The Just Transition: Retrofit Decarbonization with Modular Nuclear

Abstract

While nuclear energy represents an essential component of the transition towards net zero energy, conventional nuclear is currently a costly option due to its obstacles and shortcomings. This paper explores the potential of small modular reactors (SMRs) as an alternative to revitalize the nuclear industry and expedite decarbonization efforts. SMRs offer cost-effective, flexible solutions, leveraging existing infrastructure to mitigate construction delays and costs while creating jobs and reducing emissions in affected communities. Despite challenges, proactive measures and policy support can pave the way for a sustainable energy future centered on modular nuclear technology.

Disclosure statement

No potential conflict of interest was reported by the author(s).

Notes

1 Sean Lawrie et al., Gone with the Steam, ScottMadden, Inc. 6 (Oct. 2021), https://www.scottmadden.com/content/uploads/2021/10/ScottMadden_Gone_With_The_Steam_WhitePaper_final4.pdf.

2 U.S. Dept. of Energy, INL/RPT-22-67964, Investigating Benefits and Challenges of Converting Retiring Coal Plants into Nuclear Plants 2 (2022).

3 Id.

4 Sean Lawrie, supra note 1, at 6.

5 Liam Darby et al., Small-Scale Nuclear Energy: Environmental and Other Advantages and Disadvantages, 4 Case Studies in the Environment 1 (2011).

6 Land Needs for Wind, Solar Dwarf Nuclear Plant’s Footprint, Nuclear Energy Institute (Jul. 9, 2015), https://www.nei.org/news/2015/land-needs-for-wind-solar-dwarf-nuclear-plants.

7 U.S. Dept. of State & U.S. Exec. Office of the Pres., The Long-Term Strategy of the United States: Pathways to Net-Zero Greenhouse Gas Emissions by 2050 (2021).

8 Nuclear Energy Institute, NEI 20-08, Strategic Project Management Lessons Learned & Best.

Practices for New Nuclear Power Construction 5 (2020).

9 Id.

10 Said Abousahl et al., Technical assessment of nuclear energy with respect to the ‘do no significant harm’ criteria of Regulation (EU) 2020/852 (‘Taxonomy Regulation’), Joint Research Centre of the European Commission 34 (Aug. 17, 2021), https://publications.jrc.ec.europa.eu/repository/handle/JRC125953.

11 Darby, supra note 5.

12 Id.

13 Nuclear Energy Institute, supra note 8, at 5.

14 Lawrie, supra note 1, at 13.

15 Id.

16 Will Davis, Showdown at Shoreham, Nuclear Newswire (May 16, 2018), https://www.ans.org/news/article-2048/showdown-at-shoreham.

17 Lawrie, supra note 1, at 12–13.

18 Darby, supra note 5.

19 Id.

20 Antonio Vaya Soler et al., Small Modular Reactors: Challenges and Opportunities, Nuclear Energy Agency of the OECD 13 (2021), https://inis.iaea.org/search/52041043.

21 Darby, supra note 5.

22 Id.

23 Alec Tyson et al., Americans Largely Favor U.S. Taking Steps To Become Carbon Neutral by 2050, Pew Research Center (Mar. 1, 2022), https://www.pewresearch.org/science/2022/03/01/americans-largely-favor-u-s-taking-steps-to-become-carbon-neutral-by-2050/.

24 Lawrie, supra note 1, at 7.

25 Vaya Soler, supra note 20, at 15.

26 Id.

27 Vaya Soler, supra note 20, at 15.

28 Darby, supra note 5.

29 Lawrie, supra note 1, at 12.

30 Darby, supra note 5.

31 Id.

32 Vaya Soler, supra note 20, at 22.

33 Darby, supra note 5.

34 Vaya Soler, supra note 20, at 22.

35 Staffan Qvist et al., Retrofit Decarbonization of Coal Power Plants—A Case Study for Poland, 14 Energies 1 (2020).

36 U.S. Dep’t of Energy, supra note 2, at 11.

37 Id.

38 U.S. Dep’t of Energy, supra note 2, at 11.

39 Vaya Soler, supra note 20, at 45.

40 Darby, supra note 5.

41 Id.

42 Vaya Soler, supra note 20, at 30.

43 Id.

44 Id.

45 Łukasz Bartela et al., Techno-Economic Assessment of Coal-Fired Power Unit Decarbonization Retrofit with KP-FHR Small Modular Reactors, 14 Energies 9 (2021).

