Skip to content

Status of Nuclear Reactors for Power Generation

November 10, 2015

Virtually all existing nuclear reactors in the United States will be shut down by 2100, while China and other nations continue to build them. See, U.S. Nuclear Demise Amid Increases Elsewhere.

Small nuclear reactors have been proposed, where their modular design and ability to scale reactor size to demand are major benefits, but where the cost remains around $6,000 per KW, essentially the same as traditional boiling water reactors, including Gen-3 reactors, such as the four being built in Georgia and South Carolina. See, Small Modular Reactors.

Recently, another nuclear engineering company, X-Energy, announced a joint effort with South Carolina Electric & Gas Co. (SCE&G) to investigate the deployment of an Xe-100 pebble bed nuclear reactor (PBR).

The proposed Xe-100 design is for a 50 MW unit that could easily fit in available acreage at existing power plant sites, with the potential for upgrading coal-fired and nuclear power plants.

X-Energy and SCE&G claim the reactor is less costly to build than traditional reactors, but it’s not known whether they will cost less than $6,000 per KW.

PBRs are not a new concept. Germany was an early leader in PBRs, operating a 20 MW AVR unit for several years. Germany also built a 300 MW unit, but shut it down after two years, mainly due to political issues.

A pebble bed reactor, HTR-10, has been built in China, but another PBR proposed for South Africa was never built.

Pebble bed reactors (PBR) operate at high temperatures, using helium as a gas coolant and heat transfer agent. PBRs cannot melt down, which was the case with the core of the Fukushima reactors. PBRs could also be used to produce hydrogen.

Cutaway of pebble design from X-Energy

Cutaway of pebble design from X-Energy

The billiard-ball size pebbles are encased in graphite that cannot melt, and can provide stability for the long-term storage of spent pebbles.

Another advantage of PBRs is that new pebbles can be added to the unit while it’s in operation, thereby eliminating the need to shut down the reactor for refueling.

Schematic of PBR from wikipedia

Schematic of PBR from wikipedia

Referring to the schematic, pebbles are added at the top of the reactor, with spent pebbles removed at the bottom. The nuclear reaction within the pebbles generates heat that heats the helium to a high temperature. The helium flows through a heat exchanger where water is turned to steam. The steam is then used to drive a steam turbine generator.

The main technical and cost issue is whether PBRs can be built at costs well below $6,000 per KW. With natural gas power plants being built at a cost of $1,100 per KW, and the potential to build ultra-supercritical coal-fired power plants at around $2,800 per KW, PBRs may find that the economics are not in their favor.

Even so, PBRs have major advantages, including safety, easier disposal of pebbles, ability to operate at high temperatures, no need to shut down while the unit is being refueled and their modular design.

* * * * * *


It’s easy to subscribe to articles by Donn Dears.

Go to the photo on the right side of the article where it says email subscription. Click and enter your email address. You can unsubscribe at any time.

If you know people who would be interested in these articles please send them a link to the article and suggest they also subscribe.

© Power For USA, 2010 – 2015. Unauthorized use and/or duplication of this material without express and written permission from this blog’s author, Donn Dears LLC, is strictly prohibited. Excerpts and links may be used, provided that full and clear credit is given to Power For USA with appropriate and specific direction to the original content.

5 Comments leave one →
  1. Catcracking permalink
    November 10, 2015 5:04 pm

    Thanks, another great article.

  2. November 19, 2015 8:52 am

    News – BTW, New Jersey get about 51% of it’s in-state electricity production from nuclear and one of our four reactors will shut down next year.

    NRC Says New Jersey Site Passes Environmental Study For New Nuclear Plant

    • November 19, 2015 8:59 am

      I noticed it took five years to get this approval, and it will take several more years to build a new nuclear power plant, if its ever built. Our energy policy is upside down, closing nuclear power plants while they are still operational, while building unreliable wind mills and solar that won’t last more than twenty years.


  1. Weekly Climate and Energy News Roundup #205 | Watts Up With That?

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s