Nuclear power has certainly had its highs and lows. In the post-Hiroshima and Nagasaki era, nuclear power was considered a modern and efficient way to generate electricity. However, a number of accidents, which got international press coverage, and the long-term treatment and effects of spent fuel rods gave nuclear a major negative reputation. But recent technological advances in nuclear power and the need for energy sources that do not combust fossil fuels have resulted in leaders looking at nuclear more favorably these days.

The need to address climate change has been a boon for the nuclear power industry. Nuclear energy does not emit greenhouse gasses and many states and nations have set ambitions goals of eliminating fossil fuel-combustion power plants from their electricity grids in the next one to two decades.

Although there are few concrete plans for new nuclear plants, several states have paved the way for them by ending moratoria on new nuclear plants. A number of existing plants have been shut down or are nearing the end of their useful lives. These may be logical sites for a new generation of nuclear plants.

Of course, the old concerns of safety have not gone away, especially from the public. New nuclear plants must make headway in these issues. However, the industry has received both government and private funding and is working on new, advanced technologies and may be ready to implement them in a future generation of plants. A new nuclear plant in Tennessee went online in 2016, the first in the 21st century in the US. Two plants are expected to start operating in Georgia soon. Licenses have been obtained from the Nuclear Regulatory Commission to build new facilities in 4 states.

While nuclear is figuring into the equation to de-carbonize our future energy supply, its designs may be different in the future. A new generation of small modular reactors or “SMRs” are being developed. These are smaller in output and footprint than historic nuclear plants. However, these are attempting to be more manageable, safer, and more efficient and economical than existing large-scale reactors. For example, an SMR could use as much as 90% less water than conventional facilities. Several SMRs could be envisioned as working together to increase output at a given location. While conventional nuclear plants cost billions to design, construct and test, SMRs could likely be built at a fraction of the cost, an advantage if investment money is tight. New SMRs may be able to provide additional power to existing plants with aging reactors, minimizing the need to build new plants in areas where there may be local opposition.

CCES cannot build nuclear plants, but we have the experts to assist you in determining your best way to de-carbonize and have reliable power for your facilities. Contact us today at karell@CCESworld.com or at 914-584-6720.