A new generation of nuclear reactors has the potential to provide needed reliability services, speakers said at a webinar hosted by the Texas Reliability Entity on Feb. 27. 

However, they added, harnessing these technologies will require helping regulators, policymakers and consumers overcome longstanding concerns about nuclear power. 

Derek Haas, an associate professor at the University of Texas at Austin whose areas of research include advanced nuclear reactor design and licensing, joined Andrew Harmon, vice president of operations and business development at Natura Resources, for the regional entity’s regular Talk with Texas RE event. 

Haas observed that traditional nuclear reactors produced relatively large amounts of power but required a reliable electric supply from the grid to pump coolant even after shutdown. By contrast, newer reactor designs such as molten salt reactors, which produce energy at higher temperatures and higher efficiency but lower pressure, are built to “walk away safe” standards so they can shut down safely without melting down even if grid power is lost. 

The new designs can even support the grid in the case of an emergency, Haas said, noting that “you might have an on-site diesel generator, and with that, the reactors even provide an additional level of reliability where they could provide black start capability to the grid.”  

In addition, he observed that although “folks think of nuclear as not load-following … reactors can load follow, really, faster than coal, but not quite as fast as gas. It’s just that for such a capital-intensive project [as a traditional reactor], it doesn’t really make sense to load follow.” By contrast, he said, advanced reactors could be constructed at a smaller size and a lower cost to make them more responsive to load. 

Proponents of advanced reactors have attracted criticism for presenting an overly rosy picture of the state of the technology. For example, last year a nuclear energy expert from George Washington University argued that the presence of these reactors on power grids “is largely fictional,” and the reactors that have been built present significant risks of terrorism and nuclear proliferation. (See Report: Small Nuclear Reactors not the Answer.) 

However, Harmon, whose company is preparing to build the MSR-100 molten salt reactor at Texas A&M University, emphasized that such concerns have been considered and incorporated into the design of the new reactors. Natura touts the MSR-100 as the first molten salt reactor ever licensed by the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, and Harmon pointed out that the new reactors reduce or eliminate many of the dangers associated by the public with traditional reactor designs. 

“Molten salt reactors do not produce spent nuclear fuel, and so we have the ability to … achieve 20 times the amount of fuel utilization [of] traditional light water reactors,” Harmon said. “Basically, as long as gravity works, we’re able to drain our salt and our fuel into a drain tank below our reactor core … thus causing the fission process to stop, and keeping it under low-pressure operation. So there’s nothing that we have to actively do for that system to be able to walk away and safely shut down operations.” 

Both speakers acknowledged that nuclear proponents will need to overcome longstanding fears based on accidents like those at the Chernobyl and Fukushima nuclear plants. Haas observed that the U.S. nuclear industry also needs investment; the Nuclear Energy Institute’s 2023 Workforce Strategic Plan found that a significant portion of the nuclear workforce is approaching retirement age, particularly in the radiation protection field. 

Haas emphasized that while the cultural bias against nuclear power is understandable given their presentation in the media, “the risks are already extraordinarily low with existing [nuclear] technology,” and new designs will only increase that safety. 

“The reality about even [Chernobyl, Fukushima and Three Mile Island is] the number of people harmed was still extraordinarily low for industrial accidents,” Haas said. “I would be perfectly happy to live near a nuclear reactor, and the last place I lived was just within sight of a nuclear power plant. So [I’m] not just saying that; I’ve done it before.”