INPRO Results and Future Tasks: A Look From Russia

2004 ◽  
Author(s):  
Vladimir G. Asmolov ◽  
Leonid A. Bolshov ◽  
Evgeny P. Velikhov ◽  
Anatoly V. Zrodnikov ◽  
Vyacheslav P. Kuznetsov
Keyword(s):  
Sustainable Development ◽  
Nuclear Power ◽  
Nuclear Energy ◽  
Development Process ◽  
Fuel Cycle ◽  
Energy Development ◽  
Effective Development ◽  
Vladimir Putin ◽  
Realization Process ◽  
New Generation

Russia is supporting the INPRO Innovative Project, being fulfilled by the IAEA in the field of innovative nuclear energy. The participation of Russia in the INPRO is a part of realization process of Russia’s President Vladimir Putin Initiative, presented at the UN Millennium Summit in September 2000, on creation of new generation nuclear energy, meeting the requirements of sustainable development and excluding using the nuclear weapons technologies and materials. In 2003 the draft INPRO Methodology for assessment of the innovative nuclear energy systems correspondence to the requirements of sustainable development has been developed. At present time the Methodology’s approbation on the examples of national nuclear power technologies is being completed. It is supposed that the Methodology will be used as a navigator for the world nuclear energy development process. The INPRO stresses the timeliness of nuclear energy development problems. The International Organization on nuclear fuel cycle is the key decision of non-proliferation problem. Important are the questions of interaction and particularities of the INPRO and Generation IV programs. State support and international cooperation are conditions for effective development of nuclear energy.

scholarly journals Achievability of radiological equivalence associated with closed nuclear fuel cycle with fast reactors: impact of uncertainty factors in scenarios of Russian nuclear power development through to 2100. Part 1. Fast and thermal reactors

2021 ◽  
Vol 30 (2) ◽  
pp. 62-76
Author(s):  
V.K. Ivanov ◽  
◽  
A.V. Lopatkin ◽  
A.N. Menyajlo ◽  
E.V. Spirin ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Nuclear Power ◽  
Nuclear Energy ◽  
Fuel Cycle ◽  
Energy Development ◽  
Radioactive Wastes ◽  
Fast Reactors ◽  
Power Development ◽  
The Public ◽  
Radiation Risks ◽  
Nuclear Power Development

The Russian Government approved the Energy Strategy of the Russian Federation (Government Decree No.1523-r of June 9, 2020). The Strategy envisages the use of both thermal (TR) and fast (FR) reactors. The Strategy points out that the problems of nuclear power are associated with po-tential high expenses for irradiated fuel and radioactive wastes management. The previously de-signed model of the Russian nuclear energy development suggested that fast reactors only would operate at NPPs after 2010. Radiological equivalence, expressed as the equivalence of lifetime radiation risks to the public from radioactive wastes and from primary uranium ore, was shown to be achieved after 100-year storage. The burnup of 241Am, 237Np и 242Сm in closed nu-clear fuel cycle with fast reactors is a key part in the achievability of radiation risks equivalence. Scenarios of the Russian nuclear energy development through to 2100 with account of uncertain-ty factors in the measurement of contribution of fast and thermal reactors to the electric energy production are considered in the paper. The following three scenarios were developed: uncer-tainty is replaced by FRs; uncertainty is replaced by TRs; 50 per cent of FRs and 50 per cent of TRs replace uncertainty. If the energy is produced by fast reactors only (scenario 1) radiological equivalence was found to be achieved in 412 years. In two other scenarios radiological equiva-lence will be achieved after more than 1000 years. Contribution of main dose-forming radionu-clides and relevant ratios of potential biological hazards is included in models regardless of whether uncertainty in nuclear energy development is taking or not taking into account. Results of the study of conditions for radiological equivalence achievement should be used for amending Strategic plan of Russian nuclear power development through to 2100 that meets requirements of radiation ecology and radiation protection of the public.

