Seatrade-Maritime: Growing US momentum for nuclear power in maritime

Published by Seatrade-Maritime

As fuel prices have risen to new high levels, attention in the States is being drawn to the potential for powering commercial vessels, and portside infrastructure, to nuclear with small modular reactors (SMRs).

Importantly, the implications for seaports and the carriers serving them will be an important discussion topic at the American Association of Port Authorities (AAPA) upcoming annual convention- to be held in New Orleans at end September.

In mid-May, the US Maritime Administration (MARAD) issued a request for information (RFI) on ”a single vessel or technology demonstration” soliciting comments on: ”proficient system architecture, including liability frameworks, insurance pathways, port acceptance, workforce development, and standards integration for vessel deployment.”

In recent months, at numerous in-person appearances, the Maritime Administrator, Captain Stephen Carmel, has been promoting MARAD’s efforts to facilitate a transition to nuclear power. Late last week, in a visit to the Port of Long Beach (POLB) alongside top port officials, Carmel visited Cape Island a US ready reserve roll-on roll-off vessel and met with representatives of Bluecore Energy- a specialist in floating SMRs that is based at POLB.

Building on the visit to the port, Bluecore has now announced that it is receiving $50 million in a funding round led by Silverton Partners- an early-stage investment packager. “We believe the combination of proven water-cooled reactor technology and a floating, modular platform has the potential to open an entirely new market for nuclear energy, and we’re excited to partner with the team as they bring that vision to life,” said Silverton when announcing the funding.

According to AAPA, its upcoming panel, which will include POLB’s Executive Director, Dr Noel Hacegaba, “will explore how ports can serve as launchpads for small modular reactors, securing a new reliable power source for ports while giving the US a competitive edge in shipbuilding and port development.” Its own comments submitted in response to the RFI highlighted the infrastructure aspects, AAPA wrote that: “1. MARAD and other relevant federal agencies should adopt a technology-inclusive approach as a guiding framework for SMR-related rulemaking and policymaking; and 2. The federal government should view land-side or floating SMRs as an equal priority to incentivizing SMRs for vessel propulsion.”

Commentors from the vessel side included US shipowner Liberty Global Logistics, a leading transporter of government impelled cargoes, which said: “Rapid implementation of SMR propulsion into commercial vessels could directly support the International Maritime Organization (IMO) goal to reduce carbon dioxide (CO2) intensity by 20 percent by 2030 and reach net-zero emissions by 2050.”

A Houston based entity within the EXMAR Group, EXMAR Offshore Energy, looking at floating power supply, rather than vessel propulsion, expressed the view that: “SMR designs are still in their infancy, but the technology is maturing with an expanding portfolio of applications.”

Referring to OPTI, its proprietary hull design widely used in the offshore sector, they added that: “OPTI-based SMR facilities would serve as offshore floating nuclear power plants. Offshore FNPP’s move reactors away from onshore or nearshore locations to areas miles off the coast, situated on floating platforms moored in deepwater. These are permanent facilities designed for long-term operation, capable of enduring harsh weather and severe hurricane conditions. Power can be delivered onshore via submarine cable.”

These issues are complicated and go way beyond the technological aspects. In MARAD’s RFI, the agency acknowledged that: “Implementation of these roles will occur in coordination with the Department of Energy; the Nuclear Regulatory Commission; the Department of Homeland Security, including the US Coast Guard; the Department of War; and other relevant agencies, as appropriate, consistent with applicable financial and budgetary frameworks and statutory authorities. Consistent with longstanding United States maritime practice, any future actions informed through this RFI would be pursued in alignment with applicable international standards, protocols, and development processes, including engagement through the International Maritime Organization and relevant International Convention for the Safety of Life at Sea (SOLAS) frameworks.”

These uncertainties were highlighted dramatically in an RFI comment from The International Group of P&I Clubs. In their submission, they highlighted that: “There is currently no operative international liability regime nor bilateral agreements that exist for nuclear propulsion reactors.”

The Group explained that it had now formed a Nuclear Committee to examine issues related to nuclear powering of vessels, and pointed out that: “We therefore respectfully suggest that if MARAD wishes to support the scalable deployment of small modular reactors in commercial shipping that the development of liability frameworks is central to its considerations.”