Fact-checked by Grok 2 weeks ago

Economic Simplified Boiling Water Reactor

The Economic Simplified Boiling Water Reactor (ESBWR) is a Generation III+ light-water design developed by GE- Nuclear Energy (now GE Vernova Hitachi Nuclear Energy), characterized by its use of natural circulation for core cooling, passive safety systems that operate without external power or operator intervention for 72 hours following an accident, and a simplified single-cycle boiling water configuration that generates steam directly within the for turbine use. Evolving from the earlier Simplified Boiling Water Reactor (SBWR) concept of the 1990s, the ESBWR incorporates advanced features from the (ABWR) while emphasizing economic viability through design simplifications, such as the elimination of recirculation pumps, a 25% reduction in pumps and mechanical drives compared to active-safety plants, and modular construction to lower operational costs by approximately 20% and capital costs relative to predecessors like the ABWR. With a thermal power output of 4,500 megawatts (MWt) and a net electrical output of approximately 1,535 megawatts electric (MWe)—varying by site and turbine configuration—the reactor employs a gravity-driven cooling system (GDCS), passive cooling system (PCCS), and isolation condensers to ensure core cooling, integrity, and spent fuel pool management during emergencies, all integrated into a low-leakage, steel-lined vessel designed to withstand severe events like impacts and earthquakes. The ESBWR received design certification from the U.S. (NRC) on October 6, 2014, following an application submitted in 2005 and detailed review under 10 CFR Part 52, Appendix E, with the certification valid for 40 years following a 2025 NRC revision extending the duration of design certifications and incorporating provisions for post-Fukushima enhancements like diverse mitigation strategies and instrumentation. Although certified, no ESBWR units have been constructed as of November 2025, positioning it as a foundational design influencing smaller successors like the , with its passive safety and economic focus aimed at supporting global carbon-free energy goals through reliable, low-maintenance operation.

Overview and Specifications

Design Concept

The Economic Simplified Boiling Water Reactor (ESBWR) is a Generation III+ (BWR) design developed by , operating as a single-cycle, direct-cycle BWR where generated in the reactor core directly drives the without intermediate heat exchangers. It evolved from predecessor designs including the Simplified Boiling Water Reactor (SBWR) and the (ABWR), integrating passive safety elements from the SBWR with the operational maturity of the ABWR to achieve greater simplicity and reliability. Central to the ESBWR's core design principles is the reliance on natural circulation for coolant flow, which eliminates the need for recirculation pumps and their associated systems. This is facilitated by a taller reactor pressure vessel, measuring approximately 28 meters in height with an inside diameter of 7.1 meters, paired with a shorter core height to generate sufficient driving head for passive upward flow through the core and downward return via gravity-driven paths. These geometric optimizations enhance heat removal during normal operation and transients, supporting stable power output without active mechanical intervention. The ESBWR incorporates economic simplifications to reduce construction and operational burdens, including the elimination of 11 major systems from prior BWR designs and a 25% reduction in pumps, valves, and motors, which minimizes maintenance requirements and potential failure points. Modular construction methods further streamline assembly, enabling factory of components and shorter on-site build times while lowering overall compared to earlier BWR generations. As a Generation III+ reactor, the ESBWR builds on evolutionary enhancements to BWR technology, prioritizing through passive mechanisms, improved , and standardized components to deliver higher reliability and cost-effectiveness for utility-scale deployment.

Key Parameters

The Economic Simplified Boiling Water Reactor (ESBWR) is designed with specific technical parameters that enable its simplified operation and passive features, including reliance on circulation for flow. These parameters define its power generation capacity, core configuration, physical structure, and operational conditions, supporting a 60-year life. Key specifications are summarized in the following table:
ParameterValueDescription/Source
4,500 MWthRated thermal output.
Electrical output (gross)1,594 Turbine-generator output at rated conditions.
Electrical output (net)1,535 After house loads and auxiliaries.
Thermal-to-electric efficiencyApproximately 34%Net electrical efficiency based on rated thermal .
Number of fuel assemblies1,132Standard GE14 configuration in the .
typeUranium dioxide (UO₂)With gadolinium oxide ((U, Gd)O₂) as burnable absorber in select assemblies.
Fuel enrichmentUp to 5 wt% U-235Average reload enrichment around 4.2 wt%; initial 1.7–3.2 wt%.
Refueling cycle24 monthsStandard cycle length for equilibrium .
Reactor vessel diameter7.1 mInside diameter for the .
volumeDrywell free volume: 7,206 m³; Wetwell free volume: 5,467 m³ (total free volume approximately 12,700 m³)Optimized free volumes for passive heat removal and flooding.
Operating 7.2 operating (1,045 psia).
temperature286°CSaturated steam at outlet.
Natural circulation flow rate34.5 million kg/h ( ) during normal operation, driven by in the chimney section.
These parameters reflect the ESBWR's emphasis on natural circulation, as briefly referenced in its design concept, to achieve efficient performance without recirculation pumps.

