Driving the value of advanced reactors to fulfill critical market needs can be enabled by several conditions related to policy, regulatory, and public acceptance surrounding the commercialization of advanced reactors. The following enablers, with associated key opportunities, provide a valuable framework for focusing the solutions and actions that will enable large-scale deployment success.
First-Mover Success
While first-customer adoption can be slow for new technologies, the United States and Canada are beginning to see initial deployments with the recent approval of grid scale reactors. However, as with any new technology, the deployment of the first advanced reactors will include many new and unfamiliar complexities. Recognizing these conditions, the United States Congress has provided incentives for the deployment of advanced reactors. These include direct support to first deployments of several advanced reactor designs, nuclear tax incentives to spur market adoption, and loan guarantees. State support for the adoption of nuclear energy is also important to first-mover success, and many states are beginning to pass incentives to spur market adoption.
The industry is focused on deploying advanced reactors in a manner that minimizes risk and enables rapid learning because future deployments rely on their success.
The key opportunities to enable first-mover success are:
Governement Policies
Governments are establishing policies to meet energy and climate goals, and these policies can either enable or discourage advanced reactor adoption in the market. Established policies with stable and reliable funding of programs enable the industry to make and even accelerate business decisions that lead to the timely deployment of the first projects.
Deployment Best Practices
The actions include the development of construction and project best practices, and the implementation of these best practices for advanced reactor projects. These are especially important for the first projects that will encounter new and unfamiliar complexities. Experience has shown that government policies that establish arbitrary deadlines or other unnecessary burdens on industry can also incentivize some best practices not to be followed. Therefore, government policies that support the industry’s implementation of best practices will enable market adoption by enabling the industry to minimize cost, schedule, and risk.
Investments
It has been several decades since a large number of nuclear reactors have been built in the United States and Canada, so the investment community is relatively unfamiliar with the financial structuring of new nuclear build projects. The pricing of risk for FOAK new nuclear build projects, and the uncertainty of whether nuclear energy qualifies in environmental, social, and governance financing could be a disincentive to some investors. Building education and comfort in the investment community is needed to enable a healthy supply of investment in new nuclear projects.
Fast Followers
Customers who are hesitant to be the first to adopt new technologies prefer to wait until the products are adopted by the first movers.
These followers are seeking to better understand the costs and schedule of advanced reactors so that they can more accurately factor the risks into their business decisions. However, if these followers wait until the first projects are completed, market adoption will be too slow to enable large-scale deployment of advanced reactors in the timeframe that the market needs to achieve national energy goals. Enabling fast followers— those who proceed with projects soon after the first projects start and with reduced risks similar to having waited until the first project is completed— will allow the industry to meet the rapidly increasing need for reliable, affordable, and clean energy between now and the mid-2030s, while also establishing the foundation for large-scale deployment through 2050.
The key opportunities to enable fast followers are:
Governement Policies
Fast followers face similar costs and risks as first movers, though somewhat reduced with each subsequent deployment of the same design. They also have the same needs for government policies, though slightly reduced, including mitigating risks to ratepayers that enable fast followers to make final investment decisions, which is essential to getting to scale in the time needed.
De-Risking
The industry is developing a framework for reducing the risks for fast followers so that they are similar to the risks of having waited until the first projects are completed. This framework aligns the lead project deliverables and milestones that significantly reduce risk, in the areas of design, licensing, procurement, and construction, with the milestones of the fast follower projects. The outcome is that the fast followers benefit from the lower risks so that business decisions for moving forward can be made, in some cases reducing the timespan between the first and second project from five years to less than two years. Stakeholder support for the first projects to achieve these derisking milestones and for the fast followers to benefit from the first project’s successes in their decision-making will enable these fast followers to accelerate the deployment of advanced reactors. Examples of support include government policies, investment decisions, and public support.
Streamlining
The industry is pursuing design standardization and partnerships around individual designs of developers, customers, and suppliers that will streamline the deployment of the first wave of advanced reactors. This enables a process of learning that is well established to rapidly reduce the cost, schedule, and risks. Stakeholder support for streamlining advanced reactor deployments, by resisting the temptation to pursue major design or partnership changes for each project, and for encouraging risk sharing among the partners, will enable the industry to accelerate the deployment of advanced reactors.
