The Rolls Royce modular reactor update page [1] leaves me scratching my head as to where they are, it seems they've passed some really hard UK regulation though, maybe the official source is not the best:
To add a bit of context there were 11 companies participating in program and only 2 achieved critiality, and the deadline included in "DOE Reactor Pilot Program" was "July 4, 2026", and Aalo Atomics is the only one that might also make it in time.
> "The Trump administration is proud to support the rebirth of America’s nuclear industry and ensuring Americans have access to affordable, reliable and secure energy for generations to come."
> "The demonstration and the licensing pathway it establishes represent a key step toward deploying electricity-producing microreactors for U.S. military installations by September 30, 2028."
So which is it? Power to the people or power to the military? This microreactor concept doesn't seem very well suited for commercial use.
Is anyone working in the US on a waste solution that isn’t a big hole with a straight out of cyberpunk sci-fi warning plaque?
The French reprocess and recycle fissile material but that’s kind of a gnarly industrial process. Still they do it and it works.
The long term solution is to create a second kind of reactor that has a higher burn fraction which means a more fuel efficient fast reactor. Those would be, ideally, the big base load plants if we did this rationally.
From the article:
> We said criticality in 2026, electricity production in 2027, and power to the warfighter in 2028.
Are there any other examples of land-based militaries using nuclear power? Seems kind of like since they can't talk about the energy transition or w/e this has to be a military thing instead.
15 comments
[ 0.21 ms ] story [ 35.2 ms ] threadGreat to see engineering deliver on time. I wonder if Rolls Royce will also have a smooth ride. It's a PWR.
[1] https://www.rolls-royce-smr.com/our-progress
> "The demonstration and the licensing pathway it establishes represent a key step toward deploying electricity-producing microreactors for U.S. military installations by September 30, 2028."
So which is it? Power to the people or power to the military? This microreactor concept doesn't seem very well suited for commercial use.
Should we double down on renewable energy and solve its issues with lots of batteries or should we invest in next generation nuclear energy?
Both at the same time?
Does anyone know?
The French reprocess and recycle fissile material but that’s kind of a gnarly industrial process. Still they do it and it works.
The long term solution is to create a second kind of reactor that has a higher burn fraction which means a more fuel efficient fast reactor. Those would be, ideally, the big base load plants if we did this rationally.
Are there any other examples of land-based militaries using nuclear power? Seems kind of like since they can't talk about the energy transition or w/e this has to be a military thing instead.
And closely followed by Valar Atomics two weeks later: https://www.energy.gov/articles/department-energy-celebrates...