Going nuclear: the enriching debate behind SMRs

This week, the EU energy community had its attention dialled in on nuclear energy, and specifically, small modular reactors (SMRs). At the beginning of the week, the European Commission hosted its 16th annual European Nuclear Energy Forum (ENEF) in Bratislava. High on this agenda was a push from an alliance of pro-nuclear Member States for more support for SMRs, seen as the next generation of nuclear that could usher in a nuclear renaissance.

According to POLITICO Europe , last week 12 EU countries from the pro-nuke alliance forged by France signed a joint letter that calls on the Commission to create “a genuine EU industrial alliance” to support a “European value chain” for SMR technologies. In response, following the ENEF, the Commission announced the launching of the European Industrial Alliance on Small Modular Reactors.

“A successful deployment of SMRs by the next decade will be an important and timely milestone on our path to climate neutrality by 2050.” ~Kadri Simson, Commissioner for Energy, European Commission

There is reason for optimism around nuclear energy in the form of SMRs as even nuclear-skeptic countries like Italy have their piqued interest when the technology is mentioned. That is despite the unrealised hype of a nuclear renaissance in the past. The energy crisis has made clear that, the EU needs to shore up its security of supply – and although SMRs may be a way off yet – nuclear and this nascent sub-category could play a key role in the future net-zero energy system. That is, with a level playing field.

With the European Parliament ’s Industry, Research and Energy (ITRE) Committee having included nuclear in the Net-Zero Industry Act’s list of net-zero technologies, this is a step in the right direction for that level playing field. In our SMR position paper launched yesterday, we highlight some of the crucial benefits Europe can derive from a thriving SMR industry, should they be able to mature alongside other clean technologies. So, can SMRs live up to the hype?

Nuclear stability

No, it is not an oxymoron. Let’s wipe away the prenotion that nuclear equals unstable. The level of baseload energy nuclear provides is an indispensable link in our energy system. It is a stable source that will prove more valuable as we move towards a higher penetration of renewable energy sources (RES) in our energy mix.

This year alone, nuclear energy has provided Europe with about 23% of its electricity generation, which is the most generation by any single technology and almost as much as solar and wind generation combined (data from Elda ). In France, it accounts for 65% of the generation and nearly the same for Slovakia. It generated sizable shares of Belgium, Hungary, Slovenia, Sweden, Finland, Spain, the Czech Republic, Switzerland, the United Kingdom and Bulgaria’s electricity.

Meanwhile, the European Commission is targeting massive additions of renewable energy by 2030. A fleet of SMRs could do just the trick to balance the system given the inherent intermittence of wind and solar. In downtimes, SMRs can serve as a carbon-free source of electricity to make up for a lack of wind or sun. In high wind or shine, the electricity is neither wasted. It can be diverted to mass hydrogen production for longer duration storage energy than batteries can provide. The heat generated from the nuclear reaction can also be used in district heating and industrial processes.

But all of this could be done with conventional nuclear, too. What is special about SMRs is that their economics may prove to overcome the historical financial burden and overrun timelines for the construction of nuclear installations.

The economics of SMRs

Nuclear reactors are a highly technical technology which have a lot of upfront cost, planning, and construction. These hurdles have led to one of the well-known criticisms of nuclear energy: that it takes too much money and too long to build. SMRs however, bring innovation into the mix with the potential to lower costs and speed up the deployment of nuclear energy. This all relates to the “small” and “modular” aspects of small modular reactors.

Small

SMRs are characterised by a much smaller size and capacity than their gigantic predecessors. This may seem counterintuitive for economic success, but it really makes the deployment of such an energy source much more flexible. The ability to rapidly deploy tens instead of hundreds or thousands of megawatts of baseload electricity will support a world where renewable generation is decentralised with a couple of megawatts here and a few more over there.

What is more, this makes the technology much simpler to produce. The miniature physique of the SMR enables production in a factory, offsite, rather than onsite construction from square one. Summing this together, it can lead to a nuclear installation with reduced cost and time to deploy. It also feeds into the second feature of SMRs' advantage – modularity.

Modular

Modularity allows SMR technology to benefit from reducing costs further over time through economies of scale and the learning curve effect. Economies of scale, because their standardisation enables producers to specialise in the individual components and assembly, turning them into the nuclear Model-T and enabling their mass production. This reduces costs. The learning curve effect, too, since the technology is new. This gives leeway to production optimisation through doing, furthering cost reductions. Combined, this also addresses the time element that has hindered nuclear development over the past decades.

Small modular reactors

The modularity and small nature of SMRs taken together mean that they can be deployed at a rapid rate compared to the nuclear installations of the past that have lead times on the scale of a decade. This is the relevance of the technology. Deploying clean electricity generation at scale is crucial to the energy transition which makes SMRs a potential supplement to the energy transition. But there is more to it than this short newsletter can dig into.

If you want to know more about the particulars of SMR technology and the factors to consider for their future in the energy system, be sure to read our position paper HERE .

Not so fast…

SMRs cannot act in contrast to renewable energy deployment, despite this hype. It must be a supplement in the future. Although there is much to be excited about here, SMRs are not yet commercialised. The first deployments are not expected until late in the decade and commercialisation will not happen until sometime in the mid-2030s.

Therefore, the security of supply challenge faced today cannot be left up to an expansion of nuclear baseload. Other flexibility and storage solutions will be essential, as well as demand-side flexibility to enable the massive uptake of renewables before 2030. Nonetheless, this does not discredit the technology. The energy transition is a marathon, not a sprint.

As 2050 approaches, the year we need to have reached net zero, SMR technology should be approaching 15-20 years in maturity and economies of scale and learning curve effects should have kicked in. That is if they have been given the level playing field to develop as a net zero technology. To be part of a net zero economy, SMRs need the same access to financing and development as all other clean energy technologies. That is how we can turn hype into reality, and the enriching nuclear debate of this week will help accomplish that.

This week's edition written by:

Nicholas A. Steinwand , Strategic Communications Officer -?Eurelectric

With technical input by:

Carl Sommerholt, Senior Policy Advisor - Eurelectric

Other stories you might be interested in: