IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/gam/jsusta/v15y2023i8p6636-d1123170.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Small Modular Reactors Licensing Process Based on BEPU Approach: Status and Perspective

Author

Listed:
  • Seyed Ali Hosseini

    (Faculty of Engineering, Shahid Beheshti University, Tehran 1983963113, Iran
    GRNSPG/DESTEC, University of Pisa, 56126 Pisa, Italy)

  • Reza Akbari

    (GRNSPG/DESTEC, University of Pisa, 56126 Pisa, Italy)

  • Amir Saeed Shirani

    (Faculty of Engineering, Shahid Beheshti University, Tehran 1983963113, Iran)

  • Francesco D’Auria

    (GRNSPG/DESTEC, University of Pisa, 56126 Pisa, Italy)

Abstract

The competitiveness of small modular reactors (SMRs) has been planned based on design simplification, short construction time, passive safety systems, and enabling self-financing by ramp-up construction. Due to the global energy challenges, SMRs have received pervasive attention from a wide range of researchers, designers, developers, stakeholders, and customers. Besides the many advantages related to the design of SMRs, there are challenges ahead of these reactors. SMR licensing is one of the most critical challenges in the front deployment of these reactors. This challenge stems from innovations in SMR designs and systems, such as modularity or deployment for desalination, energy storage, hydrogen production, process heat, and district heating. Due to the lack of experimental data and technical knowledge, the licensing challenges for non-water coolant SMRs are more complicated. Nearly all previous generation reactor licenses were based on conservative analysis while the decision-making methods based on best-estimate and realistic approaches have received more attention in recent years. Thus, the method known as the best estimate plus uncertainty (BEPU) approach is selected for licensing in some cases. At this time, using the BEPU approach in licensing for conventional NPPs is a mature technology and ready for industrial application. Nevertheless, because most previous reactors were licensed based on conservative methods, developers and even regulatory bodies resist re-assessments based on the BEPU approach, while using the choice of conventional conservative methods is a type of roll-back for next-generation SMRs. Thus, this work reviews the BEPU approach and clarifies the possibility of using this approach in the licensing process of SMRs. The lack of experimental data and tight coupling of phenomena along with uncertainty quantification are the main challenges ahead of using BEPU in the licensing process of SMRs.

