Small Nuclear Reactors Finally Get the Nod from Regulators

By Mark Sullivan and Alex Pasternack

Edited: Dawn Team

THE US Nuclear Regulatory Commission, made its news in August when it gave fi nal certifi cation to a new kind of nuclear reactor called a small modular reactor (SMR). While the announcement received basically no fanfare, proponents say it could play an important role in decarbonizing the world’s energy supply.

The agency fi rst performed a safety review of reactor company NuScale Power’s SMR design in 2020. A year later, the NRC completed its standard rulemaking process, which included a review of public comments. On August 2, the commission issued a fi nal approval for the SMR, though NuScale says it’s unlikely to become operational until 2029.

Technically, nuclear power is capable of delivering large amounts of emissions-free

power. In fact, with 93 commercial nuclear plants around the country, nuclear fi ssion already produces about 55% of all carbon-free power in the U.S., and yet it constitutes only about 19% of the country’s overall power supply. (See below for a map of the US’s nuclear plants.) Fossil fuels still account for an astounding 63%.

And nuclear contribution to the overall energy sector is diminishing, due to safety concerns and high costs, especially compared with declining prices in solar and wind. The Energy Information Administration has projected that the share of all electricity generated from nuclear power in the U.S. will decline from 20% today to just 12% by 2050. Disasters at large gigawatt-scale plants, including Three Mile Island (1979), Chernobyl (1986), and Fukushima Daiichi (2011) continue to fuel public misgivings about nuclear power. Explosions at Europe’s largest nuclear plant—in the Ukrainian

A light water small modular nuclear reactor (SMR) [U.S. Government Accountability Offi ce based on Department of Energy documentation/Wikipedia Commons]

city of Enerhodar, currently occupied by Russian forces—prompted renewed fears that Russian rockets could unleash a nuclear catastrophe.

But over the past two years, nuclear has been getting a serious second look from many people in the scientifi c and policy communities. They believe a new generation of reactors, including smaller and safer ones, could remake the image of nuclear power and clear the way for the technology to play a bigger role in achieving a carbon-free future.

“I am cautious to say those fi ve dangerous words: Something is diff erent this time. But It feels like a zeitgeist is changing with growing public support and positive regulatory attention,” says Josh Wolfe, a partner at the science-focused VC Lux Capital. “If we really want to reshape and green our energy supply, the single smartest thing to do is build more of the elemental energy plants (formerly known as nuclear) we already have producing clean, zero-carbon electricity.”

A SLOW MARCH TOWARD A NUCLEAR FUTURE

Rising temperatures, rising fuel prices, and rising demands for energy independence have recently prompted some to reconsider their nuclear retreats. South Korea is resuming construction on two reactors, Japan plans to restart four reactors this year, and Germany is considering extending the life of three formerly left-for-dead plants. In California, Governor Gavin Newsom is reconsidering his decision to close the state’s last nuclear plant, which provides 9% of the state’s electricity.

Like most of the world’s reactors, these are huge, complex, and based on decades-old designs. Yet smaller, modular nuclear reactors have been the subject of speculation and research for many years. They fi t into the category of “advanced nuclear” power technology, which the Department of Energy has identifi ed as a key tool for decarbonizing the country’s energy supply.

While traditional nuclear power plants are built on-site, SMRs can be built in a factory and shipped to a facility for deployment. They use smaller amounts of radioactive material, which makes them easier to cool and secure—and lessens the potential damage of a leak.

In contrast to current gigawatt-scale reactors, the DOE defi nes SMRs as reactors that can produce up to 300 megawatts. NuScale’s pressurized water reactors, which look like oblong tubes and are 65 feet tall and 15 feet in diameter, can generate about 77 megawatts of electricity each. (For reference, an energy industry rule of thumb is that 1 megawatt is enough to power 1,000 households, although this varies widely among homes in colder and warmer parts of the country.)

An energy producer can seat up to 12 of the

NuScale reactors together at one site, for example, to produce up to 924 megawatts of power. The reactors sit together in an underground cooling pool. In the event of power failure, the reactors automatically shut down and self-cool. This passive, operatorfree safety approach is already in use in some conventional reactors, as well as in dozens of proposed SMR designs, from thermalneutron and fast-neutron to molten salt and gas-cooled reactors. In its fi rst commercial deployment, NuScale is licensing its reactor design to Utah

Associated Municipal Power Systems, which intends to build a six-reactor plant.

NuScale has yet to make a profi t, but in the last year its revenue grew by 397%, and a

SMRs from page 109

recent tweet claimed it has “18 signed and active MOUs with potential customers in 11 countries.”

NuScale’s is the seventh reactor design and the fi rst SMR to be approved by the Nuclear Regulatory Commission, although the agency is in the early stages of reviewing other SMR concepts. (The Tennessee Valley Authority is preparing to apply to the NRC for initial certifi cation of a new SMR by GE-Hitachi on the site of an old coal plant near Oak Ridge.) Getting approval is a painstaking process. According to NuScale, it involved more than a quarter million review hours, “about 2 million pages of documentation made available for review or audit, and about 100 gigabytes of test data.”

So far, only one reactor design, Westinghouse’s AP1000, a conventional pressurized water reactor, has progressed to construction in the U.S., with two now being built at the Vogtle plant in Georgia. After long delays and cost overruns (construction was originally planned to conclude in 2017, and the cost has ballooned to more than $30 billion) the Vogtle plant recently received approval from the NRC to start fuel loading and head toward operation.

As with any new nuclear project, further cost overruns—or one accident—could set the industry back even further. Proponents of SMRs are banking on catapulting the industry forward.

SMRS’ CONTESTED ROLE IN DECARBONIZATION

While the nuclear industry has gotten behind SMRs, and companies like NuScale have attracted considerable investment, the technology still faces skepticism.

“It’s a solution in search of a problem,” says Edwin Lyman, director of nuclear power safety at the Union of Concerned Scientists. “[The nuclear industry] is looking around for something new to show that it’s not just going to try the same old things, but its options are fairly limited.”

Lyman says the economics of SMRs don’t make sense. “If you shrink down the reactors, it goes against the economies of scale that you get with larger reactors.”

As a result, Lyman predicts, energy providers will be forced to fi nd ways to lower the cost of operating SMRs in order to sell the power generated at a competitive price. That would introduce signifi cant safety and security concerns because they may try to spend less on safety systems and on securing the facilities.

Or, the nuclear industry might argue that because SMRs use less radioactive material and are easier to cool, it’s safe to locate them nearer to population centers. (Indeed, the Montana Legislature, as well as West Virginia Senator Joe Manchin, have proposed putting them in retired coal plants). Even worse, Lynan fears, operators could cut corners on safety guidelines, dispensing with evacuation plans that might be needed in emergencies.

NuScale says that because its reactors can be made in a factory setting using “off the shelf” items, plant operators avoid the high cost of fabricating custom parts on-site. In addition, NuScale says, its SMRs save money because if power demand increases, an operator can simply add more reactors to the plant instead of shouldering the major capital expense of building new reactors and structures.

THE PROBLEM THAT WON’T GO AWAY

Along with e c o n o m i c challenges, one central question for any nuclear project is location—both where to install reactors and where to bury their waste. SMRs have been billed as small enough to fi t behind someone’s house, but historic fears of nuclear energy will likely continue to keep reactors out of the backyards of all but the poorest communities. And after decades, the waste question continues to plague the industry. And waste adds to the risk of proliferation.

Some argue that SMRs could make the problem worse. In a paper coauthored by Allison Macfarlane, former chairperson of the NRC, and published last

Nuclear Reactors in the USA

month in the Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, an analysis of three SMR designs— from NuScale, Terrestrial Energy, and Toshiba— concluded that SMRs will generate more nuclear waste than a standard pressurized water reactor by a factor of anywhere from 2 to 30.

NuScale and other proponents of SMRs balked at the study. “The paper uses outdated design information for the energy capacity of the NuScale fuel design and wrong assumptions for the material used in the reactor refl ector, and on burn-up of the fuel,” Diane Hughes, VP of marketing and communications for NuScale, said in a statement to Fast Company.

“With the correct inputs,” she said, “NuScale’s design compares favorably with current large pressurized water reactors on spent fuel waste created per unit of energy. These inputs are publicly available to the paper’s authors, and their omission undermines the credibility of the paper and its conclusions.” (In response, the paper’s authors contended they based their analysis on the only publicly available reactor designs at the time.) Hughes added: “NuScale’s design does not create waste and material streams that are novel to the nuclear power industry.” Compared to their Russian and Chinese counterparts, “advanced nuclear” companies in the U.S. like NuScale face relatively greater regulatory and fi nancial hardship. The Russian and Chinese governments use a lighter regulatory touch for new nuclear technology and are more forthcoming with funding grants. Thus, those countries have taken the lead in SMR deployment.

Akademik Lomonosov, a fl oating nuclear power plant in Russia’s Far East, was as of May 2020 the world’s fi rst and only operating prototype SMR. In July 2021, construction began on the world’s fi rst commercial land-based SMR at the Chinese power plant Linglong One, where a prototype is due to start operation by the end of 2026.

Policymakers in the U.S. are of course aware of this and have begun taking steps to bolster the country’s nuclear industry. Last year’s Bipartisan Infrastructure Law included $6 billion for a Civil Nuclear Credit Program to support plants at risk of economic closure. And the Infl ation Relief Act recently passed by the Senate contains billions in energy-related subsidies, including some that could impact SMRs specifi cally.

In addition to $60 billion for renewable energy like wind, solar, and hydro, the act includes $700 million for domestic mining and production of highassay, low-enriched uranium and a 6% tax credit for energy providers investing in “advanced nuclear” technologies. For technology in the “microreactor” class (SMRs) the investment credit can go up to 30%.

The provisions are part of the more $250 billion that the bill would devote to combating climate change, with the aim of reducing U.S. greenhouse gas emissions by an estimated 40% below 2005 levels by 2030.

“By creating tax incentives that include all carbonfree technologies, we are one step closer to deploying new, cutting-edge nuclear technologies that will meet the growing demand for more clean energy,” Maria Korsnick, president and chief executive offi cer at the Nuclear Energy Institute, said in a statement. “The climate provisions in the IRA advance us on a path to decarbonize our economy. And nuclear energy, alongside wind and solar, will be critical to achieving this goal.”

Obviously, the tax credits won’t de-risk investments in new kinds of nuclear reactors like SMRs. But by improving the economics of their development and deployment, the government may help new nuclear technology play a larger part in the mix of clean energy sources that will be needed to wind down our increasingly dangerous dependence on dirty fuels..

https://www.fastcompany.com/90777719/new-nuclearreactors-fi nally-get-regulators-nod-but-they-still-have-a-lotof-proving-to-do Image credit: power-eng.com, mapcruzin.com

The Metaverse and the Future of Creativity— What it Means for Creators By Brooke Hopper for Adobe

IN ITS EARLY STAGES, the metaverse has shown benefi ts for creators, ranging from the ability do what they love and make money in new ways, to seamless collaboration and more.

Yet because of its unknowns, the metaverse can also be intimidating to artists. As someone who is building creative tools for this yet-to-be-fullyexplored metaverse, my hope is that it can be a home for all creatives, where they easily adapt and understand how the metaverse can serve as a tool to achieve their goals.

As Web 3.0 and the metaverse continues to evolve, there are some primary benefi ts to creativity in this new space.

1. Collaboration and connectivity will drive creatives to go digital.

At the heart of the metaverse is social connection, which is driving many to this digital realm. For creatives, connectivity goes hand-inhand with collaboration, and I believe the digital canvas will become both dimensional and social as creatives work better and faster together, remixing each other’s work.

Professional photographer and creative Jeremy Cowart sums up how collaboration and connectivity in the metaverse will allow for more opportunities for creatives, noting, “I’m doing more collaborations than I ever have in my entire life/ career. I’m also more connected to other artists than I’ve ever been. I think we all realize that this Web 3.0 space is brand-new and kind of hanging on by a thread. So, we all need each other, and we need each other to win. A rising tide truly lifts all boats in this new industry.”

Imagine having one piece create an entire world or even a series of worlds—we see it often now in physical fandoms. An author writes a book, which then inspires fan art, which gets the eyes of producers who make a movie, which captures the hearts of children who handmake Halloween costumes, who then raise kids to read the original books, and so on. In the metaverse, all Adobe: Artist Benjamin Kohl – Created in Adobe Fresco of this can live in one collaborative, digital place where creatives can express their relative art to those that can remix it as many times as they want, seamlessly transitioning between artist and consumer.

As everything becomes a canvas, creatives will face new learning curves navigating how to merge the physical and digital worlds together, which brings me to my next point.

2. The lines between 2D and 3D artwork will become blurred.

Many creatives face a steep learning curve when navigating 3D art creation, especially traditionally 2D artists attempting the move to create 3D work in a digital space. Adding to the challenges they face, these creatives are usually short on time and budget due to strict freelance timelines or side hustles. To be successful in this immersive realm, creatives need to learn how to leverage 3D technology that can do the work for them. With existing technology that detects form and shape, creatives can create in a dimension they know and automatically have their work rendered in 3D.

Take for instance the recent, popular Van Gogh immersive exhibits. Being able to see each brush stroke of “The Starry Night” larger than life on a projector screen brought new meaning to the

piece. Now, imagine an entire world like this where you can dive into the layers of a piece and, keeping accessibility in mind, be able to touch the bumps in the canvas; hear the brush strokes and crickets chirp; see beyond the canvas into the actual landscape Van Gogh saw. 3D activations can bring art to life beyond our wildest dreams.

Further, in the metaverse, recontextualizing content will become the norm, where avatars (electronic images commonly used online) will be used to represent people. Avatars will become part of the whole—acting both as a standalone piece as a sign of the times, and simultaneously a glimpse at your broader, all-encompassing online masterpiece. Identity will play a key role in how people experience the metaverse. With new options to decorate personal VR spaces, avatars, and more, there will be an increased need to generate content for these experiences and allow users to build unique digital identities.

3. Creatives will enjoy total freedom to create.

Artists who have previously had to worry about

copyright laws and protecting their work will be free to create without fear of their work being stolen or shared without attribution with the unconditional rules of sharing art in the metaverse. Systems and marketplaces in the metaverse will allow easy transfer of rights through attribution models and make sure those who created it are getting properly ▲ Africarare, the fi rst South African metaverse to launch. compensated.

WHAT’S NEXT FOR CREATIVITY IN THE METAVERSE?

As the metaverse continues to develop, creatives can apply learnings from building the original world wide web and tap into all the benefi ts this digital realm off ers that the physical realm doesn’t. Many creatives are scared to enter this unknown space and are unsure of what’s to come, which is why I encourage them to take control of their creative future. Obstacles are unavoidable and artists will always face new challenges, especially when entering a new creative realm, but I’m hoping more creatives will feel empowered to take advantage of what the metaverse has to off er. The metaverse will bring collaboration, identity, and creativity to new heights all while preserving and enhancing the romanticism and realism of physical art. Jeremy’s sentiment on the future of creativity in the metaverse accurately portrays what many of us are feeling: “It’s changing every day. I’ve never been a part of an industry that moves so fast. But I’ve also never had more fun. It’s the wild, wild west, and anything goes.” I believe it’s safe to say the metaverse is

defi ning—and disrupting—the future of

creativity, and I’m excited to support creatives in not only adapting to this new platform but learning to thrive in it. https://www.fastcompany.com/90767915/themetaverse-and-the-future-of-creativity-what-itmeans-for-creators Image credit: https://www.facebook.com/ virgensantabarbarabendita, https://metaversetours.com/ feb-14-2015-metaverse-tour, https://www.bizcommunity. com/Article/196/484/220826.html