IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/enepol/v125y2019icp216-226.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Is it the end of the line for Light Water Reactor technology or can China and Russia save the day?

Author

Listed:
  • Thomas, Steve

Abstract

In the late 1990s, a new generation of reactor designs evolved from existing designs was touted as solving the economic problems that led to the collapse of reactor ordering after the Chernobyl disaster. It was claimed these designs would be cheap and easy to build because they would be simpler and use passive safety, modular construction and standardisation. The US and UK governments were convinced by this and launched reactor construction programmes. However, 20 years on, the claims have proved false and the US and UK programmes are in disarray. The last hope for the nuclear industry appears to be that Chinese and Russian reactor vendors, with powerful support from their governments, will take over, providing reactors that are cheap but meet the safety standards required in Europe and North America. However, these vendors and their designs are largely unproven in open markets. There is also little evidence that their reactors will be cheap, there are concerns about quality and safety culture and there are national security concerns that may deter customers. New technologies, such as radical new ones, Generation IV, and Small Modular Reactors are unproven and, at best, a long way from commercial deployment

Suggested Citation

  • Thomas, Steve, 2019. "Is it the end of the line for Light Water Reactor technology or can China and Russia save the day?," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 125(C), pages 216-226.
    • Handle: RePEc:eee:enepol:v:125:y:2019:i:c:p:216-226
    DOI: 10.1016/j.enpol.2018.10.062
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S030142151830716X
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1016/j.enpol.2018.10.062?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Lovering, Jessica R. & Yip, Arthur & Nordhaus, Ted, 2016. "Historical construction costs of global nuclear power reactors," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 91(C), pages 371-382.
    2. Ramana, M.V. & Ahmad, Ali, 2016. "Wishful thinking and real problems: Small modular reactors, planning constraints, and nuclear power in Jordan," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 93(C), pages 236-245.
    3. Grubler, Arnulf, 2010. "The costs of the French nuclear scale-up: A case of negative learning by doing," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 38(9), pages 5174-5188, September.
    4. Lovering, Jessica R. & Nordhaus, Ted & Yip, Arthur, 2017. "Apples and oranges: Comparing nuclear construction costs across nations, time periods, and technologies," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 102(C), pages 650-654.
    5. Koomey, Jonathan & Hultman, Nathan E. & Grubler, Arnulf, 2017. "A reply to “Historical construction costs of global nuclear power reactors”," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 102(C), pages 640-643.
    6. Thomas, Steve, 2017. "China's nuclear export drive: Trojan Horse or Marshall Plan?," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 101(C), pages 683-691.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Stephen Thomas & M. V. Ramana, 2022. "A hopeless pursuit? National efforts to promote small modular nuclear reactors and revive nuclear power," Wiley Interdisciplinary Reviews: Energy and Environment, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 11(4), July.
    2. Lin, Boqiang & Bae, Nuri & Bega, François, 2020. "China's Belt & Road Initiative nuclear export: Implications for energy cooperation," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 142(C).
    3. Ben Wealer & Christian von Hirschhausen, 2020. "Nuclear Power as a System Good: Organizational Models for Production along the Value-Added Chain," Discussion Papers of DIW Berlin 1883, DIW Berlin, German Institute for Economic Research.
    4. Mignacca, Benito & Locatelli, Giorgio & Velenturf, Anne, 2020. "Modularisation as enabler of circular economy in energy infrastructure," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 139(C).
    5. Ben Wealer & Simon Bauer & Leonard Göke & Christian von Hirschhausen & Claudia Kemfert, 2019. "Economics of Nuclear Power Plant Investment: Monte Carlo Simulations of Generation III/III+ Investment Projects," Discussion Papers of DIW Berlin 1833, DIW Berlin, German Institute for Economic Research.
    6. Wealer, B. & Bauer, S. & Hirschhausen, C.v. & Kemfert, C. & Göke, L., 2021. "Investing into third generation nuclear power plants - Review of recent trends and analysis of future investments using Monte Carlo Simulation," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 143(C).

