There’s been a lot of talk about SMR’s over the years, it’s nice to see one finally being built.

Even if it comes in over budget, getting the first one done will be a great learning experience and could lead to figuring out how to do future ones cheaper.

Assuming it’s on time, completion in 2029, connected to grid in 2030.

    • toastmeister@lemmy.ca
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      2
      ·
      9 months ago

      As far as safety, deaths are laughably low from Nuclear. Hydro has had significantly more casualty, thousands of times more.

      Counting long term emissions from coal or gas I’d assume you’d be higher as well.

    • CanadaPlus@lemmy.sdf.org
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      2
      arrow-down
      8
      ·
      edit-2
      9 months ago

      Which is also why they might be snake oil. Similar problems to a full-size modern reactor, but without the savings of scale and not having to ship modules around.

        • CanadaPlus@lemmy.sdf.org
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          2
          ·
          9 months ago

          To be clear, the exact designs on military craft are secret for security reasons, but not the theory and general technology. Commercial nuclear boats have long existed, they’re just niche for all the cost, safety and complexity reasons you’d expect.

            • MDCCCLV@lemmy.ca
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              3
              ·
              9 months ago

              Everything on the military is classified. Basic ass radios from the 80s are top secret, classified just means they don’t want enemies to know the exact specifications of their equipment.

            • CanadaPlus@lemmy.sdf.org
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              1
              ·
              edit-2
              9 months ago

              There’s plenty of insurers not in America…

              A nuclear reactor isn’t actually a very complicated machine, in a sense. Put enough nuclear fuel in one place and it gets hot. Then, drive a heat engine with it. Usually one based on steam, although closed-cycle gas turbines, sterling engines and airbreathing jet engines have all been experimented with.

              It’s just that you have to keep track of neutron moderation and cross sections, half lives of thousands of isotopes, thermal changes, non-constant demand and the possibility of point failures, all under the condition that you can’t let anything escape. That makes it complicated, but then again each individual part on that list can be learned from open-source materials.

              It’s even known what general kinds of reactors are on various military nuclear submarines. For example, the earlier Soviet designs used a liquid lead-bismuth cooled fast neutron design, which is why the Russians have so much polonium, while the modern designs use a pressurised water coolant.

        • MDCCCLV@lemmy.ca
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          9 months ago

          You can’t use ship style because those use weapons-grade material. It’s more compact but not something you can use for civilian designs. The design isn’t complex, it just uses higher energy density material.