from CFACT
David Wojik
While it's still early days, the future of nuclear energy is far away for Wyoming and the world. To use nuclear weapons or not; that is the question.
Many of my readers have heard of small modular reactors (SMRs), the future hope of nuclear power. The first SMR application in the United States has been submitted to the Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) in western Wyoming, within striking distance of everyone in the United States.
It was called the Sodium Plant near Kemmerer, Wyoming. Kemmerer, coincidentally named after a Pennsylvania coal tycoon, was home to the world's largest open-pit coal mine 70 years ago. Maybe they can do for nuclear what they did for coal.
The proposed power plant has a capacity of 345 MW and is an ordinary SMR. Unfortunately, they've added storage capacity, which complicates things. In fact, there seems to be an important confusion here. The applicant is Terrapower and they say the nuke plus storage runs 500 megawatts. But the NRC says it's an 850-megawatt project.
In either case, the NRC appears to be, as they say, “coming out of the fence.” They are seeking comments on the scope of an upcoming environmental impact assessment.
See https://www.regulations.gov/document/NRC-2024-0078-0006
The NRC appears to be incorporating storage facilities into its EIS. Terrapower said: “The project has a 345 MW sodium-cooled fast reactor equipped with a molten salt energy storage system.”
I don't know what a molten salt energy storage system is, but neither does the NRC. The point is it's none of their business. It shouldn't be part of their environmental assessment because I'm sure it will take them a decade or more to get this storage technology up to speed.
If Terrapower wants to fill the surrounding ranch areas with truck-sized Tesla battery packs to store power when the wind isn't blowing or the sun isn't shining, that has nothing to do with approving this little nuke.
Terrapower, on the other hand, said, “The energy storage capability enables the plant to seamlessly integrate with renewable resources and is the only advanced reactor design with this unique capability.”
So they say this is a design feature of the reactor! I don't understand how they did it, but they may have set a trap for themselves.
The NRC is seeking comments on the scope of its environmental assessment until August 12. A nice local article with a link to the Federal Register page: https://wyofile.com/is-wyomings-first-ever-nuclear-reactor-a-good-idea-the-feds-want-your-enter /
As of this writing, there are only 28 comments, most of which say we either like or dislike nukes. The SMR industry as a whole seems to be missing this point. Molten salt storage is not part of nuclear power.
Note that my understanding is that the NRC would very much like to see a bunch of new nuclear weapons. I think their entire budget is funded by the nuclear power tax. Given that the U.S. nuclear fleet has been operating for 50 years, the end of the road for the NRC is arguably just around the corner.
I have a hard time seeing storage as part of the reactor design, but if it were, I would strongly recommend a revised design that the NRC could approve quickly.
Finally, I must mention that Terrapower is a company owned by Bill Gates. Gates is trying to make money from climate change, which is part of it, but only part of it. The problem here is nuclear power, not climate change.
But some of the public rhetoric against it is hilarious because to some, Bill Gates is the devil or a close relative. I agree that nuclear power is definitely more reliable than some unnamed software.
Has the devil come to Wyoming? Or are nucleons angels? stay tuned.
related
