Laying the Foundation for New and Advanced Nuclear Reactors in the United States

NATIONAL ACADEMIES OF SCIENCES, ENGINEERING, AND MEDICINE
NATIONAL ACADEMY OF ENGINEERING

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.

What will it take for new and advanced nuclear reactors to play a role in decarbonization? Nuclear power provides a significant portion of the world’s low-carbon electricity, and advanced nuclear technologies have the potential to be smaller, safer, less expensive to build, and better integrated with the modern grid. However, if the United States wants advanced nuclear reactors to play a role in its plans for decarbonization, there are many key challenges that must be overcome at the technical, economic, societal, and regulatory levels.

A new National Academies’ report, Laying the Foundation for New and Advanced Nuclear Reactors in the United States, discusses how the United States could support the successful commercialization of advanced nuclear reactors with near-term actions to establish policies and practices.

Nuclear Power and the Changing Energy Landscape

The U.S. electric power system is undergoing a sweeping transition as the nation moves to reduce emissions and prevent the worst effects of climate change. Plans for decarbonization rely heavily on powering as many industries as possible with low-carbon energy, from transportation to manufacturing. Meeting the growing demand for low-carbon electricity in the future will be a key challenge to overcome for the United States and the world.

If the United States wants nuclear power as part of its future low-carbon energy landscape, it will be important to provide support for the demonstration, commercialization, and deployment of new and advanced nuclear reactors.

18.2%
U.S. ELECTRICITY

Nuclear power plants provide half of all low-carbon electricity in the United States. They supply 18.2% of the nation’s total electricity.

92
POWER PLANTS

There are 92 nuclear power plants in operation in the United States (with 442 across the globe).

40
YEARS

The initial licensing lifetime of a nuclear power plant in the United States is 40 years.

Demand for low-carbon electricity is projected to grow significantly.

Despite uncertainty about the level of future demand, there are likely to be many opportunities for low-carbon energy technologies such as advanced nuclear.

AEO 2021 Reference 2020 2030 2040 2050 0 2500 5000 7500 10000 Electricity Consumption [TWh] T ransportation Commercial Residential Industry ADE 2020 2030 2040 2050 LTS 2020 2030 2040 2050

Projected future electricity demand across key sectors. Three different studies show low, medium, and high growth in demand.
Source: NREL 2022

What are advanced nuclear reactors and how can they be used?

Light water reactors (LWRs) are the only type of reactor currently in use at commercial nuclear power plants in the United States. However, many companies are working to develop new small modular LWR designs as well as advanced reactor concepts that are fundamentally different from the LWR design. These new and advanced nuclear reactors could potentially meet a much wider variety of energy needs than the light water reactors in service today. These applications could include:

  • Base, NATO, Afghanistan, desert, military stock photo

    GENERATING ELECTRICITY FOR THE GRID The main use for advanced nuclear reactors moving forward is likely to be as small modular reactors producing electricity for the grid. Some smaller reactors could be manufactured in a controlled factory setting to reduce on-site construction costs. These new power plants could potentially repurpose fossil fuel plants and take advantage of existing infrastructure.

  • Continuous casting machine at the metallurgical plant stock photo

    PROVIDING HEAT

    Advanced nuclear reactors could provide heat for:

    • Thermal energy storage for electricity production
    • High-temperature heat for industry, such as chemical processing or hydrogen production
    • Low-temperature heat for district heating, desalination, or agriculture
  • High Voltage Electric Power Lines At Sunset stock photo

    PROVIDING PORTABLE POWER

    Advanced nuclear reactors could provide portable power for:

    • Microreactors (1-10 MWe) for remote sites or transportable microreactors to meet emergency needs
    • Marine propulsion
    • Remote military bases

How could advanced nuclear reactors fit into decarbonization moving forward?

The race against climate change is both a marathon and a sprint. Growth in electricity demand and the need to achieve economy-wide decarbonization over the coming several decades present important long-term opportunities for advanced nuclear technologies.

