• MystikIncarnate@lemmy.ca
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    1 month ago

    No advancements?

    Is SMR a joke to everyone?

    Look, I’m not saying nuclear is the only path forward, far from it. I don’t think any path is the only path forward. I believe that we’ll need a compilation of various generation methods to meet the demands of tomorrow.

    The only thing I want to see in that future is no coal, nor fuel plants. Those two are the most common types of greenhouse gas-producing plants in use. The objective, in my mind, is to entirely phase them out. Whatever gets us there, is good with me. If that turns out not to be nuclear, that’s fine too. If SMR or any other kind of nuclear is required to make that a reality, that’s also fine.

    I. Don’t. Care.

    • Is SMR a joke to everyone?

      Yes, because it hasn’t really been demonstrated to be particularly viable. You don’t need tons of small reactors, that’s way too much logistical and regulatory overhead for little capacity. And you need way more auxiliary infrastructure and personnel that way, driving up costs that exceed what you save by modularizing them.

      In October 2023, an academic paper published in Energy collated the basic economic data of 19 more developed SMR designs, and modeled their costs in a consistent manner. A Monte Carlo simulation showed that none were profitable or economically competitive.

      In 2024, Australian scientific research body CSIRO estimated that electricity produced in Australia by a SMR constructed from 2023 would cost roughly 2.5 times that produced by a traditional large nuclear plant, falling to about 1.6 times by 2030.