Nuclear Power in Latin America: An Overview of Its Present Status

1983 ◽  
Vol 25 (3) ◽  
pp. 377-415 ◽  
Author(s):  
Margarete K. Luddemann
Keyword(s):  
Developing Countries ◽  
Latin America ◽  
Nuclear Power ◽  
Nuclear Energy ◽  
Fuel Cycle ◽  
Field Studies ◽  
Energy Agency ◽  
Self Sufficiency ◽  
Policy Concern ◽  
Alternative Sources

The pivotal role energy plays in national economics not only converts the access to sources of supply into a vivid issue of foreign policy concern, but also causes an understandable preoccupation with investment capabilities and self-sufficiency. A report prepared by the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) in 1974 predicted a bright future for nuclear energy in the i developing countries and encouraged use of this form of energy after numerous field studies.A nation that commits itself to nuclear energy by purchasing nuclear power-generating technology but not fuel cycle facilities incurs the risk of becoming dependent upon the supplier country because a quick switch to alternative sources of supply is difficult in cases of curtailment of fuel.

scholarly journals Elaboration of approach to nuclear energy systems assessment by criterion of sustainable development

2018 ◽  
Vol 4 (1) ◽  
pp. 27-33
Author(s):  
Vladimir I. Usanov ◽  
Stepan A. Kviatkovskii ◽  
Andrey A. Andrianov
Keyword(s):  
Sustainable Development ◽  
Nuclear Fuel ◽  
Nuclear Energy ◽  
Spent Nuclear Fuel ◽  
Fuel Cycle ◽  
Energy Systems ◽  
Nuclear Fuel Cycle ◽  
Time Interval ◽  
Subject Areas ◽  
Key Events

The paper describes the approach to the assessment of nuclear energy systems based on the integral indicator characterizing the level of their sustainability and results of comparative assessment of several nuclear energy system options incorporating different combinations of nuclear reactors and nuclear fuel cycle facilities. The nuclear energy systems are characterized by achievement of certain key events pertaining to the following six subject areas: economic performance, safety, availability of resources, waste handling, non-proliferation and public support. Achievement of certain key events is examined within the time interval until 2100, while the key events per se are assessed according to their contribution in the achievement of sustainable development goals. It was demonstrated that nuclear energy systems based on the once-through nuclear fuel cycle with thermal reactors and uranium oxide fuel do not score high according to the integral sustainable development indicator even in the case when the issue of isolation of spent nuclear fuel in geological formation is resolved. Gradual replacement of part of thermal reactors with fast reactors and closing the nuclear fuel cycle results in the achievement of evaluated characteristics in many subject areas, which are close to maximum requirements of sustainable development, and in the significant enhancement of the sustainability indicator.

Use of Nuclear Energy and Sustainable Development

2014 ◽  
Vol 1070-1072 ◽  
pp. 353-356
Author(s):  
Fang Chen ◽  
Qiang Yao
Keyword(s):  
Sustainable Development ◽  
Nuclear Power ◽  
Nuclear Energy ◽  
Energy Use ◽  
Clean Energy ◽  
Human Society ◽  
Plant Safety ◽  
The Status ◽  
Nuclear Power Plant Safety ◽  
Safety Operation

Nuclear energy as a clean energy, with the gradual depletion of traditional energy, is particularly important. In this paper, the status of the application of nuclear technology was reviewed. And problems during the use of nuclear energy were addressed, including environmental issue generated by radioactive mineral extraction, radwaste disposal, nuclear power plant safety operation. Although, there are still some problems in the process of nuclear energy use, undeniably nuclear energy is still the hope for the future of human society. Therefore, the technical and management improvement can achieve sustainable development of nuclear energy, in order to ensure the safety of human energy use and sustainability.

Transmutation and the Global Nuclear Energy Partnership

2006 ◽  
Vol 985 ◽  
Author(s):  
James Bresee
Keyword(s):  
Nuclear Power ◽  
Power Plants ◽  
Nuclear Energy ◽  
Energy Use ◽  
Fuel Cycle ◽  
Spent Fuel ◽  
Closed Fuel Cycle ◽  
State Of The Union ◽  
Foreign Countries ◽  
The U.S

AbstractIn the January 2006 State of the Union address, President Bush announced a new Advanced Energy Initiative, a significant part of which is the Global Nuclear Energy Initiative. Its details were described on February 6, 2006 by the U.S. Secretary of Energy. In summary, it has three parts: (1) a program to expand nuclear energy use domestically and in foreign countries to support economic growth while reducing the release of greenhouse gases such as carbon dioxide. (2) an expansion of the U.S. nuclear infrastructure that will lead to the recycling of spent fuel and a closed fuel cycle and, through transmutation, a reduction in the quantity and radiotoxicity of nuclear waste and its proliferation concerns, and (3) a partnership with other fuel cycle nations to support nuclear power in additional nations by providing small nuclear power plants and leased fuel with the provision that the resulting spent fuel would be returned by the lessee to the lessor. The final part would have the effect of stabilizing the number of fuel cycle countries with attendant non-proliferation value. Details will be given later in the paper.