Regulatory Efficiency
The market need for advanced reactors to enable the United States and Canada to meet their increasing energy demand will result in innovative designs that regulators have not previously approved and at a volume of licensing applications that far exceeds the NRC’s or CNSC’s current capacity.
Current regulations and key policy and technical positions in the United States and Canada have been established based on existing technologies, light-water reactors (LWRs) in the United States, and heavy-water reactors in Canada. In the United States, the regulatory frameworks are beginning to be updated in response to recent legislative actions, such as the ADVANCE Act and executive orders to ensure they are more efficient for advanced reactor technologies. These updates to the regulatory framework will enable the innovation necessary for providing valuable benefits to the market. It is understood that the first time a new design undergoes a review it will take longer than later applications.
Recent NRC changes are solid steps toward preparing the regulatory framework to process applications at a sufficient pace. The historical schedule for NRC approvals is four to eight years, with NRC review fees that have grown to exceed $70 million. NRC has more recently been able to review advanced reactor applications in 24 months or less, and at a fraction of the historical costs. The NRC is making changes to improve the licensing process and has established milestone schedules that would require all advanced reactor licensing reviews to be completed in 18 months or less. Such changes are expected to increase the NRC review bandwidth by three times or more.
Although both the United States and Canada have already embarked on initiatives to revise or update regulations or regulatory documents and standards and to implement policy and technical positions that consider advanced reactor technologies, these efforts have been slow to reach completion and have not included all aspects of the regulatory processes and framework that must be updated or re-aligned to address the urgency of the climate change crisis. A letter from the Nuclear Energy Institute (NEI) to the NRC states that the NRC could have as many as 60 applications in the licensing process at one time by 2030.
In Canada, concerns about regulatory efficiency persist, particularly regarding the removal of provisions that subject nuclear projects to the federal IAA. Many view this as unnecessary, given that the CNSC already provides robust oversight. The CNSC has made efforts to make its regulatory framework more flexible, less prescriptive, and more performance-based where appropriate. In addition, CNSC has engaged its regulatory counterparts in the United States and United Kingdom to cooperate in areas such as design reviews. However, there is a considerable regulatory burden that has grown over the last 10 years and will need to be addressed to enhance regulatory efficiency.
The NRC has recently begun more extensive efforts to prepare for advanced reactors, including the initiation of two rule-makings:
To provide for the rapid and efficient licensing of low consequence reactors
To perform a wholesale rule-making to reform regulations that impose unnecessary regulatory burden. The NRC’s schedule is to complete these rule-makings in late 2026.
The key opportunities to enable regulatory efficiency are:
Regulatory Review and Reform
Regulatory reform would establish regulatory frameworks to facilitate the efficient and timely approval and licensing of innovative and safe advanced reactors. This regulatory reform would support deployment of the first advanced reactors and fast followers and set the foundation for large-scale deployment in the early 2030s. Regulatory reform includes the following:
- In the United States, efficient and timely licensing of advanced reactor licenses in less than six months for previously approved designs, from docketing of the application to issuance of the license; Note that additional time will be necessary for the first regulatory review of a design
- Resolving key policy and technical issues (for example, emergency preparedness, environmental reviews, security) prior to the submittal of applications to minimize the need for subsequent design changes that prevent the streamlining of fast followers
- Updating the regulatory framework to align requirements with the technical specifications and risk profiles of advanced reactor technologies
- Collaboration between the NRC, CNSC, and other countries, as appropriate, to minimize the duplication of regulatory reviews of designs that are commercialized in both countries and also to enable standard designs between the countries
Policy
The United States Congress, through the ADVANCE Act, and the Canadian Parliament can encourage both nations’ regulators to pursue the needed regulatory reforms that enable deployment of advanced reactors at the scale necessary. Regulatory reform is in the national and public interest because there is a market need for advanced reactors to achieve national energy, climate, environmental, economic, and national security goals.
Siting Availability and Permitting
Site selection for nuclear energy facilities has historically been limited to locations based on population density, natural weather and geological conditions, and access to resources like a local water supply or rail spur.
