SEATTLE-BASED SMR EXPLORING PH MARKET

THE Manila Times published my letter on Dec. 29, 2022, responding to Ben Kritz’s op-ed on nuclear power. In it I intentionally did not identify my employer because I did not want to be accused, as he put it, of releasing a “sly press release.” Since I was first published in 1979 in the New York Times, I have been published scores of times in every major US paper, as well as in the foreign publications, including some in the Philippines. However, I have never used them to promote my business interests, only facts and opinions.

However, Mr. Kritz’s op-ed (January 10, “The problem with nuclear energy advocates”) responded to me and in it chided me for not identifying my employer, in effect demanding a press release after all. So in order to answer him I have no choice but to say that I am a senior adviser to the CEO of Ultra Safe Nuclear Corp. (https://www.usnc.com/) based in Seattle. Now with that done, let me answer his questions.

First, Kritz is right about Terrapower’s TWR and Natrium technologies. Even though they claim to be already building a reactor using Natrium in Wyoming, it has significant hurdles, and the fast reactor technology with liquid sodium is highly unsuitable for export. Even in the US it is going to be an uphill battle. Further, they have basically abandoned the TWR and are now promoting the Natrium which, contrary to what Kritz says, uses low enriched uranium just as we do. However, the Terrapower technology is a “boutique” technology that is simply unsuitable for deployment in the Philippines and should not be confused with nuclear technologies like USNC’s that are tailored for the unique requirements of providing off-grid power to remote areas. Which, in this case, means powering the country’s SPUGs.

Now, to USNC’s technology … we do, in fact, use proliferation resistant low-enriched uranium that is available today both through the US DOE as well as plants currently in the pipeline for establishing a commercial supply. The technology builds on designs that have operated for decades in the UK, the US, Germany, China and Japan. Our choice of fuel builds and improves on safety and manufacturing through technological innovations derived from this experience.

In any case, his concerns are partly misplaced as our business model is to operate as an “independent power producer,” or IPP. So the technical and financial risk is ours. As with all SMR companies, what will determine our acceptability to the Philippine government is that your regulators say we are safe, and that our price for the power we deliver is economic. In fact, our technology is so safe that our facilities can be placed anywhere with essentially a fence and minimal security. And as to economics, recent studies on NuScale indicate that their costs will be substantially higher than USNC’s.

Also, let me address Kritz’s point about dealing with waste management. First, our reactors do not require refueling for 20 years, thus minimizing used fuel inventories that have to be stored and/or removed from the sites. They heat up an inert gas which transfers its very high temperature heat through a heat storage unit to run the steam generators, so we do not use water either as a coolant or a medium for heat transfer. Our reactors create heat that is stored, that then creates steam in any steam generator to drive a turbine. The fission process itself takes place in billions of micro-particles in the reactor core. They in turn are encased in ceramics that contain the by-products of fission, even under extreme, transient conditions.

USNC is obtaining a license to build a reactor in Chalk River, Canada in partnership with a major utility, OPG, operating under the auspices of the Canadian Nuclear Safety Agency, and in the US is in the process of obtaining a construction permit from USNRC. Also, we are in several other countries, including the US, and these will be fully functional reactors providing power.

As a potential market the Philippines has a number of appealing qualities for us to explore. Your workforce is highly educated and speaks English; your past experience with nuclear power is, ironically, an indicator of the responsibility and sophistication of your scientists and officials. Having 2,000 inhabited islands requires a plug-and-play technology like ours. And finally, your new president appreciates the possible benefits of SMRs, especially ones that can be placed off-grid in the underserved “missionary districts.”

I am glad Mr. Kritz recognizes that nuclear energy is a viable option for the electrification of the complicated electricity distribution requirements of the Philippines. But in advocating this possibility he is being clear-eyed about the obstacles. Sometimes overly optimistic claims have hindered the development of this technology by creating cycle after cycle of hope and disappointment. We intend to break that cycle.