Nuclear-Powered Cargo Ships Promise Cleaner, Faster Transport

Article content

“Those alternative fuels will not be there when we need them,” he said. “Not at a cost that makes them a viable alternative.” 

Article content

He’s more confident that the nuclear industry will be able to deliver reactors to transform the global fleet. Esteve expects to see the first ships powered by atomic energy tested by the middle of the next decade, with wider usage by the late 2030s. 

Article content

Still, transitioning to a nuclear-powered fleet will require some significant changes to the regulatory landscape. For starters, commercial insurance companies won’t provide coverage for ship that runs on fission because the potential cost of a nuclear accident is simply too high. Without insurance, few civilian ports would allow a nuclear-powered cargo ship to dock. That’s not an issue for naval vessels that can dock in military harbors, but it makes the technology a non-starter for commercial shipping.

Article content

There are also significant safety and security concerns, according to George Moore, a scientist-in-residence at the Middlebury Institute of International Studies in Monterey, California. While the fuel expected to be used for shipping doesn’t have the high concentration of uranium needed for a weapon, it’s still radioactive and commercial ships would be vulnerable to piracy or sabotage. That raises the specter of an intentional nuclear incident. Commercial ships are also typically less durable than naval vessels, increasing the risk of an accidental radiation leak due to a collision. 

Article content

Article content

While regulatory agencies could develop policies to address some of those concerns, Moore said the industry seems more focused on developing the technology and the potential market. 

Article content

“The industry hasn’t looked at all these issues,” which makes developing ships a risky idea, said Moore.

Article content

At a meeting this month, the International Maritime Organization will be discussing potential changes to the safety code for nuclear merchant ships. The group is also likely to vote in October on whether to impose financial penalties on some polluting vessels. 

Article content

New nuclear technologies may reduce some of the risk, Moore said. Navy ships typically used pressurized water reactors, which circulate hot water under high pressure. If there were an accident, that pressure means radioactive material could be dispersed over a significant distance, enough to imperil much of a port and any ships in the area. 

Article content

But TerraPower and other companies are developing a new generation of reactors to operate at normal pressure. That would help reduce the danger area, known as the emergency planning zone, in the case of an accident. The goal, said Boe, is an emergency planning zone that’s no bigger than the ship.

Article content

Article content

If these issues can be addressed, a nuclear-powered ship would offer several advantages over vessels that burn fuel, even of the carbon-free variety. Most ships today sail well below their maximum speed, often as much as 30% to 40% slower than their engines are rated, which lowers emissions and reduces operating expenses by burning less fuel, said Boe. 

Article content

But nuclear ships would have no emissions, and they wouldn’t need to pay for fuel, allowing them to travel at top speed. This would mean faster deliveries and higher revenue for shipping companies. Plus, big ships need big fuel tanks, which can take up precious space. That wouldn’t be necessary on a ship with a reactor, and Boe estimates there would be about 10% more space for cargo. 

Article content

Nuclear-powered ships could also reduce downtime by cutting out the need to refuel. The typical container ship spends a total of about a month of every year just refueling, according to Sangmin Park, a vice president with HD Korea Shipbuilding and Offshore Engineering, who’s leading the company’s effort to develop a nuclear ship. The reactors under consideration for cargo ships may have enough nuclear fuel to last for decades, which is essentially the entire expected lifecycle of the vessel. 

Article content

Shipowners will also save money by not buying fuel, though the payoff will take some time because the initial costs will be higher. Nuclear systems are pricey, and Park estimates that a new ship would cost double or perhaps even triple the price of a standard cargo ship. But over an expected 25-year life of a vessel, the total cost would be less than half, he estimates.

Article content

“The nuclear-powered ship is good for general emissions, but it’s also good for the economy in the long term,” Park said. 

Article content

—With assistance from Heesu Lee and Shoko Oda.

Article content