Energy policy in Europe has been driven by the three goals of security of supply, economic competitiveness and environmental sustainability, referred to as the energy trilemma. Although there are clear conflicts within the trilemma, member countries have acted to facilitate a fully integrated European electricity market. Interconnection and cross-border electricity trade has been a fundamental part of such market liberalisation. However, it has been suggested that consumers are exposed to a higher price volatility as a consequence of interconnection. Furthermore, during times of energy shortages and high demand, issues of national sovereignty take precedence over cooperation. In this article, the unique and somewhat peculiar conditions of early 2017 within France, Germany and the United Kingdom have been studied to understand how the existing integration arrangements address the energy trilemma. It is concluded that the dominant interests are economic and national security; issues of environmental sustainability are neglected or overridden. Although the optimisation of European electricity generation to achieve a lower overall carbon emission is possible, such a goal is far from being realised. Furthermore, it is apparent that the United Kingdom, and other countries, cannot rely upon imports from other countries during periods of high demand and/or limited supply.
In the first section, this report analyses Nuclear Power Plants (NPPs) in the context of megaprojects, explaining why they are often delivered over budget and late. In the second section, the report discusses how Small Modular Reactors (SMRs) might address these issues. Megaprojects are extremely risky and often implemented after a sub-optimal phase of project planning leading to underestimations of the costs and overestimation of short-term benefits. When considering adherence to schedule and budget, often megaprojects might be considered a failure, and optimism bias, strategic mis-rapresentation, complexity, poor planning, poor risk allocation, poor scope management are all reasons to explain their over budget and delay. For megaprojects, especially in the nuclear field, a key strategy to achieve good performances appears to be the standardization. This standardization needs to be twofold: (i) technical standardisation, i.e. the construction of very similar design over and over, and (ii) the project delivery chain standardisation, i.e. the same stakeholders involved in the delivery of a project that is replicable multiple times. Under this perspective, given their size and standardisation potential, SMRs, might be a suitable class of NPP for several countries. Yet, if the economy of scale is the only driver considered, SMRs are hardly competitive with large NPPs (or even with gas or coal power plants). However, a fleet of standard SMRs might balance the lack of economy of scale with the economy of multiples, and the delivery of several standardised SMR projects might be the key to achieve good project management performances in the nuclear sector. However, the deployment of SMRs faces a number of challenges from several perspectives, such as the licencing, supply chain and financing ones. These challenges might be enormous, but so are the potential rewards too.