Skip to main content
The Government of Bermuda Home

Small Modular Nuclear Reactor for cheap electricity and zero carbon.

From "What laws would you like to see modernized, reformed or introduced for the benefit of Bermuda?"

Go to the project

In order to reduce the price of electricity in Bermuda, we require a stable, reliable, long term, base load power generation capacity.

Renewables are intermittent and therefore cannot fill this role.

SMR technology is coming leaps and bounds. There are several companies looking for locations to site test plants. They need developed, modern economies with robust legal systems to facilitate this.

Most of the models work on power purchase agreements, so we would not own or manage the reactor. We would simply agree to buy the electricity. Models are suggesting that they will deliver electricity for $0.04 per KWH.

Many are the footprint of a 40foot container.

They last 20 - 35 years and at the end of the contract we can either sign a new contract, and they bring you a new one, or they will simply pack up the reactor and take it back with them. We would never be responsible for the fuel or waste.

Bermuda should embark aggressively on becoming a first mover on this.

look up Copenhagen Atomics, Terra Power, Moltex…

Comments(17)

Commenting is not possible because this project is currently not active.
Most recent comments have loaded.
Alright, had a read up on some of the newer nuclear options. Copenhagen Atomics: thermal solution only. This means that in order to produce power you'd need a steam turbine plant (or some other working heat transfer fluid such as carbon dioxide or helium). Basically a replica of Tynes Bay. Under ideal conditions you would be able to extract 30% of the thermal energy as electrical energy. Base load here is 60MW, so that's 200MWth to match. No true costs but the steam plant alone would be $100 million plus before the nuclear component. Terra Power: currently experimental. No proofs of concept, although it should work. Current development costs have exceeded $1 billion and no product as yet. Moltex: also experimental. Very coy about design specs. No budget figures released as yet. They have passed the first vendor review hurdle, though. The problem is cost. Any small nuclear implementation is approximately a billion dollars. You have to sell a lot of electricity to recoup that. Belco generates only 250 million kWh a year or so. Twenty year payback would require sales of electricity to the grid at roughly 50% more than the current levelled cost, and that's before staffing and other costs, much less the likely additional development costs beyond the plant itself.
    Profile of Joe Zajac
    Posted by:Joe Zajac
    3 years ago
    @Patrick Caton you have confirmed that in the end, we go back to steam power.
    • 1 like
    @Joe Zajac more work for me, as I have to do the assessments and mark the qualifying exams. 😉
      Profile of Taran Card
      Posted by:Taran Card
      3 years ago
      @Patrick Caton Thanks for doing some research. I agree with your concerns about cost if Bermuda were going to be the owner and sole finder of the development. That is not what would happen here. The developers are already funding the research and construction. They are looking to partner with a jurisdiction that is willing to allow construction. The opportunity here is to get some first mover advantage and use it to obtain favorable rates for the power purchase agreement. The 4 cents per kWh was a real number quoted to me by someone working on one of these systems as their target price. Is it likely to be higher than this, almost definitely, but it is also going to be far less than we pay now. As well as being totally carbon free and stable base load. Many of the SMR’s are designed to deliver thermal energy. The steam plant required to use this would need to be part of the negotiation. The footprint from a size point of view is still small. Some of the companies are intending to deliver full packages that include the steam generator and turbine. The question is, what do we want to do that has the best overall benefits for the investment. In my view an SMR is a much better investment than wind turbines.
      • 1 like
      Profile of Joe Zajac
      Posted by:Joe Zajac
      3 years ago
      @Taran Card Say, that sounds a lot like the same approach used by crypto companies in Bermuda. How is that working out? I am thinking build the generating plant on a ship, sail it in, connect it to the grid. Just need a place to dock/anchor the ship.
      • 1 like
      @Taran Card without a doubt SMR makes more sense than wind on a per kWh and availability basis. Still eye watering expensive.
        Wind mills do not work and is not worth building. I'm not sure about this reactor thing, but why get if it doesn't work and is way too expensive. Does it give radiation to the household?
          @Susan Symonds there's less radiation from any nuclear plant than there is from any coal plant. There are dozens of safety mechanisms, despite some sensational failures. As for windmills, they do kind of work, but you have to have the correct conditions. In a typical year here, they would operate for about 30 days.
            Profile of Joe Zajac
            Posted by:Joe Zajac
            3 years ago
            @Susan Symonds Wind farms have a place, you just have to run the numbers to see the value. If fuel was cut off for some reason, wind and solar are the fallback options to at least keep the lights on and refrigerators running for a while.
