PMFA1

ut noted that these “had varying levels of readiness and proveness”. 194 As of 1987, 19 of these 23were reported as have documented “readiness and proveness” and the IAEA concluded that SMRs“could play an important role in the 90ies and beyond” and reported that several countries had“expressed their particular interest in these reactors”. 195 In 1991, the Nuclear DevelopmentCommittee of the Nuclear Energy Agency (NEA) claimed that “there is now considerable interestarising in small reactor types”. 196 The 1990s came, but the SMRs did not play the important rolethat was envisioned for them; with the exception of the VVER‐440, no reactor that was includedin the IAEA’s list of 23 was ever constructed.The most recent, and current, wave of interest in SMRs dates back to the early 2000s. Theproblem, as laid out in 2002 by three analysts from the IAEA’s Department of Nuclear Energy, wasthat “quite simply, over the last 15 years, nuclear power has been losing market share badly in agrowing world electricity capacity market”. 197 Their diagnosis: “The main reason for thisstalemate is that we, in all our doings, continue to rely on nuclear technology developed in the1950s, which had its roots in military applications which cannot exclude absolutely the possibilityof a severe accident and which has reached its limits from an economic point of view.” 198 As theway forward, these analysts suggested developing innovative new reactor designs, chiefly of theSMR variety.“The problem I have with SMRs is not the technology, it’s not thedeployment—it’s that there’s no customers.”Danny Roderick, President and CEO of WestinghouseFebruary 2014 199Thanks to its strong belief in SMRs, the DOE (U.S. Department of Energy) has been fundingresearch and development of such reactors since the 1990s. In 2000, the United States Congressprovided one million dollars to the DOE “to undertake a study to determine the feasibility of andissues associated with the deployment of… small reactors”. 200 The DOE’s Office of Nuclear Energypublished such a report in May 2001, which conducted an overview of nearly ten SMR designsand concluded:194 L.V. Konstantinov and J. Kupitz, “The Status of Development of Small and Medium Sized Reactors”, NuclearEngineering and Design, 1988.195 Ibidem, 9.196 NEA, “Small and Medium Reactors: Status and Prospects”, OECD, Paris, 1991.197 V. Mourogov, K. Fukuda, and V. Kagramanian, “The Need for Innovative Nuclear Reactor and Fuel CycleSystems: Strategy for Development and Future Prospects”, Progress in Nuclear Energy, 2002.198 Ibidem.199 Anya Litvak, “Westinghouse Backs off Small Nuclear Plants”, Pittsburgh Post‐Gazette, 1 February 2014, seehttp://www.post‐gazette.com/business/2014/02/02/Westinghouse‐backs‐off‐small‐nuclearplants/stories/201402020074,accessed 3 February 2014.200 DOE, “Report to Congress on Small Modular Nuclear Reactors”, Office of Nuclear Energy, May 2001; andSenate, “Congressional Record”, S7900, 19 July 2001.Mycle Schneider, Antony Froggatt et al. World Nuclear Industry Status Report 2015 69