Taking the nuclear option Data centers need a steady source of power, with no greenhouse emissions. Could nuclear power be the answer?
D
Peter Judge Global Editor ata centers need to have a steady supply of electricity that comes from a sustainable source, which doesn’t pump CO2 or other greenhouse gases into the
atmosphere. A small number of organizations are starting to think that nuclear power could fit the bill. Nuclear power has an image problem. It’s tinged with its military origins, there’s a very vocal campaign against it, and nuclear projects all seem to be too costly, too late, or - in cases like Chernobyl - too dangerous. But countries like France rely on nuclear electricity, and are lobbying to have it classified as a clean technology, because it delivers steady base load electricity, without making greenhouse gas emissions. Environmentalist George Monbiot has become a supporter of nuclear power, arguing that its health risks are “tiny by comparison” with those of coal. The Fukushima accident in Japan was an unprecedented nuclear disaster, but it caused no noticeable increase in cancer deaths, even amongst workers clearing the site. Meanwhile, many are killed by pollution from coal-fired power stations - around 250,00 in China each year for instance - and that’s before we consider the greenhouse effect. “The nuclear industry takes accountability for its waste,” says Alastair Evans, director of corporate affairs at aircraft engine maker Rolls-Royce, a company which aims to take a lead in small nuclear reactors. “The fossil fuel industry doesn’t do that. If the fossil fuel industry had managed their waste in as responsible a way as the nuclear industry, then we wouldn't be having COP26 and climate conferences to try to solve the problem we're in now.”
"If the fossil fuel industry had managed their waste in as responsible a way as the nuclear industry, then we wouldn't be having COP26" Nuclear but better For all its green credentials, today’s nuclear industry is all too often bad business, with projects that take far too long, get stuck in planning and licensing, and go over budget. The UK has a new reactor being built by EDF at Hinkley Point, but it is terminally over-budget and late. Its output will cost €115 per MWh, which is double that of renewables. To make matters worse, its delay blights the grid and causes more emissions, because utilities have to burn more gas to make up for its nonappearance. Rolls-Royce is one of a number of companies worldwide that say we can avoid this with small modular reactors (SMRs), which can be built in factories and delivered where they are wanted. Standard units can be pre-approved, and other approvals are easier because they can be done in parallel, says Evans. “You don’t have to go back to government for a once in a generation decision like Hinkley Point,” he says. Nuclear you can buy They’re also easier to finance. At 470MW, Rolls-Royce’s SMRs will be a fraction of the size of Hinkley’s 2.3GW output, but cost less than a tenth the price, at around €2 billion. [Note to the reader. Nuclear reactors normally quote figures their thermal output in MWt and use MWe to refer to the amount that can be converted and delivered as electrical power. In this article, we will only refer to the electrical output, and quote it in
“A user, say a data center, books a slot for a unit, and it rolls off the production line the same way you'd order an aeroplane engine” 66 DCD Magazine • datacenterdynamics.com
MW for simplicity.] According to Rolls-Royce's site, the SMR "takes advantage of factory-built modularisation techniques to drastically reduce the amount of on-site construction and can deliver a low-cost nuclear solution that is competitive with renewable alternatives". “Like wind farms, the cost of a nuclear plant is all up-front,” says Evans. “And they give steady power for six years.” A decommissioned nuclear plant in Trawsfynydd in Wales is being considered for the first of Roll-Royce’s SMRs, and the company has spoken publicly of its ambition to build 16 in the UK. It’s reckoned that the Trawsynydd site could support two SMRs and already has all the cables and other infrastructure needed. At the time of writing, there’s no official government policy on this, however, UK Prime Minister Boris Johnson told the Conservative Party conference in September that nuclear power was necessary to decarbonize the UK electricity grid by 2035, as there is a lot of gas-fueled generation to phase out. Rolls-Royce’s SMR program had some £200 million from the UK government, and a similar amount of funding from industrial partners in a consortium which includes Cavendish Nuclear, a subsidiary of Babcock International, along with Assystem, Atkins, BAM Nuttall, Laing O’Rourke, National Nuclear Laboratory (NNL), Jacobs, The Welding Institute (TWI), and Nuclear AMRC. Having achieved its matched funding, the Rolls-Royce SMR business will submit a design to the UK Generic Design Assessment (GDA) process which approves new nuclear installations, and will also start identifying sites for the factories it will need to build the reactor components. Where and when the SMRs themselves will land is not yet clear.