Development History

Origins and Evolution

The Economic Simplified Boiling Water Reactor (ESBWR) traces its roots to General Electric's () Simplified Boiling Water Reactor (SBWR) program, initiated in the early as a response to the 1979 , with support from the U.S. Department of Energy and the . The SBWR introduced innovative passive safety features, such as gravity-driven cooling and isolation condensers that relied on natural circulation rather than active pumps, aiming for a rated power of 670 MWe initially. However, despite submitting a design certification application to the U.S. (NRC) in August 1992, GE withdrew the SBWR in March 1996 due to economic viability concerns amid shifting market conditions, and the NRC closed the review in early 1997 without commercialization. Building on the (ABWR), which received NRC design certification in May 1997 and entered operation in in 1996–1997, the ESBWR evolved in the late 1990s by integrating SBWR's passive safety elements into an ABWR-sized vessel (4,500 MWt) while pursuing further simplifications to address post-2000 economic pressures, including rising construction costs for nuclear plants. The ESBWR project was initiated by (GE) in the late 1990s. (GEH), formed in 2007 as a between GE and (with later involvement from in related ventures), advanced the design to enhance economic competitiveness, uprating the design from the SBWR's 670 MWe to approximately 1,520 MWe and emphasizing reduced capital and operational expenses through design streamlining. Pre-application interactions with the NRC began in April 2002, providing early feedback on key aspects like passive systems before the full design certification application in 2005. The ESBWR's development was also shaped by heightened safety requirements following the September 11, 2001, terrorist attacks, which prompted enhanced focus on resilient, passive systems capable of withstanding external threats without reliance on off-site power or operator action. Key design shifts included the complete elimination of active components such as recirculation pumps, enabling natural circulation and achieving at least 72 hours of passive operation for core cooling and heat removal via systems like the Gravity-Driven Cooling System and Passive Containment Cooling System. These simplifications reduced plant complexity by approximately 20% compared to earlier designs, lowering construction costs while aligning with Generation III+ standards for improved safety margins.

Major Milestones

In August 2005, (GEH) submitted a formal application to the U.S. (NRC) for certification of the ESBWR standard plant design. Concurrent with the early stages of the regulatory review, integral system tests were conducted at Purdue University's Multi-Dimensional Integral Test Assembly () facility from 2005 to 2008 to validate the ESBWR's natural circulation capabilities under various scenarios. Between 2007 and 2010, the NRC conducted reviews, issuing numerous requests for additional information (RAIs) to GEH, which responded with supplemental data and design clarifications to address technical and aspects of the ESBWR. These exchanges facilitated ongoing refinement of the design documentation. On March 9, 2011, the NRC issued its Final Safety Evaluation Report (FSER) for the ESBWR, documenting the staff's technical review and concluding that the design met regulatory requirements for , reliability, and performance. The process culminated on September 16, 2014, when the NRC approved the ESBWR design rule, making it effective for applications submitted within 15 years. In July 2025, the NRC issued a final rule extending the duration of design certifications to 40 years, effective September 15, 2025, thereby extending the ESBWR validity to October 2054. Internationally, GEH initiated engagement with regulators through submission of the ESBWR design for Generic Design Assessment (GDA) in 2007, with the assessment suspended in September 2008 at GEH's request.

Reactor Design

Core and Fuel

The ESBWR core features a compact cylindrical geometry measuring 3.05 meters in height and approximately 4.8 meters in diameter, optimized for natural circulation flow and housing approximately 1,132 fuel bundles arranged in an N-lattice configuration. This design incorporates 10 radial fuel zones to enable precise power shaping across the core, minimizing peaking factors and enhancing operational efficiency by distributing fissile material and burnable poisons strategically. Fuel assemblies in the ESBWR adopt a proven 10x10 rod array based on the GE14E , with each containing 78 full-length fuel rods, 14 partial-length rods, and two large water rods to support flow and . The fuel rods utilize (UO₂) pellets enriched up to 5 wt% U-235, encased in Zircaloy-2 cladding for resistance and structural integrity under boiling conditions. Burnable absorbers, primarily gadolinia (Gd₂O₃) integrated into selected fuel rods, provide initial reactivity hold-down and flatten the power profile as they deplete over the cycle, reducing the need for excessive soluble . Neutronics performance in the ESBWR emphasizes high fuel utilization, achieving an average discharge burnup of 55 GWd/t through optimized lattice physics and extended cycle lengths. Spectral shift control leverages changes in coolant water density due to boiling and natural circulation, softening the neutron spectrum as the cycle progresses to improve fuel economy and reactivity management without active mechanical adjustments. This approach, combined with axial power distribution control via differential rod insertion, maintains criticality and supports stable operation across a range of exposures up to 60 GWd/t in select rods. Reactivity control systems include fine motion control rod drives (FMCRDs), which use electro-mechanical actuators for precise positioning in 36.5 mm increments and scram insertion within 2.23 seconds for full travel. These 269 cruciform control rods, containing boron carbide absorbers, provide primary shutdown capability. A redundant standby liquid control system (SLCS) injects sodium pentaborate solution into the core for backup shutdown, ensuring subcriticality even under anticipated transient without scram (ATWS) conditions. Refueling operations occur on a 24-month cycle, involving complete core unloading and reloading via an inclined fuel transfer system to minimize outage duration and occupational . The core design supports a total operational capacity of 800 effective full power days (EFPD) before requiring major component replacement, aligning with the plant's 60-year through modular fuel management and minimal structural wear. The core integrates seamlessly with natural circulation cooling to sustain flow without pumps during normal and refueling modes.

