Asked by Viscount Hanworth To ask Her Majesty's Government
when they intend to report on the progress of the competition to
design a Small Modular Reactor for the United Kingdom. Viscount
Younger of Leckie (Con) My Lords, in March 2016 the
Government launched a competition to identify the best-value small
modular reactor for the UK. The...Request free trial
Asked by
-
To ask Her Majesty's Government when they intend to report
on the progress of the competition to design a Small
Modular Reactor for the United Kingdom.
-
(Con)
My Lords, in March 2016 the Government launched a
competition to identify the best-value small modular
reactor for the UK. The competition has attracted
considerable interest from industry, and 33 eligible
expressions of interest have been received. We expect to
provide an update on the competition’s progress shortly.
The focus of the competition is engagement with industry to
help inform government policy. It does not involve the
down-selection of a reactor design.
-
(Lab)
My Lords, I thank the Minister for that Answer. The
Government announced the competition for a small modular
reactor in March 2016, as we have heard, but it was
expected that phase 1 of the competition would be completed
by autumn 2016, with the publication of a road map. We are
still waiting for that. Meanwhile, some UK companies have
invested heavily in developing their solutions. I am told
that, without a clear government road map, those companies
will have to decide by the end of year whether to continue
to invest in SMRs or walk away. Should they walk away,
Britain will lose much of our nuclear competence. I must
ask the Minister: in that case, would the Government be
content to rely on foreign suppliers for our nuclear
equipment?
-
The Government acknowledge that industry is eager for
greater clarity on the approach we will adopt
on small modular reactors. Nuclear power is
an important part of our diverse energy mix, and it
currently supplies around 20% of our electricity demand.
Today, I can announce that the Government are providing up
to £7 million over the next two years to increase the
capacity of the UK nuclear regulators to support and assess
new and advanced nuclear technologies, such as SMRs.
Investment from international partnerships is forthcoming,
and we expect there to be more of interest in the future.
-
(Con)
Is my noble friend the Minister aware that British firms
are making considerable progress in this technology,
particular Rolls-Royce? Is he also aware—I am sure he
is—that China, Korea, the United States and other countries
are all pushing forward with this new technology very
rapidly? Would he consider, for the medium term down at
Hinkley Point, that installing a series of these much more
reliable and possibly cheaper nuclear installations—there
is a learning curve, as each new product cuts the costs—may
be a much better way forward than continuing with the
present plan of the giant, out-of-date design, and
staggering cost, of the present project down there, which
will impose a vast cost on the British people for years
ahead?
-
The main focus of my noble friend’s question was the siting
of SMRs, which is certainly being looked at with great care.
The picture is complex, and the House will have to be patient
in understanding that there is an awful lot to consider in
where the SMRs might be sited and the funding for them. To
take up his point about Hinkley Point, and perhaps other
nuclear facilities, it could well be sensible initially to
site the SMRs in or around the larger nuclear capabilities,
for all kinds of good reasons.
-
(PC)
My Lords, does the Minister understand that the ongoing
delays with the SMR decision are not only critical to the
companies involved but to possible locations for the SMRs.
For example, the Trawsfynydd location, which has been
decommissioned for 20 years, has been identified as a
possible location for SMRs, but that brings in a planning
blight for other developments while this is still in mid-air.
Please can the Government make progress?
-
We are aware of the interest in Wales as regards that
particular siting. However, as I said earlier, a decision has
not been made on where the sites might be. Perhaps I can
reassure the noble Lord that as much as possible is being
done to look at the early rolling-out of the SMRs, but it is
a complex matter.
-
(LD)
My Lords, I welcome Rolls-Royce’s great expertise in this
area, but as the term “modular” suggests, the only way in
which these reactors can become commercially economic is if
they roll off a production line, which it is estimated
requires some 50 to 60 reactors to be produced over a
lifetime. Is that not wildly optimistic? Surely it will never
happen, certainly given changes and developments in other
technologies in the energy field.
-
The noble Lord alludes to the different types of reactor. We
are not necessarily looking at one small modular reactor; it
is much more complicated than that. Some micro-reactors might
be helpful, for example, in introducing the SMRs into
districts to help with heating for multiple schools and so
on. The claimed advantages for SMRs include easier-to-finance
projects with lower up-front capital costs. They are smaller
projects which are quicker to build. There is a lower
construction risk and a greater deal of efficiency in their
manufacture. So there are advantages, but there is more work
to be done.
-
(Lab)
My Lords, will HMG also consider, as I understand they are
doing, fusion modular reactors? They represent a considerable
area of research in the UK, and I declare an interest as
having quite a leading role in it.
-
I note the point that the noble Lord has made. There are a
number of different types of reactor which are slightly
beyond my ken—fast reactors and so on—but, yes, that is
definitely being taken into account.
-
(Lab)
My Lords, this is really not good enough. All political
parties bear a responsibility for the abandonment for a
number of years of a proper civil nuclear programme, whereas
at one stage we led the world. In terms of energy security,
wealth creation and jobs, it is crucial that we move forward
on this. Does the Minister not agree that we really need to
move now in a number of these areas? It is all very well
saying how complicated it is, but this is a chance for us to
grab the initiative and get going. Does the Minister not
believe that we must move faster?
-
We are moving as fast as we can. We will soon be closing the
current phase of the SMR competition and making further
announcements on the next steps for SMRs in the coming
months, potentially as part of the nuclear sector deal.
|
