My view is that the Natrium reactor is (if it works and at an...

My view is that the Natrium reactor is (if it works and at an acceptable price) would be an excellent reactor to operate in SA & WA (as in the Liberal party proposal) but probably not elsewhere. The plans right now are for First of a Kind (FOAK) in 2030 but would need a few year operation prior to a risk adverse operation (like Australia) to adopt it until there were Nth of a Kind (NOAK) model which we would probably not order until after around 2035 for installation in 2040's. Less risk would be the GE BWTX - 300 which is a 300Mw Boiling Water Reactor (BWR) - which can also be flexed in operation but not in the elegant way that the Natrium is. With the BWRX-300 we have a conventional boiling water reactor (cut down version of a full scale reactor) which is still a thermal neutron reactor (but the reactor is flexed (rather than the molten salt system) - in this case their is only a primary loop (i.e the water heated by the fuel elements goes through the turbines - this provides flexibility (for a PWR the water is kept as a liquid - at high pressure) in the water is a good moderator (of thermal neutrons) but steam isn't. Thus the reactor can be easily ramped by allowing the water pass the fuel elements to go to steam (which is a poor moderator) and the power dies but ramping up the inlet water allow water to pass the fuel elements reeving up the reactor power. To cut back the inlet water allow steam to pass the fuel elements (thus power reduces) - a BWR is more flexible than a PWR and thus more suitable for WA or SA (the Natrium would be better still but is a greater technical risk)

For other Australian states the Liberals are proposing GEN3+ reactors (about 1.1Gw) which are well tested and a much lower technical risk but their economy on a /Mw basis is probably better than SMR's in that (whislt they are a modular build) the pwer is in the denominator and thus on a /Mw basis probably better value until SMR production gears up (probably in the late 2030/2040's). The other eastern states (Vic, NSW, Qld) can justify the larger power (probably need more than one Gen3 reactor at some sites) and also less risk.

For Australia's nother (mines and Broome/Darwin/Port Hedland/Exmouth etc) a 300Mw SMR is probably too large and something like the Kairos (molten salt) or X Energy reactors may be more appropriate. For mine site and smaller t(off grid) towns 8Mw/15mw micro reactors would probably be more appropriate and would replace diesel (and a bit of solar). A combination of nuclear and batteries (and some solar) would IMO be a great solution for northern sites - the reactors could be sustained on full output (economically cheap power) and the batteies could do the flexing in demand - this would also have "inertia" (from micro-nuclear) in the small local grid which would make it resilient (a small renewables only grid IMO will be unstable without "inertia"