply chain to make civilian reactors
    8. New designs over promise and underdeliver
    9. They are optimized for erratic operations (combat) not steady state (normal power loads)
    10. They are engineered assuming they have infinite sea water available for everything

    There’s more but that’s just off the top of my head