However, advanced nuclear reactors are being designed with innovative features that eliminate or at least reduce these siting constraints.Enhancements to safety enable siting in areas with more extreme weather and geological conditions and closer to population centers where the power is needed. Enhancements to safety also enable advanced reactors to be used in island mode (separated from the grid) and for black start (the generation relied on to restart the grid after an outage). More efficient operations and smaller size can make dry cooling more economically feasible, eliminating the need for drawing water from a local body of water. Innovations that make advanced reactors smaller and easier to operate enable them to be located in remote areas, and even to be periodically relocated for humanitarian and disaster relief.
These features as well as standardization of designs will maximize the areas in which advanced reactors can be located. This is essential because the scale of advanced reactor deployment to meet the market need is not limited to a small scope of siting conditions but will be wide and varied, just as the market and customer needs are diverse.
The key opportunities to enable siting efficiency are:
Permitting
Numerous stakeholders and Indigenous Nations have roles in the siting availability of advanced reactors. Indigenous communities, federal, state/ provincial/territorial, and municipal governments will be involved in the decision-making process for site permitting and making available public lands for siting advanced reactors. Local communities and the public will be involved in the process for deciding on the sites for advanced reactors. Industrial end-users of power, steam, and heat will also be significant stakeholders in site selection. Regulators, market operators, investors, and insurance companies will also influence these decisions. Supportive engagement by these stakeholders with rapid decision-making will enable the acceleration of the deployment of advanced reactors to meet the diverse set of market and customer needs.
Design Flexibility
However, such an approach would not enable the efficiencies that come from design standardization. On the other hand, design standardization creates a natural tension between minimizing costs and maximizing the range of acceptable sites. To address this, the industry will need to develop flexible designs that are both standardized and adaptable to a range of site conditions. Technologies, such as seismic isolators that can enable both design standardization and site flexibility are essential enablers to large-scale deployment. The industry needs regulators, customers, and other external stakeholders to make decisions that enable it to pursue this type of design flexibility.
The variability of site conditions across North America creates an incentive for advanced reactor designs to be tailored to each site to minimize costs and maximize performance.
Indigenous and Public Engagement
In the United States, Indigenous peoples and the public have a vested interest in the national and state policies to meet energy, climate, environmental, economic, and national security goals.
They also have a vested interest in the technologies that are commercialized to meet these goals and the plans for deployment to meet the market needs. There are numerous opportunities for Indigenous peoples and the public to engage in the government processes for establishing policies and making regulatory decisions, including decision- making related to specific project decisions, such as siting, safety, and environmental impact. In some instances, engagement of these parties happens late in the process, posing potential delays in the deployment of advanced reactors.
It is recognized that, in many cases, the Indigenous peoples and the public are not well informed about the opportunities to engage with the industry or government on decisions about energy and climate policies, technologies pursued to meet market needs, or projects to deliver value to the market. Establishment of programs by the proponents, third parties, or the government that enable these stakeholders to more effectively engage can facilitate more efficient deployment of advanced reactors.
In Canada, Indigenous peoples and community consultation are an accountability of the Crown, as represented by both federal government and provincial government agencies. Consultation involves early, ongoing, and meaningful engagement by nuclear project proponents and licensees in the spirit of Free Prior Informed Consent (FPIC) (in recognition of the UN Declaration of the Rights of Indigenous Peoples); incorporation of Indigenous knowledge into projects; and benefits agreements or agreed- upon value (potentially equity). All are necessary (but not necessarily sufficient) requirements for successful nuclear deployment in Canada.
The key opportunities to enable public engagement are:
Public Engagement
Government processes that enable early engagement of the public in the process for establishing policies and making regulatory decisions can significantly reduce risks for advanced reactor projects, enabling deployments. Such processes would need to reach final decisions early in the timeline of the industry’s business decision-making to avoid delays that come when policies and regulatory positions change late in an advanced reactor project.
Community Engagement
The industry desires a strong, positive relationship with local communities and the public, one built on the fair treatment of all communities regarding industry operations and activities. This commitment includes fostering and sustaining inclusive, trust-based, and mutually beneficial relationships with local and disadvantaged communities. The industry is pursuing a path forward on advanced reactors that would lead to early and frequent engagement with potential host communities and others in the public that have equity in a potential advanced reactor project.
