1. | EXECUTIVE SUMMARY |
1.1. | Small modular reactors (SMRs): what and why? |
1.2. | Why is interest growing nuclear energy? |
1.3. | SMRs are expected to reduce the cost of nuclear energy |
1.4. | SMRs could work alongside renewable energy systems towards decarbonization |
1.5. | The cost of energy from SMRs could compete with renewables and fossil fuels |
1.6. | Where are the SMR projects? |
1.7. | Countries around the world are announcing interest in SMR projects |
1.8. | SMRs enable new use-cases for nuclear energy |
1.9. | What reactor technologies will SMRs use? |
1.10. | SMRs in existence today |
1.11. | Selected players in SMR design |
1.12. | What is holding back SMRs? |
1.13. | What factors are important when comparing SMR technologies? |
1.14. | Insights from SMR benchmarking |
1.15. | Forecasting the SMR market |
1.16. | Forecasting growth in number of SMRs |
1.17. | Growth in installed SMR electrical capacity: regions |
1.18. | SMR technology breakdown by region: 2043 predictions |
1.19. | Key takeaways on SMRs from IDTechEx |
2. | INTRODUCTION |
2.1. | Introduction: the nuclear industry, SMRs and technical background |
2.2. | Nuclear industry overview |
2.2.1. | Nuclear energy: the story so far |
2.2.2. | Nuclear energy has struggled in recent years |
2.2.3. | Nuclear power in the global energy mix |
2.2.4. | The last decade was tough for nuclear. Why should this one be different? |
2.2.5. | Nuclear new builds: why or why not? |
2.2.6. | Nuclear for net zero: how much is needed? |
2.2.7. | Why do hopes for nuclear installation rate vary so wildly? |
2.2.8. | How realistic is rapid nuclear expansion? |
2.2.9. | Segmenting nuclear technologies: generations |
2.2.10. | How have commercial nuclear power plants been constructed? |
2.2.11. | The economics of nuclear plant construction confound expectations |
2.2.12. | Conclusions: the nuclear industry needs an overhaul |
2.3. | Introduction to small modular reactors |
2.3.1. | Small modular reactors (SMRs): what and why? |
2.3.2. | Defining small modular reactors |
2.3.3. | SMR drivers: transferring the economy of scale |
2.3.4. | SMR construction economics: the evidence |
2.3.5. | Motivation for adopting SMRs |
2.3.6. | Modularization as a cost saving |
2.3.7. | Cost of capital for SMRs vs. traditional NPP projects |
2.3.8. | The cost of energy from SMRs could compete with renewables and fossil fuels |
2.3.9. | SMRs as an answer to energy security |
2.3.10. | Where are the SMR projects? |
2.3.11. | Production bottlenecks for SMRs: reactor pressure vessels |
2.3.12. | SMR developers face slow licensing processes, but progress is being made |
2.3.13. | Are SMRs safer than large nuclear power plants? |
2.3.14. | Conclusions: SMRs aim to make nuclear power economically viable |
3. | FORECASTS |
3.1. | Introduction to forecasting |
3.2. | Forecasting overall electricity demand |
3.3. | Nuclear energy by region today |
3.4. | Nuclear energy by region: forecasting growth |
3.5. | Where in the world is growth in nuclear energy expected? |
3.6. | Constructing the forecast: SMRs in operation today |
3.7. | Constructing the forecast: establishing when SMRs enter operation |
3.8. | Forecasting methodology: projecting growth, technology focus |
3.9. | Forecasting growth in number of SMRs |
3.10. | Forecast: number of SMRs with table |
3.11. | Reactor technology forecasts |
3.12. | Forecasting reactor types: overall breakdown |
3.13. | Forecast: SMR reactor types with table |
3.14. | SMR technology breakdown by region: 2043 predictions |
3.15. | Growth in installed SMR electrical capacity: regions |
3.16. | Forecast: SMR electricity generated by region with tables |
3.17. | Installed energy capacity of SMRs: electrical |
3.18. | Installed energy capacity of SMRs: thermal |
3.19. | How much will SMRs cost to build? |
3.20. | Forecasting revenue from SMR construction: reactor types |
3.21. | Forecast: SMR construction revenue by type with data table |
3.22. | Forecasting revenue from SMR construction: regions |
3.23. | Forecast: regional revenue from SMR construction with data table |
3.24. | Forecasting: Conclusions |
4. | SMR TECHNOLOGY ASSESSMENT |
4.1. | Structure of this chapter |
4.2. | Technical primer |
4.2.1. | Nuclear fission: subatomic components |
4.2.2. | Fission processes: releasing energy |
4.2.3. | Segmenting SMRs: active vs. passive vs. inherent safety |
4.2.4. | Controlling and maintaining chain reactions |
4.2.5. | Fuel types in nuclear reactors: enrichment |
4.2.6. | Fuel costs as a fraction of levelized cost |
4.2.7. | Void coefficient as an indicator of safety |
4.2.8. | Temperature coefficient also affects safety |
4.2.9. | Explaining how nuclear reactors work through the context of light water reactors |
4.2.10. | Ultimate heat sinks and reactor siting |
4.3. | Segmenting SMRs by type |
4.3.1. | Reactor technology coverage in this report |
4.3.2. | Reactor designs: dividing by technology parameters |
4.3.3. | New reactor designs: evolution vs. revolution |
4.3.4. | Coolant temperature defines efficiency, application fit |
4.3.5. | Distribution of project types by reactor class |