The earliest demonstrations of advanced nuclear reactors are likely to be complete in the 2030s, but the timing of widescale deployment depends on many issues, especially market competitiveness.

Timeline for potential technology demonstrations and commercialization of some advanced nuclear reactors alongside broader decarbonization efforts.

Timeline for potential technology demonstrations and commercialization of some advanced nuclear reactors alongside broader decarbonization efforts.

Recommendations

Developing advanced reactors on a timeframe to significantly contribute to a decarbonized energy system will require sustained effort and robust financial support in this decade and beyond by the U.S. government, the nuclear industry, and the financial community. The successful commercialization of advanced reactors will require:

Closing Technology Research Gaps

READ MORE

Structured Federal Funding from Design to Deployment

READ MORE

Improved Project Management and Construction

READ MORE

Strengthening the Skilled Workforce

READ MORE

Timely Updates to Regulations

READ MORE

Community Engagement and Societal Acceptance

READ MORE

Advancing Security and Safeguards

READ MORE

Developing Competitive Financing Options

READ MORE

For the complete list of findings and recommendations, see Appendix I of the report.

Closing Technology Research Gaps

Advanced nuclear reactor technologies hold the promise for safer, more efficient, and more nimble designs than currently deployed nuclear technologies. However, the various advanced reactors under development are at different levels of technological maturity. These projects must resolve technology gaps and demonstrate new business use cases before wide-scale deployment.

  • Reactor Materials Research

    While many of the current concepts plan to move towards commercial reactor demonstration with existing materials, focused investment to create better-performing materials (particularly for reactor core materials and cladding) could lead to significant improvements in safety, reliability, and affordability.

    RECOMMENDATION 2.2: The Department of Energy’s Office of Nuclear Energy should initiate a research program that sets aggressive goals for improving materials performance. This could take the form of a strategic partnership for research and development involving NRC, EPRI, the nuclear industry, national labs, and universities. The program should incentivize the use of modern materials science to decrease the time to deployment of materials with improved performance and to accelerate the qualification (ASME Section III, Division 5 or equivalent) and understanding of life-limiting degradation processes of a limited number of high performance structural materials, e.g., reactor core materials and cladding.

    Learn more in Chapter 2.

  • Developing Non-Electric Applications

    In addition to providing electricity to customers across economic sectors, nuclear power plants can provide heat for industrial processes. The heat generated could be used for desalination, district heating, or producing hydrogen or synthetic fuels. All of these applications could become important as the chemical, materials, and transportation sectors transition to low-carbon operations.

    RECOMMENDATION 5.1: Industrial applications using thermal energy present an important new mission for advanced reactors. Key research and development needs for industrial applications include assessing system integration, operations, safety, community acceptance, market size as a function of varying levels of implicit or explicit carbon price, and regulatory risks, with hydrogen production as a top priority. The Department of Energy, with the support of industry support groups such as the Electric Power Research Institute and the nuclear vendors, should conduct a systematic analysis of system integration, operation, and safety risks to provide investors with realistic models of deployment to inform business cases and work with potential host communities.

    Learn more in Chapter 5.

Structured Federal Funding from Design to Deployment

In order to ensure the efficient deployment of scarce resources, U.S. federal government programs for advanced nuclear development need better coordination and continuity from early research and development through demonstration and deployment. Programs should include decision points for continuation or termination of funding for specific reactor concepts dependent on meeting key milestones for performance, budget, and siting.

RECOMMENDATION 4.2: The nuclear industry and the Department of Energy’s Office of Nuclear Energy should fully develop a structured, ongoing program to ensure the best performing technologies move rapidly to and through demonstration as measured by technical (testing, reliability), financial (cost, schedule), regulatory, and social acceptance milestones. Concepts that do not meet their milestones in the ordinary course should no longer receive support and newer concepts should be allowed to enter the program in their place.

