4 ms·

> “I am skeptical of the ability to license advanced nuclear reactors and deploy them on a scale that would make a difference for climate change” I know of at

> “I am skeptical of the ability to license advanced nuclear reactors and deploy them on a scale that would make a difference for climate change” I know of at least one design that is likely to be commercialiced in 5-10 years. The 195 MWe IMSR is much smaller than the nuScale reactor and is already in the middle of the second pre licicing review of cnsc. Main advantage of the imsr is that it operates at normal pressure and it has a much better fuel economy. It produces six times more with the same amount of fuel as a LWR.

baking 7y ago
I had to look this up. The CNSC is the Canadian Nuclear Safety Commission. Their Pre-Licensing Review is an optional process intended to streamline the eventual license application. (https://nuclearsafety.gc.ca/eng/reactors/power-plants/pre-licensing-vendor-design-review/index.cfm https://nuclearsafety.gc.ca/eng/reactors/power-plants/pre-li...) The NRC and the CNSC have also agreed to a joint review process that might perhaps allow the same design to be used in both Canada and the US. (https://www.terrestrialenergy.com/2019/12/terrestrial-energy-imsr-advanced-reactor-selected-by-canadian-and-u-s-regulators-for-joint-review/ https://www.terrestrialenergy.com/2019/12/terrestrial-energy...) However, the ISMR is at least three years behind NuScale who started their NRC application in December 2016 and are well along in the process.
- xorfish 7y ago
  If you look at the progress at the CNSC, then NuScale appears to be one year ahead. The IMSR should finish the second phase in October 2020. Terrestrial Energy plans to have the first commercial plant on the grid in the next decade.
  - baking 7y ago
    I don't know enough about the process to make comparisons, but NuScale currently expects to be producing grid power in 2026. Nothing against Terrestrial Energy or molten salt reactors which is certainly an interesting tech. NuScale is about as boring as all get-out and might face fewer regulatory hurdles, but it might also have a harder time competing against better tech.
jabl 7y ago
> It produces six times more with the same amount of fuel as a LWR. Really? From what I've seen (https://www.terrestrialenergy.com/wp-content/uploads/2018/09/TerrestrialEnergyPaperCNS2018PDF.pdf https://www.terrestrialenergy.com/wp-content/uploads/2018/09... ) it's roughly equivalent to LWR's.
- xorfish 7y ago
  You appear to be right, I misinterpreted something from a talk of David LeBlanc.

baking 7y ago

I had to look this up. The CNSC is the Canadian Nuclear Safety Commission. Their Pre-Licensing Review is an optional process intended to streamline the eventual license application. (https://nuclearsafety.gc.ca/eng/reactors/power-plants/pre-licensing-vendor-design-review/index.cfm https://nuclearsafety.gc.ca/eng/reactors/power-plants/pre-li...) The NRC and the CNSC have also agreed to a joint review process that might perhaps allow the same design to be used in both Canada and the US. (https://www.terrestrialenergy.com/2019/12/terrestrial-energy-imsr-advanced-reactor-selected-by-canadian-and-u-s-regulators-for-joint-review/ https://www.terrestrialenergy.com/2019/12/terrestrial-energy...) However, the ISMR is at least three years behind NuScale who started their NRC application in December 2016 and are well along in the process.

xorfish 7y ago
If you look at the progress at the CNSC, then NuScale appears to be one year ahead. The IMSR should finish the second phase in October 2020. Terrestrial Energy plans to have the first commercial plant on the grid in the next decade.
- baking 7y ago
  I don't know enough about the process to make comparisons, but NuScale currently expects to be producing grid power in 2026. Nothing against Terrestrial Energy or molten salt reactors which is certainly an interesting tech. NuScale is about as boring as all get-out and might face fewer regulatory hurdles, but it might also have a harder time competing against better tech.

jabl 7y ago

> It produces six times more with the same amount of fuel as a LWR. Really? From what I've seen (https://www.terrestrialenergy.com/wp-content/uploads/2018/09/TerrestrialEnergyPaperCNS2018PDF.pdf https://www.terrestrialenergy.com/wp-content/uploads/2018/09... ) it's roughly equivalent to LWR's.

xorfish 7y ago
You appear to be right, I misinterpreted something from a talk of David LeBlanc.