[loganwedwards]

Although NuScale is not the first to focus on this type of implementation (Westinghouse, Areva, B&W, etc..), namely small modular reactors (SMR), I am glad to see more hands in the mix. As a South Carolina resident (and supporter of nuclear power) and witnessing the shit-show with SCANA and the cancelled VC Summer plants, I am hopeful that economies of scale can take effect in the SMR-based designs.

[benj111]

Is this economies of scale in the right place though?

I'm doubtful we'll ever get to the point where you can just plop a reactor down and go. You're still going to have the years of political wrangling, all the bulky containment and supporting infrastructure.

[jabl]

Most likely multiple units will be deployed on each site, allowing them all to take advantage of shared infrastructure like grid connections, spent fuel storage, security etc.

[benj111]

Yes I was going to add that their best chance is being put on the sites of old reactors.

[nine_k]

I also wonder if converting old coal-fired plants is possible. If the turbines, generators, and the power distribution stuff is in place and in a good shape, maybe setting up an alternative source of steam could be more economical than building the whole thing from scratch.

[jabl]

Typical coal plants use superheated steam at around 540C and turbines designed for that, whereas LWRs produce wet steam at 300C, so no.

High-temperature reactors can produce superheated steam, but then it's not a LWR and you give up on all the knowhow how to run those. The Chinese are planning to deploy gas cooled pebble bed reactors which could replace the coal furnace at existing plants (HTR-PM).

[i_am_proteus]

Alt. take: one could not reuse the turbines, at least not efficiently. One might be able to reuse other parts of the steam/condensate/feed systems. The electrical systems could largely be reused.

I doubt that reusing anything other than the power distribution and cooling loops would be economical.