RECOMMENDATION 4.3: Congress and the DOE should maintain the Advanced Reactor Demonstration Program concept. The DOE should develop a coordinated plan among owner/operators, industry vendors, and the DOE laboratories that supports needed development efforts. The ARDP plan needs to include long-range funding linked to staged milestones; on-going design, cost, and schedule reviews; and siting and community acceptance reviews. This plan will help DOE downselect among concepts for continued support toward demonstration. A modification in the demonstration schedule that takes a phased (vs. concurrent) approach to reactor demonstration may be required. For example, funding would be continued for the first two demonstrations under the ARDP. A second round of demonstrations of designs expected to mature from the current ARDP Risk Reduction for Future Demonstrations award recipients could be funded for demonstration under an “ARDP 2.0” starting thereafter and going into the future.

Learn more in Chapter 4.

Improved Project Management and Construction

Nuclear projects in the U.S. and Europe have not been built on budget or on schedule in recent decades. These cost overruns are due to a variety of factors, including that a typical U.S. utility company does not have adequate technical and engineering personnel to plan and manage a nuclear construction project. Expertise and resources for project management are needed to support and streamline power plant construction.

  • Streamlining Plant Construction and Civil Works

    Much of the cost growth does not necessarily arise from the nuclear island, but from the civil works (e.g., concrete or steel structures and the rest of the power plant).

    infographic

    RECOMMENDATION 6.9: While it is vital to demonstrate that advanced reactors are viable from a technical perspective, it is perhaps even more vital to ensure that the overall plant, including the on-site civil work, can be built within cost and schedule constraints. Since it is likely that costs for onsite development will still be a significant contributor to capital cost, and the ~$35M in DOE funding for advanced construction technologies R&D is small in comparison to the hundreds of millions spent on nuclear island technology research, more should be done over an extended period to research technologies that may streamline and reduce costs for this work.

    Learn more in Chapter 6

  • Developing Joint Resources for Construction and Collaboration

    Some advanced reactor vendors are considering moving from the traditional “project-based” approach to a “product-based” approach in which the reactor is produced in a factory or shipyard, with the goal of improving schedules and quality while reducing costs and construction risks. However, even if this method improves the construction of nuclear components, extensive on-site construction work will still remain for the civil works.

    RECOMMENDATION 6.2: Nuclear owner/operators pursuing new nuclear construction should consider establishing a consortium or joint venture to pursue the construction on behalf of the group, thereby enabling the creation and maintenance of the necessary skilled personnel to pursue projects successfully. Alternatively, advanced reactor developers operating within the traditional project delivery model should implement a long-term business relationship, preferably an equity partnership such as a joint venture or a consortium, with a qualified engineering, procurement, and construction (EPC) firm experienced in the nuclear industry.

    Learn more in Chapter 6.

Strengthening the Skilled Workforce

Nuclear energy technologies require a highly skilled workforce, and the process to support and sustain these technologies over their 60+ year service life is complex and expensive. In addition to the staff needed to develop and build the next-generation of nuclear power plants, there must also be a training pipeline for staff to service the plants over many decades; technical experts to manage the fuel cycle; and regulatory, legal, and policy experts to handle licensing and oversight.

RECOMMENDATION 6.1: In anticipation of the necessary expansion in workforce to support more widespread deployment of nuclear technologies, the Department of Energy should form a cross-department (whole of government) partnership to address workforce needs that is comparable to initiatives like the multi-agency National Network for Manufacturing Innovation. The program would include the Departments of Labor, Education, Commerce, and State, and would team with labor organizations, industry, regulatory agencies, and other support organizations to identify gaps in critical skills and then fund training and development solutions that will close these gaps in time to support more rapid deployment.

Learn more in Chapter 6.

Timely Updates to Regulations

Domestic power reactors are tightly regulated by the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) in all phases of their lifecycle, including design, construction, operations, and decommissioning. The NRC is tasked with protecting public health, safety, and the environment by adjusting regulatory requirements and verifying safety claims for new reactor technologies and applications. Advanced nuclear reactors present new use cases and regulatory challenges. Work to develop new regulatory frameworks should begin now to support future deployment of advanced nuclear reactors.