            • 1 like
            Profile of Taran Card
            Posted by:Taran Card
            3 years ago
            @Patrick Caton they do ‘kind of’ work. But they also do not displace any of the load required to be available from BELCO. BELCO still has to assume that they may be required to support the load without the wind turbines. So they have to keep all of their equipment maintained and operational, they may even need to fit additional batteries to cope with instability. All of this means that they will, almost definitely, apply for an increase in the base price of electricity. Maybe see you at the community meeting.
            • 1 like
            Profile of Joe Zajac
            Posted by:Joe Zajac
            3 years ago
            "Renewables are intermittent and therefore cannot fill this role." So why are we looking at building a wind farm with an estimated cost between $250 and $450 MILLION? The RA is spending MILLIONS of tax dollars on consulting for the wind farm that produced a report that says we need to spend $4 million more for "derisking" to entice developers. Say what? And the kicker is, the consultants will not give an estimate on the Estimated Consumer kWh Rate (ECkR), the rate BELCO would charge to consumers - us poor folk! No doubt the cost is astronomical and higher than our current rates. Bermuda’s current electric rates are right up there with, if not higher than, green #1 Germany and green #2 Denmark. "Models are suggesting that they will deliver electricity for $0.04 per KWH." That is way under the wind farm's fudgeit estimate of between $0.17/kWh and $0.32/kWh. But neither adds in other costs such as investor return, BELCO's cost of having generators on standby, markup, grid connection, load balancing, etc. Again, what is the Estimated Consumer kWh Rate (ECkR)? Somehow I am not seeing BELCO lowering rates, it has overheard and employees to pay. Investors want a guaranteed return for the project. But compared to the cost of a wind farm, I am open to seeking alternatives other than a wind farm. Bring on the promoters! Have vendors come to Bermuda and present their products in person, by video, and by PowerPoint. We need more visitors.
            • 2 likes
            @Joe Zajac the sole reason for the wind farm is ideological. The projections are poor for wind here. Germany has energy poverty because they focused on solar and they have less sun than Alaska. They should have kept their nuclear plants. Belco has set rates with maximum profit of 5%, and temporary allowances to recoup capital expenditures in plant upgrades. The quoted rate of 4¢ per kWh is extremely unlikely at best. So is the lower end of the wind farm estimate of 17¢. FWIW diesel is approximately 17¢ per kWh first cost, so end user costs of transmission etc bump that to 50¢ on average. You make a lot of good points about the ancillary costs not being included.
            • 1 like
            Profile of Joe Zajac
            Posted by:Joe Zajac
            3 years ago
            @Patrick Caton On the wind farm, I submitted 14 pages of analysis, facts, comments, and questions to the RA. Expect a dog and pony show at the town hall meeting. Yes, I am familiar with the absence of ancillary costs. If people knew the real costs upfront, a lot of wind farms would not have been built. Major developers are looking to back out of contracts because rising interest rates negatively impacted their profit projections. UK Telegraph March 5 Why Britain is suddenly blowing cold on a wind power revolution ‘You cannot build an energy system if nobody makes a return in doing so’
            • 1 like
            @Joe Zajac not to mention that the only places offshore wind is viable is where there’s already a heavy maritime engineering presence supporting offshore oil. The crane barges alone cost a million dollars a day to rent, and that starts when they start sailing to site. As a major contributor to the Green and White Papers on energy, I’m well versed in the futility of presenting facts and analysis to ideologues.
              Profile of Joe Zajac
              Posted by:Joe Zajac
              3 years ago
              @Patrick Caton gosh, those pesky details. a fact is an anathema to politicians and greenies.
                Well that’s overly optimistic for cost per kWh, surely that’s an OPEX forecast. What about CAPEX? Typically nuclear is 10x the cost per watt of diesel plant to develop. While I’m definitely a fan of this model, it’s not necessarily viable here. Transport is punitive. And what about staffing? (There are currently two people on island who have TSSA licenses covering nuclear plants) I believe Belco did look at this potential before the east power station was approved and found it to be too expensive to develop. It likely has improved since then. Will research.
                • 3 likes
                Total likes: 3, total dislikes: 1
                . You can no longer react to ideas in What laws would you like to see modernized, reformed or introduced for the benefit of Bermuda?. You can no longer react to ideas in What laws would you like to see modernized, reformed or introduced for the benefit of Bermuda?

                Share

                Posted by

                Current status

                proposed

                Tags

                Public services
                Energy and technology