Cooling and Circulation

The Economic Simplified Boiling Water Reactor (ESBWR) employs a direct-cycle operation in which water boils directly in the reactor core, producing that flows to the turbines without intermediate heat exchangers. This design simplifies the primary coolant loop by eliminating the need for a separate , allowing the steam generated at approximately 7 pressure to drive the directly. The core power input supports this boiling process, contributing to the overall circulation dynamics. Natural circulation in the ESBWR is driven by density differences arising from the two-phase flow in the core, where the lighter steam-water mixture rises and cooler water descends in the downcomer annulus. This mechanism is enhanced by the chimney effect in the tall , featuring a 6.61 m that provides additional driving head through . The absence of recirculation pumps relies entirely on these passive forces, enabling stable operation at full power. During full power operation, flow rate reaches approximately 9,000 / (ranging from 8,763 to 10,376 /), facilitated by the low-pressure-drop design of and internals. For shutdown, main isolation valves automatically close to isolate the primary loop and prevent coolant loss, ensuring controlled cessation of flow. generated in passes through cyclone separators and dryers located within the to remove moisture before entering the steam lines. These cyclone separators achieve 99.9% moisture removal efficiency, delivering high-quality (less than 0.1% moisture) to protect components from . The balance of plant integrates with the primary loop via a four-loop system connected by four main lines, enabling efficient conversion. Feedwater is returned through a regenerative with six stages—three low-pressure and three high-pressure heaters—raising its temperature to optimize cycle efficiency before re-entering the vessel.

Containment and Balance of Plant

The Economic Simplified Boiling Water Reactor (ESBWR) employs a containment variant, featuring a steel-lined structure designed for pressure suppression. This cylindrical vessel integrates the drywell and wetwell compartments to confine radioactive materials during normal operation and transients, with a low-leakage rate of 0.35% of free volume per day. The suppression pool, raised within the and holding approximately 4,383 m³ of , serves as a primary for condensing released from relief valves during loss-of-coolant accidents or other transients. This large volume ensures submergence of the 12 vertical vents (each 1.2 m in diameter) and supports product scrubbing, pressure suppression, and long-term cooling by providing makeup for emergency systems. Balance-of-plant systems in the ESBWR emphasize simplification, including electrical distribution with two redundant safety trains utilizing and fiber optics to reduce cabling and components compared to earlier designs. Hydrogen management relies on passive autocatalytic recombiners (PARs) distributed within the to mitigate risks during severe accidents, while filtered ventilation systems, such as the Control Room Habitability Area HVAC with and carbon filters, provide radiological protection for operators. Auxiliary systems support operational efficiency and waste handling, with the —capable of storing 10 years of discharged plus a full —located in the fuel building adjacent to the for streamlined access and cooling via the Fuel and Auxiliary Pools Cooling System. Radwaste processing occurs in the radwaste building using skid-mounted, modular equipment to recycle liquid wastes and manage solid volumes below 85 m³/year dewatered, minimizing environmental impact. The control room features a , task-based with redundant displays and emergency filtered air units sustaining habitability for 21 personnel. Modularization enhances constructibility, with factory-fabricated modules for internals, including reinforcing bar assemblies, steel liners, and equipment supports like isolation condenser units, reducing on-site assembly time and labor costs.