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Wealer, B. & Bauer, S. & Hirschhausen, C.v. & Kemfert, C. & Göke, L., 2021. "Investing into third generation nuclear power plants - Review of recent trends and analysis of future investments using Monte Carlo Simulation," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 143(C).
    2. Portugal-Pereira, J. & Ferreira, P. & Cunha, J. & Szklo, A. & Schaeffer, R. & Araújo, M., 2018. "Better late than never, but never late is better: Risk assessment of nuclear power construction projects," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 120(C), pages 158-166.
    3. Matsuo, Yuhji & Nei, Hisanori, 2019. "An analysis of the historical trends in nuclear power plant construction costs: The Japanese experience," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 124(C), pages 180-198.
    4. Peter A. Lang, 2017. "Nuclear Power Learning and Deployment Rates; Disruption and Global Benefits Forgone," Energies, MDPI, vol. 10(12), pages 1-21, December.
    5. Perrier, Quentin, 2018. "The second French nuclear bet," Energy Economics, Elsevier, vol. 74(C), pages 858-877.
    6. Kan, Xiaoming & Hedenus, Fredrik & Reichenberg, Lina, 2020. "The cost of a future low-carbon electricity system without nuclear power – the case of Sweden," Energy, Elsevier, vol. 195(C).
    7. Samadi, Sascha, 2018. "The experience curve theory and its application in the field of electricity generation technologies – A literature review," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 82(P3), pages 2346-2364.
    8. Mignacca, B. & Locatelli, G., 2020. "Economics and finance of Small Modular Reactors: A systematic review and research agenda," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 118(C).
    9. Koomey, Jonathan & Hultman, Nathan E. & Grubler, Arnulf, 2017. "A reply to “Historical construction costs of global nuclear power reactors”," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 102(C), pages 640-643.
    10. Froese, Sarah & Kunz, Nadja C. & Ramana, M.V., 2020. "Too small to be viable? The potential market for small modular reactors in mining and remote communities in Canada," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 144(C).
    11. Black, Geoffrey A. & Aydogan, Fatih & Koerner, Cassandra L., 2019. "Economic viability of light water small modular nuclear reactors: General methodology and vendor data," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 103(C), pages 248-258.
    12. Matsuo, Yuhji & Endo, Seiya & Nagatomi, Yu & Shibata, Yoshiaki & Komiyama, Ryoichi & Fujii, Yasumasa, 2020. "Investigating the economics of the power sector under high penetration of variable renewable energies," Applied Energy, Elsevier, vol. 267(C).
    13. Batini, Nicoletta & Di Serio, Mario & Fragetta, Matteo & Melina, Giovanni & Waldron, Anthony, 2022. "Building back better: How big are green spending multipliers?," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 193(C).
    14. Price, James & Keppo, Ilkka & Dodds, Paul E., 2023. "The role of new nuclear power in the UK's net-zero emissions energy system," Energy, Elsevier, vol. 262(PA).
    15. Thomas, Steve, 2018. "Russia's Nuclear Export Programme," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 121(C), pages 236-247.
    16. Sascha Samadi, 2017. "The Social Costs of Electricity Generation—Categorising Different Types of Costs and Evaluating Their Respective Relevance," Energies, MDPI, vol. 10(3), pages 1-37, March.
    17. Jewell, Jessica & Vetier, Marta & Garcia-Cabrera, Daniel, 2019. "The international technological nuclear cooperation landscape: A new dataset and network analysis," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 128(C), pages 838-852.
    18. Sascha Samadi, 2016. "A Review of Factors Influencing the Cost Development of Electricity Generation Technologies," Energies, MDPI, vol. 9(11), pages 1-25, November.
    19. Carlo L. Vinoya & Aristotle T. Ubando & Alvin B. Culaba & Wei-Hsin Chen, 2023. "State-of-the-Art Review of Small Modular Reactors," Energies, MDPI, vol. 16(7), pages 1-30, April.
    20. Elia, A. & Kamidelivand, M. & Rogan, F. & Ó Gallachóir, B., 2021. "Impacts of innovation on renewable energy technology cost reductions," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 138(C).

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:eee:enepol:v:125:y:2019:i:c:p:216-226. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Catherine Liu (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.elsevier.com/locate/enpol .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.