ARC-100
About
The ARC-100 is an SFR that operates at 100 MWe. It targets grid electricity applications and industrial heat applications.
| Developer | ARC Clean Technology |
|---|---|
| Country of Origin | Canada |
| Size | Small |
| Type | Sodium-Cooled Fast Reactor (SFR) |
Jump To:
Analysis
3
Deployment Timescale
Score Justification
The ARC-100 reactor is under regulatory review in Canada and the developer has engaged in pre-application activities in the United States. The design draws on prior pool-type sodium reactor experience and uses partial factory fabrication, but it retains a conventional nuclear island and sodium components that are subject to lengthy qualification processes.
By indicator
- 2/4 Regulatory Engagement
To what extent has the reactor developer engaged with a recognized nuclear regulatory authority in the licensing process? (30% of total score) - 4/6 Technology Precedent
Has the reactor design, or a sufficiently similar design, been certified anywhere in the world? (10% of total score) - 2/3 Modularity
What share of total reactor systems can be manufactured off-site in controlled factory environments rather than constructed on-site? (15% of total score) - 3/4 Specialization
To what extent do construction activities and components require lengthy qualification processes? (15% of total score) - 2/5 Supply Chain
How mature and available are suppliers for key reactor components and fuel services? (30% of total score)
4
Overnight Cost
Score Justification
The ARC-100 avoids large high-pressure primary components typical of PWRs, including pressurizers and massive steam generators, which may reduce major equipment costs. Low-pressure operation and a compact plant layout help to reduce civil construction requirements relative to large water-cooled reactors, though sodium handling systems introduce some design complexity.
By indicator
- 3/4 Component Cost
What is the expected cost of the reactor’s major components? (40% of total score) - 4/6 Construction Cost
To what extent does the design reduce construction cost and risk through modular fabrication and limited nuclear-grade specialization? (60% of total score)
3
Operational Cost
Score Justification
The ARC-100’s operational costs are driven by expensive metallic HALEU fuel and maintenance and decommissioning costs related to its sodium coolant. However, staffing requirements for SFRs are typically lower than for similarly sized PWRs because SFRs typically have a smaller balance of plant.
By indicator
- 1/3 Fuel Cost
What is the estimated cost of nuclear fuel per unit of electricity generated, including enrichment, fabrication, and back-end costs? (15% of total score) - 3/4 Maintenance Cost
What is the expected annual maintenance cost for the reactor and balance of plant systems, including consumables? (25% of total score) - 4/5 Staffing Level
How many full-time personnel are required to safely operate and maintain the reactor unit? (40% of total score) - 3/5 Spent Fuel & Radioactive Waste Management Cost
What are the expected operational costs associated with managing spent fuel, including interim storage, transport, disposal, or recycling? (10% of total score) - 3/5 Decommissioning Cost
What are the total lifetime contributions required for decommissioning, regardless of funding mechanism? (10% of total score)
2
Cost Predictability
Score Justification
Cost Predictability is low because the ARC-100 does not yet have an operating prototype or commercial reference plant. The design includes some modular fabrication, but current cost estimates are based on first-of-a-kind construction of an integrated sodium-cooled nuclear facility.
By indicator
- 0/5 Prototype
To what extent has the reactor design been built, demonstrated, or commercially deployed in practice? (75% of total score) - 2/3 Modularity
What share of total reactor systems can be manufactured off-site in controlled factory environments rather than constructed on-site? (25% of total score)
4
Security
Score Justification
As a fast reactor, the ARC-100 produces plutonium during operation that remains embedded in spent fuel with no integrated reprocessing. The design incorporates design-basis security features, including defined vital areas and minimized access points.
By indicator
- 2/3 Fuel
What is the enrichment level and composition of the reactor fuel? (40% of total score) - 3/4 Nuclear Material Production
What is the potential for the reactor to produce weapons-usable nuclear material? (40% of total score) - 1/1 Security by Design
Has the reactor developer built in security by design? (20% of total score)
3
Safety
Score Justification
The ARC-100 has not yet received regulatory approval for commercial operation, though it has completed Phase 2 of Canada’s Vendor Design Review pre-licensing process. The design includes multiple shutdown mechanisms and metallic fuel with inherent negative reactivity feedback. It operates at low pressure with functional containment and uses indefinite passive decay heat removal systems. Its use of sodium coolant offers high thermal efficiency and operation at low pressure, but it is chemically reactive and requires careful management.
By indicator
- 1/2 Safety Case
How mature and publicly established is the reactor’s safety case with the regulator? (40% of total score) - 1/2 Shutdown Mechanism
How diverse, independent, and passive are the reactor’s shutdown systems? (20% of total score) - 1/1 Fuel With Safety Characteristics
Does the reactor use fuel with accident tolerance or inherent safety characteristics? (10% of total score) - 2/4 Pressure & Containment
How well does the reactor’s containment strategy protect from the release of radioactive material? (10% of total score) - 3/3 Passive Heat Removal
How long can the reactor remove core heat without operator intervention? (10% of total score) - 1/4 Coolant Reactivity
How chemically reactive is the reactor coolant? (10% of total score)
3
Spent Fuel & Radioactive Waste Management
Score Justification
Spent fuel from the ARC-100 does not have a licensed disposal precedent. It produces separate sodium and off-gas waste streams, in addition to activated structural materials. While the overall discharged fuel volume is lower per unit of energy than that of comparable LWRs, metallic fast-reactor fuel retains relatively high decay heat at 50 years, which is notable because volumetric decay heat is a significant driver of storage, transportation, and disposal dimensions. On-site storage includes in-vessel cooling followed by dry storage, reducing the cooling time required before handling and transport.
By indicator
- 0/1 Spent Fuel Licensing Precedent
Has the spent fuel form been previously licensed for disposal? (20% of total score) - 2/4 Waste Streams
How many distinct waste streams require separate conditioning or handling pathways? (20% of total score) - 3/3 On-Site Storage
How much on-site area is required for interim spent fuel storage? (10% of total score) - 3/3 Spent Fuel Volume
What volume of spent fuel is produced per unit of electricity generated? (15% of total score) - 1/2 Decay Heat
What is the decay heat output of spent fuel at the 50-year interim storage milestone? (20% of total score) - 2/2 Time to Interim Storage
What is the average time until spent fuel can be transferred to interim storage? (15% of total score)
2
Supply Chain
Score Justification
The ARC-100 relies on specialized sodium reactor components with a limited number of qualified suppliers. Fuel supply requires HALEU enrichment and metallic fuel fabrication, both of which exist on a limited commercial scale.
By indicator
- 1/2 Key Component Availability
To what extent are commercial or pilot-scale suppliers available for the reactor’s major components? (60% of total score) - 2/4 Fuel Availability
Are suppliers available for both fuel fabrication and enrichment required by the reactor design? (40% of total score)