Laying the Foundation for
New and Advanced Nuclear
Reactors in the United States
_____
Committee on Laying the Foundation for New and
Advanced Nuclear Reactors in the United States
Board on Energy and Environmental Systems
Division on Engineering and Physical Sciences
Nuclear and Radiation Studies Board
Division on Earth and Life Studies
Consensus Study Report
NATIONAL ACADEMIES PRESS 500 Fifth Street, NW Washington, DC 20001
This study was supported by a gift donation by James J. Truchard and by Contract No. 10005018 with the Department of Energy. Any opinions, findings, conclusions, or recommendations expressed in this publication do not necessarily reflect the views of any organization or agency that provided support for the project.
International Standard Book Number-13: 978-0-309-69077-5
International Standard Book Number-10: 0-309-69077-3
Digital Object Identifier: https://doi.org/10.17226/26630
Library of Congress Control Number: 2023938872
This publication is available in limited quantities from:
Board on Energy and Environmental Systems
500 Fifth Street, NW
Washington, DC 20001
bees@nas.edu
http://www.sites.nationalacademies.org/DEPS/BEES
This publication is available from the National Academies Press, 500 Fifth Street, NW, Keck 360, Washington, DC 20001; (800) 624-6242 or (202) 334-3313; http://www.nap.edu.
Copyright 2023 by the National Academy of Sciences. National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine and National Academies Press and the graphical logos for each are all trademarks of the National Academy of Sciences. All rights reserved.
Printed in the United States of America.
Suggested citation: National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2023. Laying the Foundation for New and Advanced Nuclear Reactors in the United States. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. https://doi.org/10.17226/26630.
The National Academy of Sciences was established in 1863 by an Act of Congress, signed by President Lincoln, as a private, nongovernmental institution to advise the nation on issues related to science and technology. Members are elected by their peers for outstanding contributions to research. Dr. Marcia McNutt is president.
The National Academy of Engineering was established in 1964 under the charter of the National Academy of Sciences to bring the practices of engineering to advising the nation. Members are elected by their peers for extraordinary contributions to engineering. Dr. John L. Anderson is president.
The National Academy of Medicine (formerly the Institute of Medicine) was established in 1970 under the charter of the National Academy of Sciences to advise the nation on medical and health issues. Members are elected by their peers for distinguished contributions to medicine and health. Dr. Victor J. Dzau is president.
The three Academies work together as the National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine to provide independent, objective analysis and advice to the nation and conduct other activities to solve complex problems and inform public policy decisions. The National Academies also encourage education and research, recognize outstanding contributions to knowledge, and increase public understanding in matters of science, engineering, and medicine.
Learn more about the National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine at www.nationalacademies.org.
Consensus Study Reports published by the National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine document the evidence-based consensus on the study’s statement of task by an authoring committee of experts. Reports typically include findings, conclusions, and recommendations based on information gathered by the committee and the committee’s deliberations. Each report has been subjected to a rigorous and independent peer-review process and it represents the position of the National Academies on the statement of task.
Proceedings published by the National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine chronicle the presentations and discussions at a workshop, symposium, or other event convened by the National Academies. The statements and opinions contained in proceedings are those of the participants and are not endorsed by other participants, the planning committee, or the National Academies.
Rapid Expert Consultations published by the National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine are authored by subject-matter experts on narrowly focused topics that can be supported by a body of evidence. The discussions contained in rapid expert consultations are considered those of the authors and do not contain policy recommendations. Rapid expert consultations are reviewed by the institution before release.
For information about other products and activities of the National Academies, please visit www.nationalacademies.org/about/whatwedo.
COMMITTEE ON LAYING THE FOUNDATION FOR NEW AND ADVANCED NUCLEAR REACTORS IN THE UNITED STATES
RICHARD A. MESERVE (NAE), Covington & Burling LLP, Chair
AHMED ABDULLA, Carleton University
TODD ALLEN, University of Michigan and Third Way
JAQUELIN COCHRAN, National Renewable Energy Laboratory
MICHAEL L. CORRADINI (NAE), University of Wisconsin–Madison (Emeritus)
RICHARD CUPITT, Stimson
LESLIE DEWAN, Radiant Nano
HEATHER FELDMAN,1 Electric Power Research Institute
MICHAEL FORD, Princeton Plasma Physics Laboratory
KIRSTY GOGAN, LucidCatalyst
NING KANG, Idaho National Laboratory
ALLISON M. MACFARLANE, University of British Columbia
DAVID K. OWENS, Puerto Rico Electric Power Authority
JAMES A. RISPOLI, North Carolina State University
RACHEL SLAYBAUGH,2 University of California, Berkeley
SOLA TALABI, Pittsburgh Technical
STEVEN ZINKLE (NAE), University of Tennessee, Knoxville
Staff
K. JOHN HOLMES, Board Director and Scholar, Board on Energy and Environmental Systems (BEES)
KASIA KORNECKI, Study Director and Program Officer, BEES
CATHERINE WISE, Program Officer, BEES
REBECCA DEBOER, Research Associate, BEES
KYRA HOWE, Research Assistant, BEES
JASMINE VICTORIA BRYANT, Research Assistant, BEES
CHARLES FERGUSON, Director, Nuclear and Radiation Studies Board (NRSB)
JENNIFER HEIMBERG, Senior Program Officer, NRSB
IPPOLYTI DELLATOLAS, Christine Mirzayan Fellow, BEES
___________________
NOTE: See Appendix H, Disclosure of Conflicts of Interest.
1 Resigned from the committee in April 2022.
2 Resigned from the committee in May 2022.
BOARD ON ENERGY AND ENVIRONMENTAL SYSTEMS
SUE TIERNEY, Analysis Group, Chair
VICKEY BAILEY, Anderson Stratton Enterprises
LOUISE BEDSWORTH, University of California, Berkeley, School of Law
DEEPAK DIVAN (NAE), Georgia Institute of Technology
MARCIUS EXTAVOUR, TIMECO2
T.J. GLAUTHIER, TJG Energy Associates
PAULA GLOVER, Alliance to Save Energy
NAT GOLDHABER, Claremont Creek Ventures
DENISE GRAY, LG Energy Solution Michigan
JENNIFER R. HOLMGREN (NAE), LanzaTech
JOHN KASSAKIAN (NAE), Massachusetts Institute of Technology
BARBARA KATES-GARNICK, Tufts University
MICHAEL LAMACH, Trane Technologies (Retired)
CARLOS MARTÍN, Harvard University
JOSÉ SANTIESTEBAN (NAE), ExxonMobil Research and Engineering Company
ALEXANDER SLOCUM (NAE), Massachusetts Institute of Technology
GORDON VAN WELIE (NAE), ISO New England
DAVID G. VICTOR, University of California, San Diego
JOHN C. WALL (NAE), Cummins
Staff
K. JOHN HOLMES, Director and Scholar
JAMES ZUCCHETTO, Senior Scientist
ELIZABETH ZEITLER, Associate Director
BRENT HEARD, Program Officer
KASIA KORNECKI, Program Officer
CATHERINE WISE, Program Officer
REBECCA DEBOER, Research Associate
KYRA HOWE, Research Assistant
JASMINE VICTORIA BRYANT, Research Assistant
KAIA RUSSELL, Program Assistant
HEATHER LOZOWSKI, Financial Manager
Reviewers
This Consensus Study Report was reviewed in draft form by individuals chosen for their diverse perspectives and technical expertise. The purpose of this independent review is to provide candid and critical comments that will assist the National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine in making each published report as sound as possible and to ensure that it meets the institutional standards for quality, objectivity, evidence, and responsiveness to the study charge. The review comments and draft manuscript remain confidential to protect the integrity of the deliberative process.
We thank the following individuals for their review of this report:
VICKY BAILEY, Anderson Stratton Enterprises
STEPHEN BURNS, U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission (retired)
KARA COLTON, Energy Communities Alliance
CRAIG HANSEN, Independent Consultant
JOE HEZIR, Energy Futures Initiative
EDWARD KEE, Nuclear Economics Consulting Group
JESSICA LOVERING, Good Energy Collective
GRANGER MORGAN (NAS), Carnegie Mellon University
NANCY JO NICHOLAS, Los Alamos National Laboratory
MARK PETERS (NAE), Battelle Memorial Institute
TIM TAYLOR, National Center for Construction Education and Research
Although the reviewers listed above provided many constructive comments and suggestions, they were not asked to endorse the conclusions or recommendations of this report, nor did they see the final draft before its release. The review of this report was overseen by ROBERT C. DYNES (NAS), University of California, San Diego, and GEORGE APOSTOLAKIS (NAE), Massachusetts Institute of Technology. They were responsible for making certain that an independent examination of this report was carried out in accordance with the standards of the National Academies and that all review comments were carefully considered. Responsibility for the final content rests entirely with the authoring committee and the National Academies.
This page intentionally left blank.
Contents
The Current State of Nuclear Power in the United States
Decarbonization and the Changing Electricity System
New Technology Deployment Scenarios
2 ADVANCED REACTOR TECHNOLOGIES
Fuel and Materials Innovation, Development, and Manufacturing
Technical Readiness and Technology Gaps
Operation and Maintenance of Advanced Reactors
3 THE EVOLVING ELECTRICITY SYSTEM AND THE POTENTIAL ROLE OF ADVANCED NUCLEAR REACTORS
The Potential Competitiveness of Nuclear
The Customer: Changing Expectations
The Grid: Changing Demand and Supply, and Implications for Reliability and Resilience
The Regulators: Pricing and Regulatory Reform Will Affect Nuclear Competitiveness
Addressing the Market Challenge: Capital Costs, Competitiveness, and Entry Barriers
Power Plant Cost Drivers and Overcoming the “Sunk Cost” Challenge of Nuclear
Unique Advanced Reactor Cost Drivers
Other Drivers of Perceived Utility in Energy Markets
Structure and Parameters for Public–Private Partnerships to Pursue Demonstrations
Advanced Reactor Demonstration Program: Path Forward
Other DOE Efforts to Support Technical Development
Advanced Reactor Commercialization Program
5 BEYOND ELECTRICITY: NUCLEAR POWER’S POTENTIAL TO PLAY A BROADER ROLE IN THE FUTURE ENERGY SYSTEM
Applications Beyond Electricity
Nuclear–Hydrogen Integrated Energy Systems and Their Potential Role in Deep Decarbonization
Other Process Heat Applications
6 THE CHALLENGE OF PROJECT MANAGEMENT AND CONSTRUCTION
Understanding the Life Cycle of a Nuclear Project
7 NUCLEAR REGULATION IN THE UNITED STATES
Siting and Emergency Planning Zones
8 THE SOCIAL ACCEPTANCE CHALLENGE
Why Does Social Acceptance Matter?