  • Establishing Regulations for New Technologies

    While the NRC must maintain its overriding commitment to safety, the regulatory process should be made as efficient as possible if advanced reactors are to be commercialized in the coming decades.

    RECOMMENDATION 7.1: Advanced reactors will not be commercialized if the regulatory requirements are not adjusted to accommodate their many differences from existing light water reactors. A clear definition of the regulatory requirements for a new technology must be established promptly if timely deployment is to be achieved. The NRC needs to enhance its capability to resolve the many issues with which it is and will be confronted. In recognition of the urgency for the NRC to prepare now, Congress should provide increased resources on the order of 10s of millions of dollars per year to the NRC that are not drawn from fees paid by existing licensees and applicants.

    Learn more in Chapter 7

  • Determining Siting Requirements

    Some reactor vendors anticipate opportunities to deploy their reactors near or in urban environments or in the vicinity of industrial facilities that will use heat produced by the reactor. These applications of advanced reactors will present unique siting and emergency planning issues. Careful and early examination of such issues is necessary to define the future range of economic opportunities that are available for advanced reactors.

    RECOMMENDATION 7.4: The NRC should expedite the requirements and guidance governing siting and emergency planning zones (EPZs) in order to enable vendors to determine the restrictions that will govern the deployment of their reactors.

    Learn more in Chapter 7.

Community Engagement and Societal Acceptance

Societal acceptance is necessary if new reactors are to play an expanded role in a decarbonized energy system, and it should be considered early in the design and verification process. The industry should engage with communities affected by prospective new construction, hear their needs and concerns, and adjust plans as a result. The effort should reflect an overriding commitment to honesty, early engagement through credible information channels, and genuine effort to develop a partnership.

Sociological approaches must become part of the nuclear energy research and development cycle, treated with the same seriousness as technology development. New risk communication strategies—grounded in rigorous social science (rather than polling) and respect for community apprehensions and desires—could greatly improve the prospects for nuclear deployment in the coming decades.

RECOMMENDATION 8.4: The developers and future owners that represent the advanced nuclear industry must adopt a consent-based approach to designing, siting, and operating new facilities. The siting approach will have to be adjusted for a particular place, time, and culture. The nuclear industry should follow the best practices, including:

  • a participatory process of site selection;
  • the right for communities to veto or opt out (within agreed upon limits);
  • some form of compensation granted for affected communities;
  • partial funding for affected communities to conduct independent technical analyses;
  • efforts to develop a partnership to pursue the project between the implementer and local community; and
  • an overriding commitment to honesty.

Following these practices will require additional time and financial resources to be allotted to successfully site and construct new nuclear power facilities, and the industry must account for these costs in their plans. The industry should be willing to fully engage with a community, hear their concerns and needs and be ready to address them, including adjusting plans. The industry, guided by experts in consent-based processes, should capture best siting practices in guidance documents or standards.

The study held an information gathering workshop on understanding societal challenges facing nuclear power in September 2021. Watch videos from the talks and explore the topics discussed on the workshop resource page .


Learn more in Chapter 8.

Advancing Security and Safeguards

Advanced reactor designs and deployment scenarios are far different from conventional nuclear power reactors, with a different set of security concerns. New security considerations for advanced nuclear reactor designs include:

  • Small modular reactors could be deployed in remote areas. This raises unique challenges for cybersecurity and may require passive elements to delay malicious actors attempting to access the reactor.
  • Smaller reactors may with fewer on-site staff may reduce risk from insiders, but may also reduce the facility’s capability to repel attackers.
  • New and advanced reactors rely on high assay low-enriched uranium (HALEU) fuel, which is more attractive for diversion or theft than the low-enriched uranium required by traditional light water reactors and may require additional security measures.
  • Some microreactor designs allow for the reactor and fuel to be moved, requiring a different set of security measures than a stationary facility.
  • Updating Security Requirements

    The Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) has proposed significant modifications to physical security requirements to accommodate designs and operations proposed by licensees of advanced reactors. There are many hurdles remaining. Clear NRC guidance is needed, as well as a fuller understanding of the vulnerabilities that the new designs and deployment scenarios may present.

