Mr. Denis Duff:

There is one question we have not addressed, which is about the impact of seismic events and large natural disasters. I will tie in the point made about the post-9-11 situation and terrorist activities. The designers of small modular reactors have taken this into account. We would love to give the committee a presentation on them at some stage, or perhaps the environment committee, an excellent suggestion from Deputy Phelan. Members could see that these reactors would be built where they are seismically insulated, perhaps in a large tub of water. In the event that all power was lost to these reactors, they can cool themselves naturally, without any external power, because of their size and design. Therefore, the type of accident that happened at Fukushima has been taken into account.

The reactor at Chernobyl where another accident occurred was of a completely different design, one which would not be allowed in Ireland or anywhere else in the West. It would be physically impossible for such an accident to occur at one of the reactors to which we are referring.

On the question of small modular reactors, SMRs, versus nuclear power stations, Deputy Griffin has inquired how long construction takes. The United Kingdom is building what is called a European pressurised reactor, EPR, and hopes to complete the project in eight years. The projects involving these reactors have always extended beyond their design-construction periods. The one in Finland is wandering on and on, while the one in France is going to be late. I have no doubt that the reactor project in the United Kingdom will also be late. That is one of the benefits of SMRs. These reactors are built and tested in factories and then assembled on site. The estimated construction time is between 18 months to three years and depends on the manufacture and size. Those involved are much more confident that they will be able to achieve these build times. SMRs change the entire nuclear scenario for countries such as Ireland.