The Underlying Roots of Public Opposition to Nuclear Power
Insights from the Social and Decision Sciences
Opposition Rooted in Factors That Are Common Across Technologies
Charting a Path Forward: Best Practices for Community Engagement
Avoiding Risk Communication Strategies That Have Failed in the Past
Acknowledging Factors That Might Affect Societal Acceptance of Nuclear Power
Recent U.S. Efforts to Incorporate Consent-Based Siting in Decision-Making
Best Practices in Community Engagement
9 ENSURING SECURITY AND PROMOTING SAFEGUARDS
Safety, Security, and Safeguards by Design
10 NUCLEAR EXPORTS AND INTERNATIONAL COMPETITION
Nuclear Cooperation Agreements and Nuclear Export Controls
Commerce and Export Administration Regulations
International Markets and Competition
National Security and International Markets
U.S. Government and IAEA Initiatives
A Summary of Advanced Reactor Design Concepts
B Examples of Technology Development Gaps for Advanced Reactors
D The Current Role of Government in Demonstrations, with a Focus on the Department of Energy
E Nuclear Cooperation Agreement Details
G Committee Member Biographical Information
H Disclosure of Conflicts of Interest
Preface
The world confronts an existential challenge in responding to climate change, resulting in an urgent need to reduce greenhouse gas emissions from all sectors of the economy. At the same time, there is growing concern throughout the world with ensuring energy security. In response, a rapid transition is necessary to reduce dependence on fossil fuels. While there will certainly be increased reliance on renewable energy, other low-carbon technologies will also likely play a significant role. The trajectory for this technology transition is very uncertain.
Nuclear power provides a significant portion of the world’s low-carbon electricity, and it is widely recognized that the ongoing contribution from existing nuclear power plants will be essential to achieve carbon-reduction targets over the next decade or longer. Many companies in the United States and around the world are pursuing development of advanced reactor technologies and targeting demonstration and deployment in coming years. The vendors claim that the new designs offer improved safety, lower cost, shorter construction times, and increased operational flexibility over existing reactors. For some technologies, there is also the potential for higher thermal efficiency, higher-temperature operation (opening opportunities for process heat applications), greater fuel utilization, stronger security, improved proliferation resistance, and reduced need for regulatory constraints on deployment. If achieved, these outcomes would be significant, with the result that advanced reactors could be an important component of our energy future.
Because most of the advanced reactors will not complete demonstration until the 2030s, their contribution could only arise in the longer term. The transition of the U.S. economy to use low-carbon energy sources will likely span several decades, and the contribution of various technologies will likely evolve as a result of technical advances, policy actions, economic trade-offs, infrastructure constraints, and many other factors. If advanced reactors are to play an important role, there is a need to consider the uncertainties bearing on future deployment. The uncertainties encompass the evolution of energy policy, comparative economics with other energy technologies, the challenge of building plants on budget and on schedule, future energy demand and the structure of the grid, societal preferences, and the prospect of using nuclear energy for purposes beyond electricity generation. Uncertainties also arise from the need to provide strong assurance of safety and security, regulatory hurdles, international market opportunities, waste disposition, nonproliferation concerns, and the availability of fuel and necessary supply chains. It is important to address many of these uncertainties now to the extent possible to lay a foundation so that advanced reactors can contribute in the future.
Against this backdrop, the National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine appointed an ad hoc consensus committee to identify the opportunities and barriers for new nuclear technologies to contribute
meaningfully to a low-carbon future (see statement of task in Box 1-1). The committee’s work commenced in January 2021 and had to overcome significant challenges in the information-gathering and deliberative phases of its work as a result of the global pandemic. The committee had many information-gathering webinars with experts, countless subgroup discussions, and 14 full committee meetings.
The committee was made up of members with expertise in a variety of different domains, facilitating the response to the wide-ranging scope of our charge. I would like to thank the committee for their enthusiasm, time, effort, and expertise. The congeniality of the group greatly facilitated our efforts. I would also like to thank the National Academies’ staff who assisted in our work. They include Kasia Kornecki, Jasmine Bryant, Kyra Howe, Rebecca DeBoer, Catherine Wise, and Jennifer Heimberg.
We are hopeful that our report clarifies the barriers that must be overcome for advanced reactors to play a role in the response to climate change and assists in their resolution.
Richard A. Meserve, Chair
Committee on Laying the Foundation for New and Advanced Reactors in the United States