4.3.6. | Project stage by reactor class (I) |
4.3.7. | Project stage by reactor class (II) - frontrunner technologies |
4.3.8. | Project stage by reactor class (III) - "middle of the pack" |
4.3.9. | Project stage by reactor class (IV) - speculative technologies |
4.3.10. | Which technologies are likely to see wide use in a future SMR fleet? |
4.3.11. | Comparing promising technologies |
4.3.12. | Conclusions: A wide range of reactor types are competing for use in SMRs |
4.4. | SMR technology benchmarking |
4.4.1. | Introduction to Benchmarking |
4.4.2. | Benchmarking KPIs |
4.4.3. | Building the benchmark |
4.4.4. | Comparing benchmarks |
4.4.5. | Which variables form each benchmark? |
4.4.6. | Judging overall reactor performance |
4.4.7. | The issue of unavailable data |
4.4.8. | Comparing performance between benchmarking metrics |
4.4.9. | Unweighted benchmarking scores |
4.4.10. | What plant types are exceeding benchmarking expectations? |
4.4.11. | Plant efficiency has little correlation with technological focus |
4.4.12. | More power-dense plants are seeing greater industry focus |
4.4.13. | Conclusions from benchmarking |
4.5. | Pre-Gen IV reactor designs |
4.5.1. | Pre-Gen IV designs: introduction to established nuclear technologies |
4.5.2. | Pressurized Water Reactors (PWRs): Overview |
4.5.3. | Layout of PWRs |
4.5.4. | Types of PWR: overview |
4.5.5. | Shrinking PWRs could improve safety and smooth operations |
4.5.6. | CAREM: slow progress towards an Argentinian SMR |
4.5.7. | CAREM: passive safety and a conventional approach |
4.5.8. | CAREM/CAREM25: SWOT |
4.5.9. | NuScale: potentially the closest SMR to market in the USA |
4.5.10. | NuScale: a new approach to PWR design |
4.5.11. | NuScale: when will reactors be built? |
4.5.12. | NuScale/VOYGR: SWOT |
4.5.13. | Rolls-Royce SMR: the not-so-small modular reactor |
4.5.14. | Rolls-Royce SMR: designed for export potential |
4.5.15. | Rolls-Royce SMR: small pressure vessel, large power output |
4.5.16. | Rolls-Royce SMR: SWOT |
4.5.17. | Boiling Water Reactors (BWRs): Overview |
4.5.18. | Why are less BWR SMR projects ongoing than PWRs? |
4.5.19. | GE Hitachi's BWRX-300: accelerating project timespans is key |
4.5.20. | GE Hitachi's BWRX-300: compact plant design eases siting difficulties |
4.5.21. | BWR-300: SWOT |
4.5.22. | Pressurized Heavy Water Reactors (PHWRs): Overview |
4.5.23. | PHWR-based SMRs |
4.5.24. | Summary: the Gen III/III+ SMR landscape |
4.5.25. | Comparison of leading Gen III/III+ designs |
4.5.26. | Conclusion: older reactor designs will continue to see wide use in SMRs |
4.6. | Gen-IV reactor designs |
4.6.1. | Gen IV designs: introduction to transformational nuclear technologies |
4.6.2. | High Temperature Gas Reactors (HTGRs): Overview |
4.6.3. | HTGRs: Introduction |
4.6.4. | TRISO: the new paradigm for nuclear fuel? |
4.6.5. | HTGRs: multiple possible generation schemes |
4.6.6. | HTGRs: Rankine vs. Brayton vs. combined cycle generation |
4.6.7. | Comparing benchmarking scores for HTGR types |
4.6.8. | Pebble bed HTGRs: why frequent anomalies? |
4.6.9. | GFRs appear to be high technical performers, yet are let down by power density |
4.6.10. | HTR-PM: the first commercial-scale land-based SMR |
4.6.11. | HTR-PM: use of HALEU, Rankine cycle approach |
4.6.12. | HTR-PM: SWOT |
4.6.13. | U-Battery: distributed nuclear energy for industry |
4.6.14. | U-Battery: how do you target an SMR project? |
4.6.15. | U-Battery: SWOT |
4.6.16. | Liquid Metal Fast Reactors (LMFRs): Overview |
4.6.17. | LMFRs: extensive demonstrator experience has struggled to transfer to commercial use |
4.6.18. | Comparing LMFRs to other Gen IV types |
4.6.19. | Molten Salt Reactors (MSRs): Overview |
4.6.20. | Molten salt reactors perform highly in technology benchmarks - yet adoption has lagged |
4.6.21. | Terrestrial Energy: molten salt SMRs with short-life cores |
4.6.22. | Terrestrial Energy: focus on co-generation as a business model |
4.6.23. | Terrestrial Energy: LEU in a Gen IV reactor |
4.6.24. | ISMR400: SWOT |
4.6.25. | Not every Gen IV design is being considered for SMRs |
4.6.26. | TerraPower: Gen IV designs outside of SMRs |
4.6.27. | Summary: the Gen IV SMR landscape |
4.6.28. | Conclusion: Gen IV designs are likely to find their place in SMRs |
5. | APPLICATIONS FOR SMRS |
5.1. | SMRs and new use-cases for nuclear |
5.2. | Cogeneration: getting the most out of nuclear fuel |
5.3. | Pairing SMRs with industrial zones for efficient use of nuclear cogeneration |
5.4. | Compatibility between processes and reactor types relies on reactor temperature range |
5.5. | Nuclear energy and the hydrogen economy |
5.6. | Desalination using nuclear energy |
5.7. | Nuclear district heating - a proven concept enhanced by SMRs |
5.8. | High temperature reactors open new possibilities for process heat supply |
5.9. | The "nuclear battery": nuclear microreactors |
5.10. | Marine SMRs: portable nuclear power |
5.11. | No smoking: coal-fired power plant repowering |
5.12. | Development status of new SMR use-cases |
5.13. | Summary: SMRs make nuclear energy more versatile |