With a few SMR projects built and operational at this point, and more plants under development, the Institute for Energy Economics and Financial Analysis (IEEFA) concludes in a report that SMRs are “still too expensive, too slow to build, and too risky to play a significant role in transitioning away from fossil fuels.”

  • fpslem@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    1
    ·
    3 months ago

    Return on investment is still heavily in favor of solar or wind generation with battery or hydro storage for low generation periods.

    • RvTV95XBeo@sh.itjust.works
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      3 months ago

      Yes, and SMR tech is not mature enough to be considered useful, BUT if it can overcome that hurdle, it has the potential for applications that need exceptionally high availability, like data centers targeting five 9s availability.

      Energy costs aren’t always the only consideration

    • Forester@yiffit.net
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      3 months ago

      We can’t scale battery storage or hydro storage to the capacity we need to go carbon free