Safety Features

Passive Safety Systems

The passive safety systems of the Economic Simplified Boiling Water Reactor (ESBWR) rely on , natural circulation, and stored water inventories to provide cooling, pressure relief, and heat removal during design-basis accidents, without requiring (AC) power, pumps, or operator actions for at least 72 hours. These systems integrate seamlessly to maintain reactor water levels above the , prevent overpressurization, and reject , drawing on the reactor's natural circulation baseline for efficient operation. The Isolation Condenser System (ICS) comprises four units, each featuring heat exchangers submerged in the suppression pool. Upon actuation—triggered by signals such as low reactor water level (Level 2) or high drywell pressure—this closed-loop system removes through natural circulation: steam from the (RPV) rises to the heat exchangers, condenses using pool water as the , and returns as subcooled liquid to the RPV via gravity-driven flow in the downcomers. The ICS operates passively, with isolation valves ensuring integrity, and can sustain cooling for 72 hours without by leveraging the pool's thermal capacity. The Gravity Driven Cooling System (GDCS) consists of three pools with a total volume of approximately 2,400 m³, elevated above the RPV to enable gravity-fed injection. Activated by a low-pressure signal following RPV depressurization, the GDCS floods the core and downcomers with demineralized , refilling the RPV to maintain coverage over the active fuel region and removing through long-term flooding and boiling. Each pool drains independently through injection lines, providing redundant low-pressure cooling paths that interface with the suppression pool for extended inventory if needed, all without pumps or for the full 72-hour period. The Passive Cooling System (PCCS) includes six condensers that reject heat from the containment to both the atmosphere and the suppression pool, keeping containment temperatures below 100°C even under prolonged conditions. and noncondensable gases from the drywell enter the condensers—located in upper pools—where natural circulation drives on the tube surfaces; the drains back to the GDCS pools for reuse in core cooling, while vent lines direct noncondensables to the suppression pool to manage pressure and . This gravity-driven process operates indefinitely without , supporting 72-hour by limiting containment pressure rise to below design limits. The facilitates GDCS operation by rapidly relieving RPV pressure through a series of safety relief valves (SRVs) and dedicated depressurization valves (DPVs) that discharge to the suppression pool. Actuated automatically on persistent low water level (Level 1) or high drywell pressure signals—with staged opening to control blowdown rates—the ADS depressurizes the RPV within minutes, enabling the low-pressure GDCS injection while minimizing loss. It requires no for valve operation, integrating with the (which isolates during ADS activation) to ensure a smooth transition to gravity-driven core flooding throughout the 72-hour response. Collectively, these systems form a robust, redundant where the provides initial high-pressure heat removal, the enables transition to GDCS flooding, and the PCCS handles heat rejection—all gravity-fed and powered solely by natural forces, eliminating reliance on active components or external power for 72 hours of autonomous accident mitigation.

Safety Performance Analysis

The Economic Simplified Boiling Water Reactor (ESBWR) demonstrates exceptionally low risk profiles in probabilistic risk assessments, with a core damage frequency (CDF) of approximately $1.7 \times 10^{-8} per reactor-year, representing a reduction of over 50 times compared to earlier designs like the BWR/6. This metric encompasses internal and external events at full power and during shutdown, achieved through passive systems that minimize reliance on active components and operator actions. The large release frequency (LRF), which quantifies events leading to significant offsite radioactive releases, is calculated at $9.62 \times 10^{-10} per year for at-power internal events, well below regulatory goals of $10^{-6} per year and ensuring integrity with a conditional probability under 0.1. These outcomes reflect the design's emphasis on margins, where severe accident sequences are mitigated to prevent core damage in nearly all scenarios. Beyond-design-basis accident handling in the ESBWR relies on extended coping capabilities provided by passive systems, enabling 72 hours of operation without power or operator intervention, a feature aligned with post-Fukushima enhancements for resilience against prolonged station blackouts and loss of ultimate heat sinks. Flexible coping strategies, such as diverse water addition from the fire protection system and passive autocatalytic recombiners for hydrogen control, further reduce risks from multi-unit or external hazards, maintaining core coverage and pressure below design limits (310 kPa gauge) even in extended loss-of-coolant scenarios. In (LOCA) analyses, the gravity-driven cooling system (GDCS) and passive containment cooling system (PCCS) collectively limit the peak cladding temperature to below 1,200°C by ensuring rapid core flooding to at least 1 meter above the active and sustained removal through natural circulation. This performance prevents cladding oxidation beyond 17% equivalent cladding reacted and maintains generation under 0.01 times the inventory, as validated against regulatory criteria in 10 CFR 50.46. For station blackout (SBO) events, the ESBWR achieves full passive removal without diesel generators, utilizing the and PCCS to condense steam and transfer heat to the suppression pool, sustaining core cooling for at least 72 hours on battery power alone. This eliminates the need for immediate AC restoration, with offsite doses remaining below 15 rem total effective dose equivalent at the exclusion area boundary. Safety performance evaluations are validated through RELAP5 thermal-hydraulic code simulations, which model transient behaviors like natural circulation and in and , showing agreement with experimental data within 10-15% for key parameters such as and void fraction. tests at facilities like the GIST and PANDA confirm these results, demonstrating GDCS injection rates of 500 m³/h per loop and PCCS heat removal up to 7.8 MWt per loop under simulated LOCA and SBO conditions.

