Introduction

When one thinks of nuclear power, they typically imagine traditional large-scale reactors with imposing cooling towers billowing steam overhead. Naturally, these reactors evoke a sense of suspicion. While nuclear reactors are powerful and reliable energy sources, many are wary of the technology due to its involvement in the Fukushima and Chernobyl disasters. Given these unfortunate incidents, nuclear power at such a scale is often considered dangerous, so nuclear power at the local level had previously seemed impossible. Nuclear researchers, however, have been developing a new form of nuclear power that is designed to be integrated into the electrical distribution grid – distributed nuclear power. The technology, termed microreactors, will be tested by the Department of Energy starting in 2026 in the hopes that it can be commercialized by the end of the decade. This article examines the emerging technology and how it could be implemented in Texas.

Overview

Distributed nuclear power is an emerging type of distributed generation (DG), which avoids traditional electrical generation and transmission by connecting a low-megawatt power source directly into the distribution grid. Fundamentally, a microreactor is a scaled-down large nuclear reactor. The Idaho National Laboratory, where most of the distributed nuclear research is taking place, defines a microreactor as “a small nuclear reactor that can operate as part of the electric grid, independently from the electric grid, or as part of a microgrid to generate up to 20 MW thermal energy that can be used to generate electricity and provide heat for industrial applications.” For comparison, the average large-scale reactor produces around 1 GW of energy. Microreactors’ small size means they can be assembled in a factory, transported by boat, plane, or truck to almost any location, and installed directly to the distribution grid. 

A crucial component of microreactors is uranium fuel. Microreactors require much smaller quantities of uranium than large-scale reactors and use a different form of the fuel: high-assay low-enriched uranium, or HALEU. These two factors mean passive cooling can be used instead of the complex active water cooling required by traditional reactors. Aside from conserving water, smaller-scale passive cooling is significantly safer than active cooling. The Fukushima disaster occurred because the plant lost external power, meaning water could not be consistently fed into the plant to cool the reactor. This risk is eliminated with microreactors, and the smaller amounts of uranium mean it is safe to house near the point of delivery. 

Distributed nuclear power can integrate well into the energy grid, especially with existing forms of DG like solar panels and battery storage systems. Since both function on the distribution grid, distributed nuclear power can complement other DG, transferring power to utility grids to balance net loads and strengthen grid reliability. Microreactors can help provide needed energy when renewables encounter times of minimal load – for example, on a cloudy summer day when there is little solar energy available but demand is high. The technology can therefore be a solution to renewable problems of intermittency and variability, stabilizing renewables as the power grid transitions toward clean energy. 

Pros and Cons

Distributed nuclear power, like any technology, has both advantages and disadvantages associated with it. The chief drawback is cost. Construction and fuel will be quite expensive, especially in the early stages of development. HALEU is pricey compared to traditional uranium, mainly because it is somewhat intensive to produce. Other specialized materials and equipment make construction costs formidable. Nevertheless, due to the smaller size of the reactors, expenses will be lower and construction timelines shorter compared to large-scale nuclear plants. 

Another downside of implementing microreactors is their potential to become terrorism targets in an attempt to dismantle the power grid. Due to their capability to be installed underground at substations; however, this would be fairly difficult to execute and is probably not a major concern. Furthermore, distributed nuclear power would pose a new cybersecurity risk that would necessitate preventative measures and defense systems. Lastly, there could potentially be natural hazard effects, for instance, leaching from underground microreactors into groundwater. 

Conversely, there are numerous benefits to distributed nuclear power. For starters, microreactors are expected to have excellent performance, with longer refueling intervals than large nuclear plants and long operational horizons. This means they will function continuously without needing refueling or replacement for several decades. Currently, large-scale nuclear reactors have operational horizons of roughly 60 years as compared to 40 for coal and only 20-25 for wind and solar. Microreactors will likely have even better numbers due to their longer refueling intervals. Their high performance also means variable operation and management (O&M) costs are lower than those associated with fossil fuel technology. Additionally, the per unit electrical output for uranium is much higher than for coal or gas, meaning nuclear-generating costs are less sensitive to fuel price volatility. A 2023 study by the Nuclear Energy Institute shows that doubling nuclear fuel costs results in only a 10% increase in generation costs, and further demonstrates cost increases of 32% for coal and 77% for natural gas. So, despite being initially costly to produce and install, microreactors have significant long-term economic upsides. 

Moreover, microreactors are expected to be highly resilient. Established nuclear energy is already resilient, but passive cooling and low refueling frequency mean microreactors do not need much maintenance. As a result, distributed nuclear power is a good choice for remote and rural areas where frequent maintenance would be difficult to organize. Because of the technology’s similarity to current forms of DG, it can provide a substitute for DG in areas with limited renewable resources, such as in far northern latitudes where solar panels are far less efficient. Distributed nuclear power, therefore, could be unparalleled in its resilience. 

Feasibility in Texas

It is worth examining the feasibility of distributed nuclear power’s implementation in Texas. While the technology would at first be cost-prohibitive for smaller utilities, wealthier utilities such as Austin Energy or CPS Energy might benefit from early implementation, especially considering their ambitious climate targets. Economies of volume, though, will cause microreactors to decrease in cost because increased production reduces per-unit production costs. A study from the National Academy of Engineering likens it to jet engine turbines or solar panels, both of which started at exorbitant prices and rapidly became affordable. The study is confident this will occur with microreactors because they can be mass-produced in factories, allowing for faster “learning” which can minimize production costs and achieve greater economies of scale. A report from Columbia’s Center on Global Energy Policy agrees, citing an  MIT study that concluded that advanced fuels – such as HALEU – could reduce overnight costs by 25-30%. Therefore, there is widespread optimism among experts that microreactors can achieve cost parity with fossil fuels before 2050.

If this occurs, microreactors would be a strategic economic option for cities as opposed to fossil fuels because of their installation at the distribution level. MIT found increasing advantages for new nuclear technologies in Texas specifically as emissions limits become tighter and nuclear costs decrease. Instead of paying volatile ERCOT transmission prices, cities could simply produce a portion of their energy locally from a highly consistent source. Distributed nuclear power is therefore likely to eventually become economically feasible in Texas, if not in the near future.

Conclusion

  Distributed nuclear power has the potential to revolutionize how cities obtain energy. A single microreactor could provide clean and reliable power for decades while helping cities and taxpayers avoid generation and transmission costs. Distributed nuclear power can serve as a zero-emission alternative to fossil fuels for the same cost and less price volatility. The technology is resilient, safe, and highly portable, so communities across the country could benefit significantly from implementation. When microreactors are fully deployed and become cost-effective through economies of volume, Texas cities should take advantage of the clean, reliable energy they will provide. To do so, they should monitor the technology’s development and consider purchase and installation timelines once distributed nuclear power reaches a feasible price point.