COMPACT, PREFAB POWER PLANTS MAY REVIVE NUCLEAR OPTION
Oregon’s NuScale says smaller, cheaper, simpler is way to go
The prospect of a U.S. renaissance in nuclear energy has lost its luster in recent years. Yes, four reactors are under construction at two sites in Georgia and South Carolina, the first in 30 years. And last year, the Tennessee Valley Authority completed a plant that had lain unfinished for three decades.
Beyond that, no electricity providers in the U.S. plan to build another reactor any time soon.
Instead, some have closed reactors. Six units have been shut down since 2013 in the face of competition from natural gas, solar power and wind energy.
Nevertheless, an Oregon-based company is taking a big step toward eventually rekindling the nuclear option in the USA.
NuScale Power seeks certification from the federal Nuclear Regulatory Commission for a design that’s relatively small compared with the massive nuclear plants built since the 1950s and are simpler to operate.
Based on research funded by the U.S. Department of Energy, NuScale’s technology uses 50megawatt pressurized water reac- tors that would be assembled in a factory and installed in combinations of as many as 12 modules, depending on the amount of generation capacity needed.
Moreover, the modules come with safety features the company says enable them to shut down on their own in case of an emergency, without the need for external sources of electricity or water.
If certified by the NRC, the reactor design would be used in a new power plant in Idaho whose construction would cost much less than the massive new plants in Georgia and South Carolina.
“When you look at these largescale plants, very few people can put them on their balance sheets,” John Hopkins, the chairman and CEO of NuScale, said in an interview. “With our plant, if you were to go with the full 12 pack, you’re looking nominally at a cost of $3 billion for 600 megawatts of capacity. And the beauty of it is that they’re scalable.”
By comparison, the cost of building Georgia Power’s two reactors with 2,200 megawatts of capacity will go well beyond that of the NuScale approach — specifically, $11 billion for the two Vogtle reactors.
Utah Associated Municipal Power Systems (UAMPS), a wholesale provider of electricity in Utah, Idaho and five other states, plans to install 12 NuScale units on federal land at the Idaho
If certified by the NRC, the reactor design would be used in a new power plant in Idaho whose construction would cost much less than the massive new plants in Georgia and South Carolina.
National Laboratory as a replacement for coal-fired power plants within its system.
UAMPS would apply to the NRC for a construction and operating license if the commission certifies the design, which NuScale formally sought Dec. 31. The target date for completing the nuclear plant is 2026.
Backed by Fluor, its major investor, NuScale has sunk more than $300 million in the project in recent years, and the DOE has contributed $219 million, based on a competitive solicitation.
More government support will be needed to make the undertaking commercially viable, especially given the relatively low price of natural gas and declining costs of solar and wind energy, all of which command an increasing share of the electric power market in the U.S.
“It’s going to take about a billion dollars to get through the entire process, and we’ve already spent $500 million,” Hopkins said of getting to manufacturing-and construction-ready detail in the design.
As for market share, Hopkins said his company’s product would be “pretty competitive” with natural gas spot prices of $5 per million British Thermal Units.
That’s considerably more than the $2.51 average for the Henry Hub price, the leading U.S. benchmark for gas, in 2016, as well as the U.S. Energy Information Administration’s estimates of $3.55 and $3.73 for the spot price in 2017 and 2018, respectively.
Gas prices have a history of volatility analysts said could reoccur, even amid the recent boom in U.S. shale gas production.
Moreover, Hopkins maintained that concerns over climate change will promote new interest in nuclear energy and its carbonfree emissions.
Hopkins is buoyed by bipartisan support for NuScale in Washington, where the Obama administration, as well as Republican and Democratic lawmakers, supported the company. He said he hopes for similar backing from the Trump administration.
NuScale faces the task of proving it’s design is legitimate and fending off critics’ claims the company’s assurances on safety and economics are wrong.
The future of nuclear energy in the U.S. may hang in the balance.