RITM-200
About
The RITM-200 is an SMR with PWR technology that operates at 50 MWe. It was originally developed to power Russian icebreakers, and can serve as a floating nuclear power plant on a barge. It has also been adapted for terrestrial electricity production.
| Developer | Rosatom |
|---|---|
| Country of Origin | Russia |
| Size | Small |
| Type | Pressurized Water Reactor (PWR) |
Jump To:
Analysis
5
Deployment Timescale
Score Justification
The RITM-200 has multiple operating units, providing construction, operational, and supply chain precedents. Maritime deployment demands modularization, facilitating transport and installations, and accelerating deployment by leveraging learning and economies of scale.
By indicator
- 4/4 Regulatory Engagement
To what extent has the reactor developer engaged with a recognized nuclear regulatory authority in the licensing process? (30% of total score) - 6/6 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) - 4/4 Specialization
To what extent do construction activities and components require lengthy qualification processes? (15% of total score) - 5/5 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 RITM-200’s small unit size and modular construction approach support a moderate overnight cost profile. As a PWR, the design does not rely on exotic components, and its maritime deployment minimizes the need for large cooling towers and containment domes.
By indicator
- 3/4 Component Cost
What is the expected cost of the reactor’s major components? (40% of total score) - 5/6 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)
4
Operational Cost
Score Justification
Operational Cost for the RITM-200 benefits from the reactor’s compact footprint and integrated design, which support relatively low staffing and maintenance requirements. Decommissioning costs are expected to be lower for maritime reactors than their terrestrial counterparts because there is less civil infrastructure to dismantle and no requirement to restore the surrounding environment.
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) - 4/4 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) - 5/5 Decommissioning Cost
What are the total lifetime contributions required for decommissioning, regardless of funding mechanism? (10% of total score)
5
Cost Predictability
Score Justification
Cost predictability for the RITM-200 is supported by “nth-of-a-kind” learning from multiple deployed units and a standardized, modular design. Factory fabrication and repeatable construction practices reduce uncertainty relative to first-of-a-kind reactor designs.
By indicator
- 5/5 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)
5
Security
Score Justification
The RITM-200 incorporates security-by-design features that limit on-site access to nuclear material, which is particularly important for a vulnerable maritime deployment. The design uses HALEU. Its thermal spectrum is not optimized to produce weapons-usable nuclear material.
By indicator
- 2/3 Fuel
What is the enrichment level and composition of the reactor fuel? (40% of total score) - 4/4 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 RITM-200 operates at high pressure and employs a containment envelope surrounding an integrated reactor vessel. The design relies on negative reactivity feedback and incorporates an independent shutdown system using sensor-activated control rods that are passively inserted by gravity in the event of power loss. Passive residual heat removal is provided for at least one day without operator intervention.
By indicator
- 2/2 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) - 0/1 Fuel With Safety Characteristics
Does the reactor use fuel with accident tolerance or inherent safety characteristics? (10% of total score) - 1/4 Pressure & Containment
How well does the reactor’s containment strategy protect from the release of radioactive material? (10% of total score) - 1/3 Passive Heat Removal
How long can the reactor remove core heat without operator intervention? (10% of total score) - 3/4 Coolant Reactivity
How chemically reactive is the reactor coolant? (10% of total score)
3
Spent Fuel & Radioactive Waste Management
Score Justification
As a PWR with HALEU fuel, the RITM-200 produces predictable waste streams that include light water coolant, spent fuel, activated metals, and low-level waste. Because of the reactor’s maritime deployment, the design has low on-site storage requirements (1,000-2,000 m2).
By indicator
- 0/1 Spent Fuel Licensing Precedent
Has the spent fuel form been previously licensed for disposal? (20% of total score) - 3/4 Waste Streams
How many distinct waste streams require separate conditioning or handling pathways? (20% of total score) - 2/3 On-Site Storage
How much on-site area is required for interim spent fuel storage? (10% of total score) - 2/3 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)
5
Supply Chain
Score Justification
The RITM-200 has a robust commercial supply chain for its major components, but only one commercial supplier of its HALEU fuel.
By indicator
- 2/2 Key Component Availability
To what extent are commercial or pilot-scale suppliers available for the reactor’s major components? (60% of total score) - 3/4 Fuel Availability
Are suppliers available for both fuel fabrication and enrichment required by the reactor design? (40% of total score)