Environment & Energy

FBaggins

(28,369 posts)

4. Incorrect on many levels

Mon Jul 28, 2025, 06:02 PM

Jul 28

1 - The military programs you're thinking of are "microreactors"... not SMRs. SMRs have nothing to do with mobility in civilian use and are usually many times the size. They're only "small" when compared to their 1GW cousins.

2 - Project Pele has hardly been sidelined or abandoned. The first contract was awarded barely three years ago - construction was begun on the core in just the last few weeks and fuel has already been fabricated. The first unit should be in service in a couple of years.

3 - The military has lots of success with SMRs (including mobile ones)... The Navy operates about a hundred of them (all of which dramatically outperform their diesel alternatives).

Edit history

Please sign in to view edit histories.

Recommendations

0 members have recommended this reply (displayed in chronological order):

8 replies

= new reply since forum marked as read

Highlight:

UK, US should work together on small modular reactors, Starmer says [View all] OKIsItJustMe Jul 28 OP

SMR- Tried and Failed to Be Economical/Reasonably Priced, Truly Mobile, Safe and Secure MrWowWow Jul 28 #1

While I'm sure that's all very interesting, these SMR's are not intended for mobile use by the military OKIsItJustMe Jul 28 #2

SMRs - Mobile High Risk and Very Expensive Technology MrWowWow Jul 28 #3

Incorrect on many levels FBaggins Jul 28 #4

Any reference links to your dubious claims? MrWowWow Jul 28 #5

You mean like the support you provided for your claims? FBaggins Jul 28 #6

Start Here OKIsItJustMe Jul 28 #7

Oh, about those mobile reactors FBaggins mentioned the Navy using... OKIsItJustMe Jul 28 #8