Regulatory Process

NRC Design Certification

The U.S. (NRC) completed its formal design certification review of the Economic Simplified Boiling Water Reactor (ESBWR) with the issuance of a final rule on October 15, 2014, codified as Appendix E to 10 CFR Part 52. This certification approves the standard plant design developed by GE-Hitachi Nuclear Energy for referencing in future combined license applications, providing a pre-approved generic framework that streamlines subsequent licensing. The certification remains valid for 40 years from the effective date of November 14, 2014, until November 14, 2054. The certification process involved an extensive technical review of the ESBWR Design Control Document (DCD), including Revisions 9 and 10, with the NRC staff issuing numerous requests for additional information () to address key technical areas such as thermal-hydraulics, severe accident mitigation, and human factors engineering. Over the course of the review, which spanned nearly a decade following the 2005 application, the staff conducted detailed audits, inspections, and analyses to resolve open items, particularly focusing on components like the steam dryer and systems. The Final (FSER), published as NUREG-1966 in April 2014 with Supplement 1 in September 2014, concluded that the design meets the General Design Criteria (GDC) outlined in Appendix A to 10 CFR Part 50, including requirements for protection against natural phenomena, coolant pressure boundary integrity, and engineered features. This compliance was further supported by probabilistic risk assessments demonstrating a core damage frequency well below regulatory targets, ensuring adequate protection of public health and . The Advisory Committee on Reactor Safeguards (ACRS) played a key role in the process, conducting subcommittee and full committee reviews in March and April 2014, respectively, and issuing a letter on April 17, 2014, affirming the design's adequacy for . The review also incorporated considerations for international alignment, drawing on harmonized standards from the (IAEA) to ensure global consistency in safety evaluations where relevant. Following , the NRC has approved minor post-certification amendments through the process under 10 CFR 52.63, including updates in 2015 and 2017 to bolster seismic resilience in select design elements, such as enhanced analysis for risk-significant structures. These amendments maintain the certified design's integrity while accommodating evolving regulatory insights.

Licensing Applications

The combined construction and operating license (COL) process, governed by 10 CFR Part 52, allows applicants to seek approval for both construction and operation of a nuclear power plant in a single application, incorporating the NRC's certified reactor design while addressing site-specific environmental impacts, safety analyses, and operational programs. This framework streamlines licensing by referencing the generic design certification for the ESBWR, supplemented by applicant-specific reviews to ensure compliance with regulatory standards. Entergy Operations, Inc. submitted a COL application in September 2008 for Unit 3 in , referencing the ESBWR design for an approximately 1,520 MWe unit, but withdrew the application on September 22, 2015, citing economic factors and changing market conditions. Similarly, filed a COL application in 2008 for River Bend Station Unit 3 in , also referencing the ESBWR, which was docketed by the NRC but requested suspension on January 9, 2009, and withdrew the application on December 4, 2015 (effective June 14, 2016), due to economic challenges and shifting priorities. These early applications highlighted the ESBWR's role in initial U.S. new-build proposals, though none progressed to . Dominion Energy received a COL on June 2, 2017, for North Anna Power Station Unit 3 in , authorizing construction and operation of a single approximately 1,520 MWe ESBWR unit adjacent to the existing plant. The license, valid for 40 years until June 2, 2057 with potential for renewal for an additional 20 years, permits limited pre-construction activities such as site preparation but no full-scale building has begun as of November 2025, reflecting broader market uncertainties. The ESBWR COL reviews encountered significant delays from numerous requests for additional information (RAIs) issued by the NRC, compounded by post-Fukushima Daiichi requirements in 2011 that mandated enhanced assessments of severe mitigation and external hazards, extending timelines beyond initial projections. For instance, applications like North Anna's faced iterative RAI responses that prolonged the safety evaluation process.

Deployment Status

Current Projects

As of November 2025, no Economic Simplified Boiling Water Reactor (ESBWR) units are under construction worldwide. The design, certified by the U.S. (NRC) in 2014, has not progressed to active deployment despite earlier interest. The Combined License (COL) for North Anna Unit 3 in , issued by the NRC in 2017, remains valid but inactive, with no construction initiated by due to economic and market challenges. Similarly, the COL for Fermi Unit 3 in , issued in 2015, remains valid but inactive by . Earlier U.S. projects have been withdrawn or abandoned, such as initial proposals in the late 2000s and early . International interest in the mid-2010s has also not progressed to firm projects, with countries exploring alternative technologies and facing regulatory hurdles. GE Hitachi Nuclear Energy (GEH) has advanced successor developments based on the ESBWR, notably the (SMR), a 300 MWe design that incorporates the ESBWR's passive safety features such as natural circulation and isolation condenser systems. The received a construction license from the Canadian Nuclear Safety Commission in April 2025 for deployment at Ontario Power Generation's site, with the first unit planned for completion by the end of 2029. In the U.S., the design is under NRC pre-application review, with a construction permit application docketed for the Authority's site in July 2025. Market factors continue to hinder large-reactor projects like the ESBWR, including elevated interest rates that increase financing costs and persistent disruptions affecting long-lead components and skilled labor availability. Globally, the ESBWR holds no firm orders, though its passive safety innovations are referenced in U.S. Department of Energy () advanced reactor programs as a foundational light-water technology for future demonstrations.

