Most excellent primer in small reactors, answering many questions in an efficient single place. In summary, one might say, “Small reactors make little sense. It’s not nice to fool Mother Nature."
Extremely clear. What can justify that OKLO is a $3B company or that Westinghouse promotes the eVinci rather than focus on making the AP1000 faster and cheaper to build ?
I understand the need for shielding. I also understand that most diesel generators are on a standby / as needed mode for backup, or they are on a mobile power mode for micro-grids. What about hospitals? I think there is a case to be made for a micro-reactor that makes a hospital grid independent and that has enough excess power to sell into the grid. When a blackout occurs to the grid around a hospital they would maintain their power systems UN-interrupted. The Aalo reactors might fit here.
If all the hospitals in an area were grid independent, they could provide enough power to help local neighborhoods in cases of emergency. Between 2MW to 5MW would be about right for all needed power.
Great explanation. Knowing full size nuclear power plants are among the most efficient and reliable sources of energy, are the longest-lasting (except hydro dams) and thus justifiable for capital investment, I was excited about microreactors when I first started hearing about them. They sounded great. What I wasn't hearing was the other side of the story, which you have made very clear.
Thinking microreactors were surely going to become successful, but not knowing which of many startups in the field would end up on top, I invested a few bucks in half a dozen of the ones who sounded best.
After your dose of reality, I'm going to sell every one of those stocks. At least they're a little ahead right now because of all the hype.
I contacted a microreactor vendor and they states this article is only applicable to light water reactor microreactors. So it depends on the type of reactor you invested in. If not LWR and you feel confident in their technology and how they can execute, then it might be an OK, if not risky, investment. "if a totally different technology is used, particularly one that has advantages over the existing LWR technology (molten salt, sodium, gas-cooled TRISO, etc.) then a totally different scaling curve exists, and for several technologies the scaled down version has the capacity to be lower cost/MW than LWR at the large scale. Further, if one takes advantage of a different cost scaling principle (economies of mass production) then the cost can be even further reduced."
Todd, thanks for the comment. Triso was mentioned in the original article as prohibitively expensive, so I don’t think it was only about light water reactors.
In the meantime, there’s a new post out today from the “Decoupling” substack. It’s an in-depth look at molten salt reactors. Here’s the link: https://www.decouple.media/p/pass-the-salt?
It would be nice to reveal your principal axiom before beginning your proof: "The only reason anyone would switch from diesel to nuclear is if it's cheaper." Alas, that appears to be accurate. There is no hope. See you in climate hell.
Chris, Really clear article dealing with facts, not hopes.
Really fantastic write-up, have already sent it along to friends who have had questions on the subject!
Chris—thanks for a clear and concise exposition of the issues. Very valuable.
Most excellent primer in small reactors, answering many questions in an efficient single place. In summary, one might say, “Small reactors make little sense. It’s not nice to fool Mother Nature."
Extremely clear. What can justify that OKLO is a $3B company or that Westinghouse promotes the eVinci rather than focus on making the AP1000 faster and cheaper to build ?
I understand the need for shielding. I also understand that most diesel generators are on a standby / as needed mode for backup, or they are on a mobile power mode for micro-grids. What about hospitals? I think there is a case to be made for a micro-reactor that makes a hospital grid independent and that has enough excess power to sell into the grid. When a blackout occurs to the grid around a hospital they would maintain their power systems UN-interrupted. The Aalo reactors might fit here.
If all the hospitals in an area were grid independent, they could provide enough power to help local neighborhoods in cases of emergency. Between 2MW to 5MW would be about right for all needed power.
Great explanation. Knowing full size nuclear power plants are among the most efficient and reliable sources of energy, are the longest-lasting (except hydro dams) and thus justifiable for capital investment, I was excited about microreactors when I first started hearing about them. They sounded great. What I wasn't hearing was the other side of the story, which you have made very clear.
Thinking microreactors were surely going to become successful, but not knowing which of many startups in the field would end up on top, I invested a few bucks in half a dozen of the ones who sounded best.
After your dose of reality, I'm going to sell every one of those stocks. At least they're a little ahead right now because of all the hype.
I contacted a microreactor vendor and they states this article is only applicable to light water reactor microreactors. So it depends on the type of reactor you invested in. If not LWR and you feel confident in their technology and how they can execute, then it might be an OK, if not risky, investment. "if a totally different technology is used, particularly one that has advantages over the existing LWR technology (molten salt, sodium, gas-cooled TRISO, etc.) then a totally different scaling curve exists, and for several technologies the scaled down version has the capacity to be lower cost/MW than LWR at the large scale. Further, if one takes advantage of a different cost scaling principle (economies of mass production) then the cost can be even further reduced."
Todd, thanks for the comment. Triso was mentioned in the original article as prohibitively expensive, so I don’t think it was only about light water reactors.
In the meantime, there’s a new post out today from the “Decoupling” substack. It’s an in-depth look at molten salt reactors. Here’s the link: https://www.decouple.media/p/pass-the-salt?
It would be nice to reveal your principal axiom before beginning your proof: "The only reason anyone would switch from diesel to nuclear is if it's cheaper." Alas, that appears to be accurate. There is no hope. See you in climate hell.