A new report has assessed the feasibility of deploying small modular nuclear reactors to meet increasing energy demands around the world. The findings don't look so good for this particular form of energy production.

[T]he report’s executive summary certainly gets to the heart of their findings.

“The rhetoric from small modular reactor (SMR) advocates is loud and persistent: This time will be different because the cost overruns and schedule delays that have plagued large reactor construction projects will not be repeated with the new designs,” says the report. “But the few SMRs that have been built (or have been started) paint a different picture – one that looks startlingly similar to the past. Significant construction delays are still the norm and costs have continued to climb.”

  • AA5B@lemmy.worldEnglish
    12·
    30 days ago

    someone else said we will need some kind of nuclear power for future space exploration

    And I was one of those someone else’s, but in the context of calling out that there’s likely little in common.

    • a power plant on earth needs to be scaled up, assembled on site to meet the needs, can depend on gravity and open air. It needs repair ability and refuel ability, and can’t pollute ground water. It is well staffed and call in more as needed
    • a power plant off planet is likely much smaller, it has t be completely assembled ahead of time to fit on a rocket, and can not count on gravity, water, air, or even air pressure. It’s critical that it move mostly hands off: there’s no staff, no repairs, no spare parts.

    biomass shouldn’t be installed as it destroys too many native forests.

    That’s a choice: too many less developed countries still clear native forest for agriculture, so expanding agriculture has a downside . ITs something those countries need to take care of regardless, just to feed their people.

    This is a failure of policy and governance, not technology