46 Nicholas Watson et al., Repurposing Fossil Fuel Power Plant Sites with SMRs to Ease Clean Energy Transition, International Atomic Energy Agency (Jun. 16 2022), https://www.iaea.org/newscenter/news/repurposing-fossil-fuel-power-plant-sites-with-smrs-to-ease-clean-energy-transition.

47 Id.

48 Qvist, supra note 35.

49 Id.

50 U.S. Dep’t of Energy, supra note 2.

51 Id. at 29.

52 Jackie Toth et al., Opportunities for Coal Communities Through Nuclear Energy: An Early Look, Good Energy Collective 30 (Jan. 2022), https://www.goodenergycollective.org/policy/coal-repowering.

53 Vaya Soler, supra note 20, at 22.

54 Lawrie, supra note 1, at 16.

55 U.S. Dep’t of Energy, supra note 2, at 30.

56 Qvist, supra note 35.

57 U.S. Dep’t of Energy, supra note 2, at 32.

58 Id.

59 Qvist, supra note 35.

60 U.S. Dep’t of Energy, supra note 2, at 2.

61 Qvist, supra note 35.

62 Id.

63 U.S. Dep’t of Energy, supra note 2, at 20.

64 Watson, supra note 46.

65 Qvist, supra note 35.

66 Id.

67 Watson, supra note 46.

68 U.S. Dep’t of Energy, supra note 2, at 2.

69 Toth, supra note 52, at 4.

70 Lawrie, supra note 1, at 15.

71 Toth, supra note 52, at 4.

72 U.S. Dep’t of State, supra note 7.

73 Watson, supra note 46.

74 Toth, supra note 52, at 52.

75 U.S. Dep’t of Energy, supra note 2, at 66.

76 Toth, supra note 52, at 23–24.

77 Id. at 26.

78 U.S. Dep’t of Energy, supra note 2, at 2.

79 Nicholas Watson et al., Towards a Just Transition: Nuclear Power Boasts Best Paid Jobs in Clean Energy Sector, International Atomic Energy Agency (Apr. 14 2022), https://www.iaea.org/newscenter/news/towards-a-just-energy-transition-nuclear-power-boasts-best-paid-jobs-in-clean-energy-sector.

80 Vaya Soler, supra note 20, at 22.

81 Watson, supra note 46.

82 U.S. Dep’t of Energy, supra note 2, at 3, 69.

83 Id. at 61.

84 Id.

85 Kathryn Huff, Inflation Reduction Act Keeps Momentum Building for Nuclear Power, Office of Nuclear Energy (Sep. 8, 2022), https://www.energy.gov/ne/articles/inflation-reduction-act-keeps-momentum-building-nuclear-power; Inflation Reduction Act of 2022, H.R. 5376, 117th Cong. § 13701 (2022); Inflation Reduction Act of 2022, H.R. 5376, 117th Cong. § 13702 (2022).

86 NuScale Small Modular Reactor Design Certification, 88 Fed. Reg. 12 (Jan. 19, 2023) (to be codified at 10 C.F.R. pt. 52).

87 Id.

88 Watson, supra note 46.

89 U.S. Dep’t of Energy, supra note 2, at 36.

90 Lawrie, supra note 1, at 12.

91 Darby, supra note 5.

92 Bartela, supra note 45.

93 Lawrie, supra note 1, at 17.

94 Id.

95 New York State Climate Action Council, New York State Climate Action Council Scoping Plan, New York (2022), https://climate.ny.gov/ScopingPlan.

96 Lawrie, supra note 1, at 17.

97 U.S. Dep’t of Energy, supra note 2.

98 CHIPS and Science Act of 2022, H.R. 4346, 117th Cong. § 10781 (2022).

99 Advanced Small Modular Reactors (SMRs), Office of Nuclear Energy (last visited Apr. 11, 2023), https://www.energy.gov/ne/advanced-small-modular-reactors-smrs.

100 Id.

101 Vaya Soler, supra note 20, at 42.

Additional information

Notes on contributors

Chloe Hillson

Chloe S. Hillson is a third-year law student at Columbia Law School. She earned a B.A. from Villanova University. She previously worked as a summer associate for New York City’s Office of Technology and Innovation in the Office of the General Counsel.