    RECOMMENDATION 9.1: The modification of the security requirements proposed by the NRC staff could have significant implications for the design, staffing and operations of advanced reactors, thereby impacting business plans. Delays in providing clear regulatory guidance may impact capital availability and increases the potential for costly re-design if guidelines do not align with expected modifications to existing protocols. Congress should provide additional funding for NRC evaluation of security guidelines and the Commission should expedite its consideration of the staff proposal and seek to complete the rulemaking promptly if significant changes are deemed appropriate. In that case, the prompt completion of the associated guidance should also be a high priority.

    Learn more in Chapter 9

  • Promoting Nuclear Safeguards

    As advanced reactors continue to be developed with the potential of rapid scale-up both domestically and internationally in the coming decades, it is crucial to recognize, prioritize, and address gaps in safeguards technology and to incorporate key measurement capabilities at the earliest stages of the design process.

    The U.S. government has established a robust set of programs and organizations that will support advanced reactor developers across the spectrum of research, development, and deployment, including support for domestic and international safeguards and security research, international engagement, and licensing assessment.

    RECOMMENDATION 9.4: The United States should increase sustained long-term financial and technical support for bilateral and multilateral programs (e.g., IAEA) to build capacity in likely partner countries to deploy new and advanced reactors that meet safety, security and safeguards requirements, including support from U.S. national labs and universities as training platforms. It should seek commitments from vendors, supplier countries, and customer countries to adhere to the highest standards of safety, safeguards, and security. The Departments of Energy and State should partner with U.S. reactor vendors to develop a safety, safeguards and security “package,” where the United States and the vendor could offer customized support to a host country for developing and implementing new safety, security and safeguards arrangements.

    Learn more in Chapter 9.

Developing Competitive Financing Options

The upfront financing costs for developing nuclear reactors are currently higher than those for other energy technologies because of large capital requirements, extended development timelines, and limited financing options. Incentives to support commercialization and more flexible financing options would help support new reactor deployment.

  • Encouraging Commercial Investment

    The commercial deployment of low-carbon energy resources will require substantial investment. In order to obtain funds at this scale, the investments must present sufficiently low risk that they can compete with other “ordinary” investments in the public equity and debt markets. Widespread commercial deployment of nuclear reactors will occur only if the projects can convincingly demonstrate that they can compete in a marketplace with alternatives.

    RECOMMENDATION 4.4: To enable a cost-competitive market environment for nuclear energy, federal and state governments should provide appropriately tailored financial incentives (extending and perhaps enhancing those provided recently in the Inflation Reduction Act) that industry can use as part of a commercialization plan, consistent with the successful approaches used with renewables. These tools may vary by state, locality, and market type. Continued evaluation of the recently passed incentives will need assessment to determine their adequacy. The scale of these incentives needs to be sufficient not only to encourage nuclear vendors, but also the supporting supply chains.

    Learn more in Chapter 4

  • Supporting International Deployment

    Many new and advanced nuclear vendors in the United States anticipate a strong international market for their designs. However, non-U.S. vendors have more options for financing the export and deployment of advanced reactors than U.S. vendors, which will reduce the competitiveness of U.S. companies and limit opportunities for the United States to promote global nuclear safety and security.

    RECOMMENDATION 10.2: International nuclear projects by U.S. exporters are likely to require a financing package that reflects a blending of federal grants, loans, and loan guarantees along with various forms of private equity and debt financing. The Executive Branch should work with the private sector to build an effective and competitive financing package for U.S. exporters.

