DEAR News Of The Area,

I READ with interest your article: “Small modular reactors a ‘chimera’ for now” (NOTA, August 1).

I agree with the fact that SMRs “are not something today” and also “they have not been demonstrated or tested”.

I am mystified as to why a photo of the Lucas Heights 20MW OPAL reactor accompanied the article.

OPAL is an “Open Pool Australian Lightwater” reactor, with no reactor pressure vessel.

It is incapable of generating steam to drive a turbine and is used solely for isotope production and nuclear research.

It’s not a “small modular nuclear reactor”.

Unlike OPAL, SMRs have many drawbacks, including a problem called “neutron leakage”, where neutrons escape from the reactor core and strike surrounding structural materials, such as steel and concrete.

These materials become radioactive when “activated” by neutrons lost from the core.

A 2022 Stanford-led research study found that, because of their smaller size, small modular reactors will experience more neutron leakage than conventional reactors, resulting in a greater amount of radioactivity created by neutron activation.

The study noted that small modular reactors will generate at least nine times more neutron-activated steel than conventional power plants; and also that spent nuclear fuel from SMRs will be discharged in greater volumes per kW, and can be far more complex than nuclear waste from larger reactors.

I don’t think that we need such risky technology in Australia’s energy system.

Regards,
Kenneth HIGGS,
Raymond Terrace.