State to study benefits of placing modular nuclear reactor at Hanford

RICHLAND — The Hanford Nuclear Reservation could become a new hub for manufacturing or assembling small commercial modular nuclear reactors, according to the Tri-City Herald.

hanfordThe Tri-City Development Council is currently seeking bids study the potential benefits of building a small modular reactor system at Hanford.

The Herald reports the Department of Energy has announced $452 million in matching funds for two proposals to design and license modular nuclear reactors. The DOE grants have not yet designated a site which gives the development council time to make the case that Hanford is the best place for an operating small modular reactor.

A new modular reactor would cost between $500 million and $1 billion and would create several hundred construction jobs along with 100 permanent jobs, the Herald reported.

The DOE plans to have the first small reactors in operation within a decade.

Other DOE sites in Tennessee and South Carolina are also being considered for a modular reactor, according to the Herald.

Back in August, Governor Inslee wrote to Energy Secretary Ernest Moniz asking the department to consider placing a small modular reactor at Hanford to help with growing power requirements for environmental cleanup.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s


  • Joe Schmo

    The DOE never intends to "designate a site", it isn't that they haven't done it "yet". The siting is a business decision by a utility and the selection of a technology is between the utility and the reactor vendor. The first solicitation indicated the award would be given to teams that included a vendor and a utility partner – the teams themselves "designated a site". The second solicitation did not include the requirement for a utility partner and a site.