Add new comment

       In 2018, U.S. Secretary of Energy Rick Perry announced the nuclear versatile test reactor (VTR) research program as part of the Trump administration policy to help revitalize the U.S. nuclear industry.
       The purpose of the VTR is to provide U.S. companies with the ability to carry out tests of new nuclear technologies and fuels in the U.S. without having to go to nations such as China and Russia which are working on similar experimental reactors.
       This would be the first nuclear reactor built by the U.S. Department of Energy in decades. It is expected to be constructed and operating by 2025. The VTR is expected to be the first of fleet of fast reactors which would breed their own nuclear fuel during operation. The VTR research programs will be headed up by the Idaho National Laboratory with General Electric and Hitachi forming a partnership called GE Hitachi Nuclear to support the design and safety of the plant. The original cost of the VTR program was estimated to be about three and a half billion dollars.
       Now the DoE has released a new estimate of the ultimate cost of the VTR. The total cost is now estimated to be as much between four and six billion dollars. Between five hundred fifty million dollars and eight hundred fifty million dollars will have to be spent each year for the first seven years of the program. The entire budget of the DoE nuclear technology budget in the 2019 budget proposal is seven hundred forty million dollars. Of that amount, only sixty-five million dollars was slated to be spent on the VTR in that year.
       Ed Lyman is a senior scientist with the Union of Concerned Scientists. It was the UCS which filed the freedom of information request that revealed the new cost estimate for the VTR. He said “These values assume different cost escalation factors over a roughly seven-year period. I estimate the corresponding unescalated cost to be as much as $5 billion. The reactor isn’t really “over budget” yet, because there was no official cost estimate prior to this.”
        “The UCS has many concerns about this project. First, we don’t generally support the development of fast reactors because of their proliferation and nuclear terrorism risks, so we question the rationale for building this facility.  Second, we believe this reactor will not be a reliable test reactor because the design is experimental. Third, there are much cheaper options that the DOE has not adequately explored to provide a source of fast neutrons to reactor developers.”
        “Given the likelihood that any DOE first-of-a-kind nuclear construction project will experience major delays and cost overruns, the project may well end up costing $10 billion or more. That money could be far better spent on working to improve the safety and security of light-water reactors.”
        Lyman also said that there were cheaper ways to support the development of fast reactor designs that could be carried out at the Oak Ridge National Laboratory in Tennessee.