    Learn more in Chapter 10.

Committee Members

Richard A. Meserve

Richard A. Meserve, Chair

Ahmed Abdulla

Ahmed Abdulla

Todd Allen

Todd Allen

Jaquelin Cochran

Jaquelin Cochran

Michael L. Corradini

Michael L. Corradini

Richard Cupitt

Richard Cupitt

Leslie Dewan

Leslie Dewan

Michael Ford

Michael Ford

Kirsty Gogan

Kirsty Gogan

Ning Kang

Ning Kang

Allison M. Macfarlane

Allison M. Macfarlane

David K. Owens

David K. Owens

James Rispoli

James Rispoli

Sola Talabi

Sola Talabi

Steven J. Zinkle

Steven J. Zinkle

FAQs

  • What was the focus of the study and who sponsored it?

    The study committee was asked to identify opportunities and barriers to advanced nuclear reactor commercialization in the United States over the next 30 years as part of a decarbonization strategy.  The report considers:

    • Research, development, and demonstration
    • Manufacturing, construction, and operational characteristics
    • Economic, regulatory, societal, and business challenges
    • Applications outside the electricity sector
    • Role of the U.S. government
    • National security and nonproliferation
    • Future workforce and educational needs

    Learn more about the study and read the official statement of task on the study website.

    The funding for the report came from the Department of Energy and a philanthropic donation to the National Academy of Engineering by Dr. James J. Truchard.

  • What role could advanced nuclear reactors play in decarbonization?

    There are many possible ways to achieve decarbonization, and there is a lot of uncertainty regarding what the future electricity system will look like in the United States as more low-carbon energy is deployed. This report doesn’t advocate for a specific path towards decarbonization, because the future marketplace will determine what technologies ultimately contribute to the future energy mix in the United States.

    However, there is the potential for advanced nuclear technologies to play an important role in decarbonization, particularly if the cost barriers can be overcome. The committee sees the need to advance low-carbon technologies of all kinds to keep our options open and make sure we have tools that are available to confront this huge societal problem.

  • Does the report address questions on fuel cycle and nuclear waste?

    Nuclear waste is a serious problem that needs to be addressed. Nuclear fuel cycle issues were outside the scope of this report, but a recently published National Academies’ study covers that subject in detail. Merits and Viability of Different Nuclear Fuel Cycles and Technology Options and the Waste Aspects of Advanced Nuclear Reactors discusses nuclear fuel cycle options for both existing and advanced reactors, as well as nonproliferation and security considerations for these fuel cycles.

  • How did the committee develop their conclusions and recommendations?

    The committee met many times over the course of two years and held many information gathering sessions with briefings from federal agencies, vendors, and other stakeholders interested in advanced nuclear across a range of issues.

    All recommendations in the report are consensus recommendations, agreed upon by the whole committee, comprised of experts from a wide array of backgrounds. The final report also went through rigorous peer review as part of the National Academies consensus study process.

  • How was the study committee selected?

    One of the strengths of the National Academies is the tradition of bringing together recognized experts across many disciplines and facilitating collaboration. Careful steps are taken to convene diverse committees that have an appropriate range of expertise and represent a balance of perspectives. Stakeholders have the opportunity to nominate potential committee members at the beginning of the study, and all nominations are carefully considered. Committee members are always screened for possible conflicts of interest, and they serve as individual experts, not as representatives of organizations or interest groups. Learn more about the study committee for this report above.

  • How will the results of the study be used?

    The report has been presented to the study sponsors and congressional staff with interest in advanced nuclear technologies. Moving forward, additional dissemination briefings will be held for government, industry, scientific, and community stakeholders. If you are interested in requesting a briefing, please contact the study staff at advancednuclear@nas.edu. Follow on events, including a workshop, are planned for late 2023.

RELATED RESOURCES



NAE logo

This study was organized by the National Academies’ Board on Energy and Environmental Systems and the National Academy of Engineering.

SHARE THIS PAGE