Economic and Future Prospects

The ESBWR design incorporates significant economic simplifications to reduce and operational costs compared to earlier boiling water reactors like the ABWR. By relying on natural circulation for core cooling, it eliminates recirculation pumps, associated large-bore piping below the top of active fuel, and related components, resulting in approximately 25% fewer pumps, valves, and motors than active safety plants such as the ABWR. These reductions, along with a compact volume that is 18% smaller than the ABWR's, contribute to lower material requirements and simplified , targeting an overnight of around $2,000 per kWe based on 2010 estimates adjusted for design efficiencies and . Operational savings stem from the passive safety systems, which minimize active components requiring frequent maintenance and surveillance. The design enables shorter refueling outages, with goals of 10 days for refueling alone and up to 14-20 days including maintenance, facilitated by robotic fuel handling and automation that reduces labor and worker exposure. Additionally, features like 100% liquid waste recycling and one-person control room operations further lower ongoing expenses, supporting a projected plant availability of 92-95%. Despite these advantages, first-of-a-kind (FOAK) engineering and construction costs for an ESBWR unit are estimated at $10-15 billion, reflecting the complexities of scaling up from prototypes amid the nuclear market slowdown driven by low and the 2011 accident. This period saw delayed projects and heightened financing risks, limiting immediate deployment. Looking ahead, the ESBWR holds potential for fleet deployment and , where growing energy demands could leverage its certified design for baseload power integrated with variable renewables like and to ensure stability. Its passive features have influenced smaller evolutions, such as GE Hitachi's , which adapts ESBWR principles for modular construction and faster rollout in regions seeking scalable nuclear options. Key barriers include competition from inexpensive and rapidly scaling renewables, which have eroded nuclear's market share, though opportunities arise from post-2014 NRC design certification providing regulatory stability for new applications. U.S. Department of Energy funding programs for advanced reactor demonstrations, including small modular designs derived from ESBWR technology, could accelerate commercialization by offsetting FOAK risks and supporting pilot projects.

