An analysis by the Institute for Energy Economics and Financial Analysis (IEEFA) suggests that small modular reactors (SMRs) may not play a significant role in transitioning away from fossil fuels within the next decade or so. According to the study, SMRs are deemed too costly, slow to build, and risky compared to readily available renewable technologies.
The report highlights that investing in SMRs could divert resources from greener and more affordable renewable energy solutions that could accelerate the energy transition over the next decade. It concludes that the actual costs and construction times of operational and proposed SMRs often exceed initial projections.
Currently, only three SMRs are operational worldwide—two in Russia and one in China—while one is under construction in Argentina. The analysis reveals that the cost of Russian SMRs has surged by over 300% from the original estimate, and the Chinese reactor’s cost is three times higher than initially projected.
The study emphasizes that significant delays in SMR construction have become the norm, with projects taking up to 13 years instead of the planned three or four. As a result, the analysis urges regulators, utilities, investors, and government officials to acknowledge renewables as the immediate solution to the energy transition.
Should SMR projects proceed, the report suggests implementing measures to prevent increased costs and construction delays from burdening taxpayers. It also recommends comparing unpredictable SMR costs and deadlines with known figures for renewable energy construction and advocating for transparency in sharing this data with the public.