Indigenous Engagement
It is recognized that unique government-to-government relationships and processes form the basis of engagement with Indigenous communities. Project proponents will engage Indigenous peoples to achieve the outcomes outlined above for the public and community engagement as well as in support of potential partnerships that recognize Indigenous peoples’ right to self- determination. It is important to note that in Canada, consideration of FPIC is critical to project success, and failure to adequately consult with Indigenous groups will result in lengthy delays and costs to the proponent that could impact the viability of a project.
Supply Chain Ramp Up
The United States and Canada have deployed only a few new nuclear energy facilities in the last several decades.
Projects like the AP1000 at Vogtle 3 and 4 and the refurbishments of the Canada Deuterium Uranium (CANDU) reactors in Canada continue to maintain a domestic supply chain. However, much of the new nuclear supply chain is located outside of North America. Policies for domestic content drive the need for an increase in the U.S. and Canadian supply chains. Advanced reactor technologies also incorporate new materials and innovative components for which there is little experience in manufacturing. The shift from in-field construction to factory manufacturing of advanced reactors enables larger-scale deployment, but it also makes the need for a strong domestic supply chain even more essential to meeting the market need.
The key opportunities to enable supply chain ramp-up are:
The shift from in-field construction to factory manufacturing of advanced reactors enables larger-scale deployment, but it also makes the need for a strong domestic supply chain even more essential to meeting the market need.
Fuel Cycle
Fuel enrichment from Russia, once a significant contribution to the worldwide supply, is considered a less favorable option in many countries for meeting fuel supply needs for advanced reactors. Increasing development of nuclear facilities around the world means that there will be growing demand for the existing enriched fuel supplies. Potential scarcity of supply and desire for fuel security have both Canada and the United States considering their options for a domestic supply. In the United States, the federal government is investing in the high-assay, low-enriched uranium (HALEU) supply chain to catalyze industry build-out of HALEU production through the rapid implementation of the HALEU Availability program, which is essential to the success of many advanced reactor developers. In addition to conventional enrichment, recycling spent fuel to recover usable uranium and plutonium can support long-term supply assurance and reduce demand on primary enrichment resources. Policy support for fuel recycling infrastructure, including regulatory development, could reduce pressure on enrichment services and enhance strategic supply chain independence over time. Enrichment and recycling capacity in the near term will be an important step to ensuring energy security in both countries.
Component Manufacturing
The industry is pursuing the expansion of the supply chain for advanced reactors; however, uncertainty in the timeliness and scale of advanced reactor deployment is likely to suppress the investment needed in the supply chain. Furthermore, innovative advanced reactor designs with novel components will have longer lead times and are more prone to early design changes, putting at risk the ability to standardize the design, which is important to fast followers, regulatory efficiency, and cost reduction in progressing to nth of a kind (NOAK). Government support for the expansion of domestic supply chains will provide the industry with enough capital and confidence to increase existing capacity in the near term and enable the prototyping of novel components early in the design so that any design changes can be made before applications for the first movers are submitted to the regulators. These novel elements might include advanced manufacturing methods and commercial standards to meet nuclear-grade quality requirements.
Workforce Development
Workforce challenges are being experienced today, not just in the nuclear and broader energy industries but across the economic sectors worldwide. This challenge is fueled by an aging workforce, which leads to staffing reductions through retirements and a change in work culture among the younger generations.
For instance, younger workers are less inclined to pursue jobs with significant travel, untraditional hours, or in remote situations. There has also been a long-term decline in the number of skilled craft workers that will be essential in the manufacturing, construction, and operation of advanced reactors. The industry action plan describes the path forward to ensure a stable and sufficient workforce for the deployment of advanced reactors as well as to support the long-term operation of the current fleet
The key opportunity to enable workforce development is:
Training and Recruitment
The industry’s plans for workforce development include programs to create a pipeline of sufficient qualified workers in all areas, including engineering and design; technical knowledge such as operations and maintenance (O&M), radiation protection, and chemistry, skilled trades for manufacturing and construction; legal and regulatory affairs; communications; and human resources. These programs are designed to attract, train, and retain the workforce for advanced reactors. These workforce issues will also impact the regulators and other government agencies that have actions necessary to support the commercialization of advanced reactors. Government programs that attract individuals into the trade schools and colleges to study in areas that develop the skills and knowledge needed by the nuclear industry will enable the deployment of advanced reactors.