References

  1. [1]
    Economic Simplified Boiling-Water Reactor (ESBWR)
    The ESBWR is a 4,500 MWt single-cycle boiling-water reactor with natural circulation, passive safety features, and a low-leakage containment vessel.Project Overview · Applicant's Design Control...
  2. [2]
    Economic Simplified Boiling-Water Reactor Design Certification
    Oct 15, 2014 · The ESBWR design includes an offsite power system, nonsafety-related standby diesel generators, and ADGs, any of which can mitigate the ...
  3. [3]
    Large Boiling Water Reactors | GE Vernova Hitachi Nuclear Energy
    GVH's Generation III+ reactor, the Economic Simplified Boiling Water Reactor (ESBWR) was certified by the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission in 2014. GVH's ...
  4. [4]
    The Evolution of the ESBWR - POWER Magazine
    Nov 1, 2010 · The ESBWR program started in the early 1990s with GE's Simplified Boiling Water Reactor (SBWR) design rated at 670 MWe, augmented with features ...<|control11|><|separator|>
  5. [5]
    Another Nuclear Design Approved by the NRC
    "The SBWR design eventually evolved into the ESBWR, which is even more ... GE-Hitachi's ESBWR displays a number of highly advanced features, including ...
  6. [6]
    Regulator Approves GE-Hitachi ESBWR Design For US - NucNet
    Jan 27, 2014 · These passive features include: natural circulation via a taller reactor vessel, a shorter core and improved water flow through the vessel ...
  7. [7]
    [PDF] GE-Hitachi ESBWR Design Control Document Tier 2, Rev. 10
    Apr 10, 2014 · Because the ESBWR design relies on natural circulation for core flow circulation, the ... natural circulation Dodewaard reactor. Dodewaard.
  8. [8]
    NRC Certifies GE Hitachi ESBWR Design - POWER Magazine
    Sep 16, 2014 · The design is substantially simpler than earlier BWR models, requiring 25% fewer pumps, valves, and motors. The core is also shorter than ...Missing: reduced | Show results with:reduced
  9. [9]
    [PDF] The ESBWR Plant General Description - GE Vernova
    Jan 22, 2007 · ESBWR. Recirculation. Two external loop Recirc Vessel-mounted reactor Natural circulation. System system with jet pumps internal pumps inside ...
  10. [10]
  11. [11]
    [PDF] ESBWR - Office for Nuclear Regulation
    GEH describes the ESBWR as a boiling water reactor in which the steam is generated within the reactor pressure vessel (RPV) and transferred directly to the.
  12. [12]
    [PDF] Pre-application review of ESBWR - Nuclear Regulatory Commission
    Apr 18, 2002 · This letter is written to request a pre-application review of the General Electric Company reactor design. ESBWR.Missing: 2004 Hitachi
  13. [13]
    [PDF] Secretary of Energy
    Jan 26, 2012 · The studies initiated by the NRC following 9/11 also addressed a number of issues directly related to the safety of pool storage, including ...
  14. [14]
    Applicability of small-scale integral test data to the 4500MWt ...
    This paper discusses the scaling methodology used by GE Hitachi Nuclear Energy (GEH) to show that the data obtained from the small-scale integral test ...
  15. [15]
    [PDF] GE Hitachi Nuclear Energy, Request for Additional Information ...
    Oct 1, 2008 · SUBJECT: REQUEST FOR ADDITIONAL INFORMATION LETTER NO. 260 RELATED TO. ESBWR DESIGN CERTIFICATION APPLICATION. Dear Mr. Brown: By letter dated ...
  16. [16]
    [PDF] Final Safety Evaluation Report For The Economic Simplified Boiling ...
    Mar 9, 2011 · Final Safety Evaluation Report: GEH's. ESBWR Design Certification cc w/o encls: See next page. Page 2. March 9, 2011. Mr. Jerald G. Head, Senior ...
  17. [17]
    [PDF] NRC Certifies GE-Hitachi New Reactor Design.
    Sep 16, 2014 · GE-Hitachi Nuclear Energy submitted its application for ESBWR certification on Aug. 24,. 2005. The ESBWR is a 1,594 megawatt electric, natural ...Missing: timeline | Show results with:timeline
  18. [18]
    GE-Hitachi Nuclear Energy Submits ESBWR to U.K. Regulators for ...
    Jun 21, 2007 · WILMINGTON, N.C.--(BUSINESS WIRE)--GE-Hitachi Nuclear Energy (GEH) today submitted its ESBWR reactor design to government regulators in London ...Missing: 2013 paused
  19. [19]
    [PDF] TRACG Application for ESBWR, NEDO-33083
    The boiling length correlation is known to be accurate over a large range of lengths and covers the 10 ft active core height of the. ESBWR. ... 4.8m. 4.8m. 4.
  20. [20]
    [PDF] ESBWR Core & Fuel
    Sep 29, 2005 · ESBWR Core and Fuel. Thermal Mechanical - Channel. Design Criteria. • ... ESBWR due to identical geometry and reduced ESBWR fuel assembly weight.
  21. [21]
    [PDF] ESBWR Design Control Document - Tier 2 Chapter 4 Reactor
    Because of the channeled configuration of ESBWR fuel assemblies, there is no bundle-to- bundle cross flow inside the core, and the only issue of hydraulic ...<|control11|><|separator|>
  22. [22]
    Advanced Nuclear Power Reactors
    Apr 1, 2021 · Today's PRISM is a GE Hitachi design for compact modular pool-type reactors with passive cooling for decay heat removal. After 30 years of ...
  23. [23]
    [PDF] ESBWR Design Control Document - Nuclear Regulatory Commission
    (i) Standby Liquid Control (SLC) system Flow/Pressure —SLC flow indication / measurement is not provided because of the passive nature of the system and the ...
  24. [24]
    [PDF] NEDC-33084, ESBWR Design Description.
    ... ABWR vessel diameter and leaving approximately the same size annulus as the earlier SBWR. The ESBWR core was then increased in size by adding fuel bundles ...
  25. [25]
    [PDF] Natural Circulation in ESBWR Fact Sheet.
