Nuclear Engineer Rejects Viability of Small Modular Reactors Soon

Hugh Durrant-Whyte suggests 2045 is realistic, highlighting potential high costs

Australia would require “many decades” to develop the regulations and expertise necessary to operate a nuclear power plant.

The experience at the existing Lucas Heights facility offers limited benefits, according to New South Wales’ chief scientist and engineer.

Hugh Durrant-Whyte reaffirmed statements made to a 2019 NSW upper house inquiry into uranium mining and nuclear facilities, emphasizing that managing a plant and its fuel supply chain demands skills developed “over many decades.”

Have You Read?

Peter Dutton’s Coalition Hints at Dropping 2030 Emissions Goal

Speaking as a trained nuclear engineer rather than as the state’s chief scientist, Durrant-Whyte stressed that the industry requires comprehensive regulations and monitoring across all stages of fuel handling, power generation, and waste management.

In an interview with Guardian Australia, Durrant-Whyte cited 2040 or even 2045 as a “realistic” timeframe for developing nuclear power capabilities. “We need personnel trained in measuring radioactivity, assessing containment vessel strengths, and managing every aspect of what we do,” he explained.

On Wednesday, the federal opposition unveiled plans to construct seven nuclear power stations across five states at existing coal plant sites, aiming for the first to be operational by the mid-2030s.

The government would own these plants and could compulsorily acquire the sites if current owners, including private companies and the Queensland and Western Australian governments, refused to sell.

Shadow energy spokesperson Ted O’Brien pointed to France and Canada as models Australia could emulate, also mentioning Lucas Heights in Sydney’s south, where a small reactor has supported medical research for years.

Durrant-Whyte noted that Canada’s nuclear sector employs about 30,000 people, while France’s employs 125,000 – “not an insignificant number.”

Durrant-Whyte dismissed the likelihood that small modular reactors (SMRs) – the starting point for the opposition’s nuclear program – would be commercially viable soon. “When I was at Rolls-Royce in 1979, colleagues next to me were designing SMRs,” he said.

Of Same Interest

Australian Opposition Unveils Nuclear Energy Strategy

“The challenge with anything big and complex, like an aeroplane or a nuclear reactor, is that the first one is always the hardest.”

The expertise at the Lucas Heights Ansto (Australian Nuclear Science and Technology Organisation) facility offers “little contribution” to supporting a nuclear power industry in Australia, Durrant-Whyte wrote in his 2019 report.

“It must be acknowledged that this is a ‘zero-power’ pool reactor, devoid of the complexities of high pressure, high power, and high radiation environments.” Likewise, skills required for nuclear-powered submarines in the Aukus program do not translate well.

The pressurized water reactors on these submarines are essentially SMRs with a 100-200 megawatt capacity. “My suspicion is we will purchase the reactors as part of the submarines and assemble them here,” Durrant-Whyte said. “But even then, we’re looking at the mid-2040s.”

Regarding safety, Durrant-Whyte noted that nuclear reactors are designed to be “very, very safe.” However, human error has caused “a lot of accidents” due to fuel handling and other issues. “This nuclear debate has occurred many times over the last 20 years in Australia,” he remarked. “It would be costly, and likely more expensive than anything else you could possibly think of.”

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *