A respected independent grouping of academics has poured cold water on Opposition leader Peter Dutton's plans to have small modular nuclear reactors (SMRs) operating in Australia by the mid 2030s, and said the technology would come too late for Australia to meet its emissions reduction targets.
Subscribe now for unlimited access.
or signup to continue reading
Mr Dutton is proposing to build two small modular reactors as part of the Coalition's plan to commission seven nuclear power plants to enable Australia to decarbonise its power grid.
The nuclear power stations proposed for WA and South Australia are earmarked for SMR technology, with the Coalition indicating it hoped to have the first smaller reactors up and running by 2035.
However, a report from the Australian Academy of Technological Sciences & Engineering (ATSE) found after surveying all SMRs in development across the OECD that there would not be a mature market for the technology before the late 2040s.
The first full scale prototype could be ready by the mid 2030s, but co-author Professor Ian Lowe said adopting this technology would be a "high risk strategy" as costs and operating parameters would not be known.
"The only way to have a SMR operating by 2035 would be to take the higher risk option of agreeing to undertake a design that hasn't yet been proven," Professor Lowe said
While the most advanced SMR in development by American company NuScale was cancelled in 2023, there are just over a dozen other efforts to build SMRs in North America, Europe and Asia.
These include a range of technologies and sizes, but none have yet reached the prototype stage.
The report authors note that this means that any discussion about deploying SMRs in Australia leaves open questions of cost, capacity and time frame, as well as regulatory hurdles such as removing moratoriums or bans on nuclear power at the Commonwealth and state level and training a capable workforce.
"Capital, operating cost and generation performance data will only be reliable after a representative number of SMR commercial power plants have been built and operated for an extended period," the report highlights.
While the report plays down the role of SMRs in electricity generation, the report says the technology could address the challenges of decarbonising hard to abate sectors such as the production of steel, cement and other industrial products.
![Opposition leader Peter Dutton said the high upfront cost of nuclear power could be offset over the lifetime of the power plant. Pictures by Elesa Kurtz and Shutterstock Opposition leader Peter Dutton said the high upfront cost of nuclear power could be offset over the lifetime of the power plant. Pictures by Elesa Kurtz and Shutterstock](/images/transform/v1/crop/frm/123041529/2b70d154-1ede-4fe6-9964-eea2363d7e77.jpg/r0_0_1920_1079_w1200_h678_fmax.jpg)
Co-author Dr Sarah Ryan said while SMRs won't do the bulk of the heavy lifting, "the requirement for industrial heat cannot be underestimated".
The report comes as Mr Dutton foreshadows further detail on the Opposition's nuclear policy.
Speaking in Queensland on Monday, July 22, Mr Dutton told reporters that there would be a large upfront cost for nuclear energy, but this could be offset over the long operating life of the plant. Mr Dutton also flagged the party would be releasing a business case for the network of reactors.
"There is a big upfront capital cost, but you can amortise that cost over 80 years, it makes it a cheaper source of energy," he said.
According to the World Nuclear Association, new conventional nuclear power plants have an operating life of between 40 and 60 years.
The lifetime of SMRs is yet to be determined, co-author of the ATSE report, John McGagh said.
"At the present moment it is very difficult to suggest what the lifetime would be, SMRs are still in design and none have been licensed or constructed," he said.