POWER May 2013 - 68

NUCLEAR POWER
Are SMRs U.S. Nuclear Power's
Last, Best Hope?
Historic low prices for natural gas and slow demand recovery are the principal
barriers to new nuclear power construction in the U.S. Small modular reactors
(SMRs) may break through those barriers, but only if installed cost
targets are met.
By Kennedy Maize
T
he U.S. nuclear power industry
has seen the future, and it is small,
modular, flexible, and, most of all,
risk resistant in the extreme. To date, that
spells Babcock & Wilcox (B&W), an alsoran
in the first generation of the civilian
nuclear power sweepstakes but now the
front-runner in the new contest. But that
could change.
SMRs Take Center Stage
B&W's mPower machine, the very model
of the modern small modular reactor
(SMR), was the star of the show at the annual
Platts nuclear gabfest in Washington
in late February. While the 180-MW B&W
reactor isn't the only SMR, it is the leader
of the pack by virtue of being the Department
of Energy's first, and so far only, selection
for government support. (On Mar.
11, as this story was in production, the
DOE announced a new funding opportunity
for SMRs. On Mar. 27, NuScale said it
would enter the competition for this funding
round, and a Westinghouse-Ameren
team followed suit on Apr. 8.)
B&W positioned its captain of the
modular flagship, Christofer Mowry, in
a prominent role at the Platts nuke event:
presenter of a paper in a major morning
session, purveyor of more good news at
a B&W-sponsored luncheon, and gladhander
and nimble responder to a gaggle
of reporters in a noisy hallway press confab.
(An interview with Mowry begins on
p. 74.)
Mowry's various presentations and proffers
drew figurative " Ooos " and " Aaas "
from the assembled nuclear luminaries, literal
applause from the luncheon audience,
and only a few skeptical questions from
the ink-stained wretches of the press (most
of whom are steeped in digital delivery
and have little notion of what printer's ink
is). It was as if B&W had won the nuclear
Grammy awards. Finally, nuclear power in
68
the U.S. had something to cheer about.
Mowry announced during lunch at the
posh and historic Capital Hilton in downtown
Washington that his firm and Tennessee
Valley Authority (TVA) had signed
a formal contract to go forward with site
development for a two-unit B&W plant at
TVA's Clinch River site in pursuit of a license
from the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory
Commission (NRC) to start construction
(Figure 1). The contract gives a green
light to drill, dig, and scrape into the site
to gather data for a formal environmental
assessment that is necessary for NRC approval.
Let's ignore the irony in the fact
that this site is where TVA and the federal
government once schemed (and failed)
to build a demonstration liquid metal-
cooled, fast neutron-impelled breeder reactor-once
the next big thing in nuclear
technology.
The mundane contract with TVA demonstrates
the resolve of B&W and TVA,
both of which have had a checkered nuclear
past, to be very careful and take no
shortcuts in developing what many believe
is the next, maybe only, best hope for new
nuclear power in the U.S. and for regaining
supremacy in international markets. It
is what one observer called the " belt and
suspenders " approach to designing a nuclear
power plant. There is no way B&W
or TVA will let the pants fall down on this
attempt at nuclear energy if they can do
anything about it.
B&W Springs SMR
Licensing Surprise
An example is how the partners want to develop
the license for the plant, in the context
of NRC licensing reforms. These reforms
were encouraged by Congress in the 1980s
and were implemented by the commission
several years later, but have not yet been formally
tested. The industry's complaint was
that the way to get a plant operating in the
www.powermag.com
POWER | May 2013
early days of nuclear enthusiasm was cumbersome
and costly. Lurking in Part 50 of the
U.S. Code of Federal Regulations that governs
the NRC's licensing process were two
major hurdles before a plant could generate
power for the grid. First the developer had to
convince the NRC of the virtue of the design
and site, leading to a construction permit.
Then, once the plant was built, the licensee
had to convince the NRC that the plant was
built to specs and would operate safely. It was
complex, costly, and time-consuming.
So Congress approved and the NRC
established a one-stop process. Nuclear
projects henceforth need only apply for
a combined construction and operating
license (COL), a new Part 52 of the U.S.
Code. It was deemed to be necessary, if
not sufficient, if new plants were ever to
be built again in the U.S. after the worrisome
experience of the first round of
nuclear enthusiasm.
So Part 52 was well and good for the
industry and its assertion that the twostep
license was one of the things holding
back new plant development. But B&W,
as Mowry explained, is going at least an
extra mile to prove the worthiness of its
1. Double your pleasure. B&W has secured
its first order, from TVA for two SMRs
to be built at the Clinch River site. This is an
artist's conceptual drawing of the plant. Courtesy:
Babcock & Wilcox
http://www.powermag.com
POWER May 2013

Table of Contents for the Digital Edition of POWER May 2013
