![](images/Logos/oilprice-logo%20copy.jpg)
U.S. Company Signs Deals In Europe For Small Nuclear
Reactors
By Leonard
Hyman & William Tilles
April
1st, 2023
-
Last Energy signed deals for 34 SMRs with Poland and the UK.
- The tiny modular
reactors produce about 20 MWs of electricity each.
- In terms of cost, the UK
press cited a figure of £100 million or less per 20 MW unit, or
about $6,135 per KW.
Last week, Washington, D.C. based Last Energy announced that it had
signed agreements in the UK and Poland for thirty four small modular
reactors. Frankly, when we first saw the headline we assumed editorial
failure by the UK press and moved on. But our initial impression was
wrong. These are among the tiniest modular reactor designs we have
seen to date, producing a mere 20 MWs of electricity. All of the 34
orders cited above collectively equal about one half of a gigawatt
scale power plant regardless of type. By contrast the proposed NuScale
reactors produce 77 MWs and the GE Hitachi BWRX 300 reactor under
consideration by TVA for its Clinch River site is, as the name
implies, 300 MWs. But size is not the only thing that differentiates
Last Energy from its more conventional competitors. Last
Energy is unusual in that its financial backing comes from
libertarian, Silicon Valley funders who typically have been portrayed
in the press as “disrupters”. Last’s CEO, Bret Kugelmass, started a
Washington D.C. based think tank, the Energy Impact Center, “which
sought to answer the ultimate question of our lifetime: how to reverse
climate change. Nuclear is the answer.” They also sponsored a podcast,
”Titans of Nuclear”, featuring many experts and issues in the field.
Our point here is that this company bears little resemblance to the
conventional array of government-backed defense contractors
representing most of the other SMR technologies. Given its background,
not surprisingly Last Energy sounds to us a bit like Uber or WeWork
but for new nukes. Their lofty and worthwhile goal is to reverse the
impacts of climate utilizing off the shelf nuclear technology with an
innovative delivery mode. Their claim is to “follow the best practices
of the renewables industry: scaling of quantity rather than size.”
Related: WTI Crude Gains As Banking Fears Ease, Kurdish Oil Exports
Remain Suspended
Their offering is a compact 20 MW, single loop, pressurized water
reactor that could sit on a site of ½ an acre. It would use
conventional nuclear fuel, 4.95% enriched uranium and standard fuel
rods in a 17 by 17 array. The build time is estimated to be just 30
months. But, given the full modularity of all plant structures the
estimated actual on site construction time is estimated at just three
months. The fuel cycle is a lengthy 72 months with a three month
refueling interval. These plants would also be air cooled and the
company touted its meager water usage of a mere 8 gallons per minute.
This contrasts with the significant water demands of other even
relatively small reactors. Like other smaller reactors the Last Energy
design would feature a “subterranean nuclear island” and “low profile
balance of plant”. Gone are the big reinforced domes or rectangles of
previous designs that could withstand whatever hypothetical impact
short of an asteroid. They describe their approach as “customer
centric” and that “our innovation is simple; leverage only proven
nuclear technology, create a replicable, manufacturable power plant,
and size for private capital.” The first actual plant installations
could occur as soon as 2025 or 2026. No other SMR builder is offering
a new plant much before 2029.
In terms of cost, the UK press cited a figure of £100 million or less
per 20 MW unit, or about $6,135 per kw. This was for a total of 34
European reactors, 24 in the UK and 10 in Poland. Romania is also
considering the design. The company has secured PPAs, purchase power
agreements, with 4 industrial partners. In Poland they are partnering
with the Katowice Special Economic Zone in southwest Poland. In the UK
they have three industrial partnerships only identified as “a life
sciences campus, a sustainable fuels manufacturer, and a developer of
hyperscale data centers.” Last Energy is unique in that they offer
“one stop shopping” for nuclear energy purchasers. They state that,
“We cover all aspects of the investment process including design,
construction, financing, service, and operation.”
The European Nuclear Energy Agency, which monitors nuclear issues,
currently lists no fewer than twenty one promising nuclear
technologies on its SMR dashboard. (Last Energy’s PWR 20 is not
currently listed.) There are multiple entries in each of the five
categories of new, small nuclear technology: water cooled, gas cooled,
fast spectrum, micro (which would include Last Energy), and molten
salt. The dashboard approach ranks these various technologies on five
criteria: licensing, siting, supply chain, engagement, and fuel. None
of these technologies has as yet been commercially licensed outside of
China and Russia. The NEA stated that less than half of the featured
technologies could obtain financing for a first-of-its-kind unit and
an even smaller subset would be able to obtain purchase power
agreements, which Last Energy has done.
The one major difference between say the BWRX 300 or NuScale versus
Last’s PWR 20 is with respect to licensing. The first two companies go
to great lengths to describe and advertise their proximity to
regulatory approvals. Last’s website notes that the “Biggest
uncertainties (are) posed by the licensing process.” They further
state their hope that in terms of design development “we are able to
fabricate in parallel with our licensing process”. Regardless of how
they describe the regulatory/licensing process, the NEA summarizes the
basic process in the US and Europe as consisting of four essential
steps: 1) pre-licensing interaction with regulators, 2) design
approval, 3) construction, and finally 4) issuance of an operating
license and commercial operation. Stated differently, it won’t matter
how quickly Last Energy engineers can fabricate and assemble their PWR
20 until various regulators approve their design.
From a commercial acceptance perspective, it is difficult to even
hazard a guess about future SMR technology since we’re really talking
about a replacement cycle, mostly for aging natural
gas power plants in
the 2040s. Assuming that a new generation of SMRs begin operating at
the end of this decade as planned, there is no reason to believe the
market will coalesce around one SMR size or technology much before the
mid to late 2030s. Right now all we can say broadly is that there seem
to be two markets for SMRs, the almost utility scale reactors
producing 300 MWs like the BWRX model and micro reactors in the 5-50
MW range including Last Energy. And that these are being pitched to
very different types of customers. Electric utilities have been
gravitating towards larger reactors for reasons of cost, bigger is
still considered cheaper. Smaller reactors on the other hand have
appeal for inside the fence commercial and industrial activities,
provision of process steam, and compatibility with district heating
systems. And this is where Last Energy seems to be making some
inroads.
In the end, though, neither the technical nor business prowess of Last
will prevail if the public becomes uncomfortable with the idea of mini
nukes spread over the landscape. These will have to be guarded against
terrorists, possibly by weak governments, and whose waste has to be
transported through neighborhoods and communities to facilities not
yet built. Mini nukes look good on paper. But as they say in
automotive circles, “Let’s wait until the rubber hits the road.”
Something better might come along while we wait.
By Leonard Hyman and William Tilles for Oilprice.com
Green Play Ammonia™, Yielder® NFuel Energy.
Spokane, Washington. 99212
www.exactrix.com
509 995 1879 cell, Pacific.
exactrix@exactrix.com
|