    Natural circulation in the ESBWR also eliminates the risk of flow disturbances resulting from recirculation pump anomalies. Natural circulation is consistent ...
  26. [26]
    [PDF] SEVERE ACCIDENT MITIGATION FEATURES OF THE ECONOMIC ...
    The. ESBWR has a low-leakage containment vessel, which comprises the drywell and wetwell. The containment boundary is shown in dark grey in Figure 1, and ...<|control11|><|separator|>
  27. [27]
  28. [28]
  29. [29]
    [PDF] GE-Hitachi ESBWR Design Control Document Tier 2, Rev. 10
    Apr 10, 2014 · Power-Operated Gate Valves. The number of safety-related valves in the ESBWR is much smaller than previous designs. The number safety-related.
  30. [30]
    [PDF] Chapter 6 - Engineered Safety Features.
    ... GDCS pools and piping, passive containment cooling system (PCCS piping, ICS piping, safety/relief valves (SRVs) and piping, depressurization valves (DPVs) ...
  31. [31]
    [PDF] GEA19489E GVH ESBWR Passive Safety factsheet - GE Vernova
    The ESBWR passive safety systems require no AC power to actuate or operate - the only forces that are needed to safely cool the reactor are: the natural ...
  32. [32]
    [PDF] NEDO-33201, Revision 3, "ESBWR Certification Probabilistic Risk ...
    The at-power internal events large release frequency (LRF) is 9.62 E-10/year. 17.2.3.1 Significant Large Release Sequences –At Power Internal Events. The ...
  33. [33]
    [PDF] GE-Hitachi ESBWR Design Control Document Tier 2, Rev. 10
    Apr 10, 2014 · Significant Large Release Sequences of External Event Fire. The calculated large release frequency for fire-initiated events is also very low.
  34. [34]
    [PDF] ESBWR Test and Analysis Program Description, Supplement 1 ...
    Rationale for Important Parameters for ESBWR LOCA (GDCS period) ... ECCS. Emergency Core Cooling System. EOPs ... Peak Cladding Temperature. PIRT. Phenomena ...
  35. [35]
  36. [36]
  37. [37]
    Grand Gulf, Unit 3 Application - Nuclear Regulatory Commission
    On September 15, 2015, the staff issued a letter notifying EOI that their request to have the GGNS3 COL application withdrawn from the docket has been granted ...
  38. [38]
    River Bend Station, Unit 3 Application
    Application for a combined license (COL) for a single Economic Simplified Boiling Water Reactor (ESBWR) designated as River Bend Station, Unit 3. When ...
  39. [39]
    North Anna Power Station, Unit 3 | Permitting Dashboard
    Sep 22, 2016 · The new unit would be capable of providing an additional 1500 megawatts of baseload electricity. The combined license was issued on June 2, 2017 ...
  40. [40]
    Issued Combined Licenses for North Anna, Unit 3
    Due to a lapse in appropriations, the NRC has ceased normal operations. However, excepted and exempted activities necessary to maintain critical health and ...
  41. [41]
    Application Review Schedule for the Combined License Application ...
    Initially, Dominion Virginia Power (Dominion) submitted an application to obtain a combined license (COL) for an Economic Simplified Boiling Water Reactor ...
  42. [42]
  43. [43]
    COL Applications - World Nuclear Association
    Dec 3, 2024 · ... ESBWR. Then in 2007, GE and Hitachi formed the GE Hitachi partnership, bringing that Japanese expertise back into play. In October 2007 ...
  44. [44]
    Too Many Trees, Not Enough Forest: Notes on the Recent Nuclear ...
    May 27, 2025 · Those capital costs also make investment in nuclear energy very risky: a shift in interest rates, an unexpected delay, problems in the supply ...
  45. [45]
    Advanced Reactor Demonstration Program | Department of Energy
    The Advanced Reactor Demonstration Program (ARDP) will speed the demonstration of advanced reactors through cost-shared partnerships with US industry.Advanced Reactor... · DOE Awards $20 million for... · Energy Department’s...Missing: ESBWR | Show results with:ESBWR
  46. [46]
    [PDF] Slides for 6/20-6/21 Mtg. on ESBWR Design Summary.
    ESBWR design includes a taller, larger vessel, shorter core, chimney for natural circulation, and a 120 inch active fuel length. It has a 4000 MWe power output.
  47. [47]
    Diseconomy of scale – world's largest canned-motor reactor coolant ...
    This first-of-a-kind ESBWR will probably cost close to $10 billion. “NRC Chairman Stephen Burns did not announce a date for a hearing on the staff ...
  48. [48]
    [PDF] Global-Situation-Small-Modular-Reactor-Development-Deployment ...
    In October 2019, GE Hitachi Nuclear Energy and Fermi Energia agreed to collaborate on potential deployment applications for GE Hitachi's BWRX-300 SMR in Estonia ...
  49. [49]
    [PDF] BWRX-300 General Description | GE Vernova
    The focus on design-to-cost and a reduced construction schedule duration led to a construction method that yields less material for decommissioning purposes.
  50. [50]
    Top 5 SMR Technologies Southeast Asia Should Consider
    Jun 18, 2025 · The BWRX-300's passive safety systems, adapted from the ESBWR, enable natural circulation and cooling for up to seven days without power or ...
  51. [51]
    [PDF] Reactor Plant Cost Reduction to Compete with Natural Gas Fired ...
    Through additional design simplification and innovation, LOCA risk could potentially be reduced significantly, supporting elimination of some LOCA mitigation ...
  52. [52]
    DOE Reissues $900M SMR Funding Opportunity with Focus on ...
    Apr 4, 2025 · Applicants must demonstrate significant regulatory engagement with the Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC), a clear financing strategy, and ...<|control11|><|separator|>