By Nautilus
Recent public debate about nuclear propulsion for submarines
has been notable for the polarised viewpoints on the issue.
On the one hand, the strategic advantages of nuclear
propulsion for submarines have been acknowledged, while on the other, the lack
of experience within Australia of nuclear power for civil or naval use demands
a deliberate program to move up the learning curve. It will take at least a
decade to meet community expectations for internationally-recognised regulatory
standards for safety, security, efficiency and sustainability.
The first challenge is to contemplate nuclear energy as a
beneficial adjunct to renewable energy generation and advanced storage that is
the ultimate goal of an emissions-free electrical power generation network.
What are more likely to be accepted are small, road-portable
modular reactors based on proven pressurised water cooling, which is, coincidentally,
the norm for naval propulsion. The attractive feature of small, modular
reactors is their size and mass is small enough to be easily transportable so
they can be constructed and fuelled remotely from their operating sites and after
many years of effective operation, they can then be removed in the same way for
safe decommissioning in a similar remote site.
The connection between nuclear power stations and trained
naval operating personnel has been recognised in other countries such that the
education and training of operators and maintainers of naval nuclear reactors
are readily transitioned to civil reactor operations after their naval service.
This is even more the case when the civil reactors use the same
pressurised-water-reactor technology, as is the case with most small modular
reactor programs.
For Australia, there is a critical national need for energy
security and this is sufficient to justify contingency planning, such as the
installation of a single small modular reactor at Lucas Heights in southern
Sydney for familiarisation, research and development, and for the education and
training of civil and naval professional staff for operation and maintenance of
such reactors. This would help to build the foundation workforce for this
industry.
Only then could Australia realistically consider the next
generation of submarines beyond the current acquisition program for the future
submarines, which will itself have many challenges in energy generation,
conversion and storage. The design of the Shortfin Barracuda, now underway, will
address air-independent propulsion in one form or another and, also, the
related issue of energy density in battery technologies. This research and
development is already time-constrained. Random thoughts of nuclear propulsion
should never be permitted to raise the risk of a capability gap arising from
resulting delays occurring in the Future Submarine Program (FSP).
Beyond the urgency of the FSP, there is sound argument to plan
for the transition to the greater performance and availability of nuclear
propulsion, but this needs a research and development program in its own right and
a concerted program to build up the scientific, engineering and operational
workforce.
We can reasonably expect support from our allies and business
partners in the US, UK or France, but ultimately, Australia needs to set and
meet our own demanding standards for safety, security, efficiency and
sustainability. This will take significant time – even if we start immediately
– as the Submarine Institute of Australia believes we should.
