A small modular nuclear reactor by NuScale is getting canceled because it would have produced 450 Megawatts and cost over $9 billion.
The Vogtle Unit 3 and unit 4 are each 1,114 megawatt (MW) AP1000 nuclear reactors, and they will cost a combined $30 billion.
The US was trying to shift to small modular nuclear reactors to make up for large project incompetence and over regulation of the nuclear energy industry. The US was trying to make nuclear reactors that are 3 to 10 times smaller than traditional nuclear reactors to make up for them costing 5 to 10 times more. However, the cost overruns outpace the shrinking of reactors.
China is buying 6600 Megawatts of nuclear for $17 billion. This will be about 3500 megawatts for the price that Nuscale was trying to make 450 megawatt.
Units 5 and 6 of the Ningde Nuclear Power Plant in Fujian Province, China are ACPR-1000 or HPR1000 reactors (power in the range of 1020MW to 1150 MW).
Units 1 and 2 of the Shidaowan plant in Shandong Province
Units 1 and 2 of the Xudabao plant in Liaoning Province.
China has the third most nuclear power in the world. Both China and the USA have not had fatal nuclear power accidents. China has had no nuclear power plant accidents. The US had Three Mile Island but that resulted in no deaths.
The US Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) has not approved any completely new nuclear reactor designs since it was formed about 50 years ago. The Atomic Energy Commission approved the boiler water and pressure water nuclear reactor designs. The NRC has only approved follow on modifications and modernizations based upon the already approved nuclear reactors. The NRC has taken several actions to modify its licensing process to include advanced nuclear reactors.
CNNC plans to start building an improved Hualong Two by 2024. It will be a more economical version of the Hualong One using similar technology, reducing build time from 5 years to 4, and reducing costs by around a fourth from 17,000 yuan per kW to 13,000 yuan per kW.
Bill Gates and GE are backing Terrapower to make a 345 MW sodium reactor for about $4 billion. This will be 6.5 times more expensive than China’s reactors. $11600 per kW for the Terrapower Natrium reactor vs $1780 per kW for the Hualong Two.
Nuclear Regulation in the USA
The NRC (from 1974-2023) has certified seven designs: the Advanced Boiling Water Reactor, System 80+, AP600, AP1000, the Economic Simplified Boiling Water Reactor, Nuscale and the APR1400. Designs for original pressure water reactors and the boiler water reactors were all approved under the Atomic Energy Commission (AEC) which ran from 1946 to 1974. After the AEC was replaced by the NRC, the approval of new nuclear reactor designs ground to a near halt.
It takes 7-20 years for an NRC approval and the odds of successfully getting through certification are about 20% or less. The odds seem even worse if your reactor is not submitted by Westinghouse or something Westinghouse-related. CANDU heavy water reactors (which have had versions built around the world), pebble bed reactors and high temperature reactors tried to get licenses and then applications get withdrawn after a decade or so.
Gregory Jaczko served on the Nuclear Regulatory Commission from 2005 to 2009, and as its chairman from 2009 to 2012. He was appointed by President Obama. Jaczko is now openly vehemently anti-nuclear energy. He was already anti-nuclear when he was appointed to run the NRC. It is shocking that nuclear agencies run by anti-nuclear fanatics do not advance nuclear energy.
Jaczko rails about the dangers of nuclear energy despite the evidence that nuclear is the safest energy source. Nuclear energy displaced 20% of the overall electricity used by coal in the US by the 1970s. This saved millions of lives from air pollution deaths. France built nuclear energy in the 1980s for three times less than Germany spent for the past two decades on wind and solar. France reached 80% clean energy from nuclear while Germany is stuck at about 30-40% energy from solar and wind. France did it in about a decade while Germany will take at least four to five times longer and eventually spend ten times the money.
Brian Wang is a Futurist Thought Leader and a popular Science blogger with 1 million readers per month. His blog Nextbigfuture.com is ranked #1 Science News Blog. It covers many disruptive technology and trends including Space, Robotics, Artificial Intelligence, Medicine, Anti-aging Biotechnology, and Nanotechnology.
Known for identifying cutting edge technologies, he is currently a Co-Founder of a startup and fundraiser for high potential early-stage companies. He is the Head of Research for Allocations for deep technology investments and an Angel Investor at Space Angels.
A frequent speaker at corporations, he has been a TEDx speaker, a Singularity University speaker and guest at numerous interviews for radio and podcasts. He is open to public speaking and advising engagements.
And US reactors are likely 5-10 times as safe as thr questionable quickly constructed Chinese plants. Tofu-dreg comes to mind.
Yeah i’m not understanding your thinking. No utility is asking for it, and this is the only venue i’ve ever seen the argument CANDU good, NRC obstructive. The vendor, in this case the canadian government, would be on the hook to pay the NRC for it’s time through the licensing process. The only application I know of that was outright rejected was Oklo in 2022. I can say without looking it up that Canada withdrew the application. I can wager that Canada withdrew the applicaution because there were no customers. it’s a very different technology and it is not actually competitive…
Bill Gates could have perfected a new nuclear design in China before rolling it out in the west. Making China the bogeyman really hurts innovation in the west. What IP China needed to steal, it has already stolen. Now it’s driving innovation and west needs to learn from them.
Restrictions now are closing the barn door with the horse standing outside.
Why is a problem that NRC hasn’t licensed the CANDU? Like you wrote, the USA has licensed 7 designs. The CANDU is almost certainly less economical to operate than the PWR/BWR fleet in the lower 48… CANDU need to be offline for a 2 year refurbishment after 20 EFPY. CANDU has no advantage, just like BWR has no advantage over PWR or vise versa. Should we license everything? At cost to whom?
All those who think the pressure vessel is the problem, should note that the CANDU doesn’t have a large forged vessel.
It’s a problem because there’s no rational reason for them to have not licensed the CANDU.
It works, it has a proven safety record, that should be the end of the matter so far as regulators are concerned. The utilities can decide its merits, the only thing the NRC has jurisdiction over is whether it’s dangerous.
So, it’s evidence, as if we needed more, that the NRC’s regulations are not driven by science and technology.
Related note: high speed rail in CA probably is at least 10x more expensive than high speed rail in China.
Sad.
First Of A Kind reactors are always more expensive.
Inflation is hitting steel and concrete which influence FOAK and nth of a kind reactor prices.