Suggested Citation

  • Seyed Ali Hosseini & Reza Akbari & Amir Saeed Shirani & Francesco D’Auria, 2023. "Small Modular Reactors Licensing Process Based on BEPU Approach: Status and Perspective," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 15(8), pages 1-15, April.
    • Handle: RePEc:gam:jsusta:v:15:y:2023:i:8:p:6636-:d:1123170
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/15/8/6636/pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/15/8/6636/
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Bredimas, Alexandre & Nuttall, William J., 2008. "An international comparison of regulatory organizations and licensing procedures for new nuclear power plants," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 36(4), pages 1344-1354, April.
    2. Kumar, Dinesh & Bahauddin Alam, Syed & Ridwan, Tuhfatur & Goodwin, Cameron S., 2021. "Quantitative risk assessment of a high power density small modular reactor (SMR) core using uncertainty and sensitivity analyses," Energy, Elsevier, vol. 227(C).
    3. Mignacca, Benito & Locatelli, Giorgio & Sainati, Tristano, 2020. "Deeds not words: Barriers and remedies for Small Modular nuclear Reactors," Energy, Elsevier, vol. 206(C).
    4. Ramana, M.V. & Hopkins, Laura Berzak & Glaser, Alexander, 2013. "Licensing small modular reactors," Energy, Elsevier, vol. 61(C), pages 555-564.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    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. Vegel, Benjamin & Quinn, Jason C., 2017. "Economic evaluation of small modular nuclear reactors and the complications of regulatory fee structures," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 104(C), pages 395-403.
    2. Alhadhrami, Saeed & Soto, Gabriel J & Lindley, Ben, 2023. "Dispatch analysis of flexible power operation with multi-unit small modular reactors," Energy, Elsevier, vol. 280(C).
    3. Ridoan Karim & Mohammad Ershadul Karim & Firdaus Muhammad-Sukki & Siti Hawa Abu-Bakar & Nurul Aini Bani & Abu Bakar Munir & Ahmed Imran Kabir & Jorge Alfredo Ardila-Rey & Abdullahi Abubakar Mas’ud, 2018. "Nuclear Energy Development in Bangladesh: A Study of Opportunities and Challenges," Energies, MDPI, vol. 11(7), pages 1-15, June.
    4. Eberl, Jakob & Jus, Darko, 2012. "The year of the cat: Taxing nuclear risk with the help of capital markets," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 51(C), pages 364-373.
    5. D. Finon & F. Roques, 2008. "Financing Arrangements and Industrial Organisation for New Nuclear Build in Electricity Markets," Competition and Regulation in Network Industries, Intersentia, vol. 9(3), pages 247-282, September.
    6. 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).
    7. Gangyang, Zheng & Xianke, Peng & Xiaozhen, Li & Yexi, Kang & Xiangeng, Zhao, 2021. "Research on the standardization strategy of China's nuclear industry," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 155(C).
    8. Nian, Victor & Mignacca, Benito & Locatelli, Giorgio, 2022. "Policies toward net-zero: Benchmarking the economic competitiveness of nuclear against wind and solar energy," Applied Energy, Elsevier, vol. 320(C).
    9. Carless, Travis S. & Talabi, Sola M. & Fischbeck, Paul S., 2019. "Risk and regulatory considerations for small modular reactor emergency planning zones based on passive decontamination potential," Energy, Elsevier, vol. 167(C), pages 740-756.
    10. Pablo Fernández-Arias & Diego Vergara & Álvaro Antón-Sancho, 2023. "Bibliometric Review and Technical Summary of PWR Small Modular Reactors," Energies, MDPI, vol. 16(13), pages 1-15, July.
    11. Alonso, Gustavo & Bilbao, Sama & Valle, Edmundo del, 2016. "Economic competitiveness of small modular reactors versus coal and combined cycle plants," Energy, Elsevier, vol. 116(P1), pages 867-879.
    12. Lindley, Ben & Roulstone, Tony & Locatelli, Giorgio & Rooney, Matt, 2023. "Can fusion energy be cost-competitive and commercially viable? An analysis of magnetically confined reactors," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 177(C).
    13. Nian, Victor & Ghori, Amjad & Guerra, Eddie M. & Locatelli, Giorgio & Murphy, Paul, 2022. "Accelerating safe small modular reactor development in Southeast Asia," Utilities Policy, Elsevier, vol. 74(C).
    14. Haneklaus, Nils & Schröders, Sarah & Zheng, Yanhua & Allelein, Hans-Josef, 2017. "Economic evaluation of flameless phosphate rock calcination with concentrated solar power and high temperature reactors," Energy, Elsevier, vol. 140(P1), pages 1148-1157.
    15. Ramana, M.V. & Hopkins, Laura Berzak & Glaser, Alexander, 2013. "Licensing small modular reactors," Energy, Elsevier, vol. 61(C), pages 555-564.
    16. Michanek, Gabriel & Söderholm, Patrik, 2009. "Licensing of nuclear power plants: The case of Sweden in an international comparison," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 37(10), pages 4086-4097, October.
    17. Iyer, Gokul & Hultman, Nathan & Fetter, Steve & Kim, Son H., 2014. "Implications of small modular reactors for climate change mitigation," Energy Economics, Elsevier, vol. 45(C), pages 144-154.
    18. Invernizzi, Diletta Colette & Locatelli, Giorgio & Brookes, Naomi & Davis, Allison, 2020. "Qualitative comparative analysis as a method for project studies: The case of energy infrastructure," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 133(C).
    19. Elaheh Shobeiri & Filippo Genco & Daniel Hoornweg & Akira Tokuhiro, 2023. "Small Modular Reactor Deployment and Obstacles to Be Overcome," Energies, MDPI, vol. 16(8), pages 1-19, April.
    20. Heffron, Raphael J., 2013. "Nuclear energy policy in the United States 1990–2010: A federal or state responsibility?," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 62(C), pages 254-266.

    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:gam:jsusta:v:15:y:2023:i:8:p:6636-:d:1123170. 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: MDPI Indexing Manager (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.mdpi.com .

    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.