Scenario Analysis on the Benefits of Multi-National Cooperation for the Development of a Common Nuclear Energy System Based on PWR and LFR Fleets

2014 ◽  
Author(s):  
Marco Ciotti ◽  
Jorge L. Manzano ◽  
Vladimir Kuznetsov ◽  
Galina Fesenko ◽  
Luisa Ferroni ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Public Opinion ◽  
Nuclear Fuel ◽  
Nuclear Power ◽  
Power Plants ◽  
Nuclear Energy ◽  
Fuel Cycle ◽  
Proper Time ◽  
Nuclear Fuel Cycle ◽  
Levelized Cost Of Electricity ◽  
Base Load

Financial aspects, environmental concerns and non-favorable public opinion are strongly conditioning the deployment of new Nuclear Energy Systems across Europe. Nevertheless, new possibilities are emerging to render competitive electricity from Nuclear Power Plants (NPPs) owing to two factors: the first one, which is the fast growth of High Voltage lines interconnecting the European countries’ national electrical grids, this process being triggered by huge increase of the installed intermittent renewable electricity sources (Wind and PV); and the second one, determined by the carbon-free constraints imposed on the base load electricity generation. The countries that due to public opinion pressure can’t build new NPPs on their territory may find it profitable to produce base load nuclear electricity abroad, even at long distances, in order to comply with the European dispositions on the limitation of the CO2 emissions. In this study the benefits from operating at multinational level with the deployment of a fleet of PWRs and subsequently, at a proper time, the one of Lead Fast Reactors (LFRs) are analyzed. The analysis performed involves Italy (a country with a current moratorium on nuclear power on spite that its biggest utility operates NPPs abroad), and the countries from South East and Central East Europe potentially looking for introduction or expansion of their nuclear power programmes. According to the predicted evolution of their Gross Domestic Product (GDP) a forecast of the electricity consumption evolution for the present century is derived with the assumption that a certain fraction of it will be covered by nuclear electricity. In this context, evaluated are material balances for the front and the back end of nuclear fuel cycle associated with the installed nuclear capacity. A key element of the analysis is the particular type of LFR assumed in the scenario, characterized by having a fuel cycle where only fission products and the reprocessing losses are sent for disposition and natural or depleted uranium is added to fuel in each reprocessing cycle. Such LFR could be referred to as “adiabatic reactor”. Owing to introduction of such reactors a substantive reduction in uranium consumption and final disposal requirements can be achieved. Finally, the impacts of the LFR and the economy of scale in nuclear fuel cycle on the Levelized Cost of Electricity (LCOE) are being evaluated, for scaling up from a national to a multinational dimension, illustrating the benefits potentially achievable through cooperation among countries.

Sustainable Development of China With Nuclear Energy System Beyond Generation-IV

2009 ◽  
Author(s):  
Zhiwei Zhou ◽  
Hong Xu ◽  
Yongwei Yang
Keyword(s):  
Power Generation ◽  
Sustainable Development ◽  
Nuclear Power ◽  
Nuclear Energy ◽  
Clean Energy ◽  
Nuclear Fission ◽  
Hybrid Reactor ◽  
Fissile Material ◽  
Nuclear Power Generation

Two aspects of the development trend of current nuclear fission technology are discussed. The first aspect is to improve economic competitiveness and safety for searching opportunity of enlarging the share of nuclear power. The second aspect is to explore new ways of improving the efficiency of nuclear fuel utilization and of reducing the geological repository volume of radioactive products from nuclear power generation. Sustainable development of Chinese economy in 21st century will mainly rely on sustainable supply of clean energy with indigenous natural resources. The burden of current coal-dominant energy mix and the environmental pollution due to energy consumptions has led nuclear power to be an indispensable choice for further expanding electricity generation capacity and for reducing greenhouse effect gases emission in China. The long-term sustainable development strategy with nuclear fission technology beyond generation-IV for electric power generation, namely the fusion-fission hybrid subcritical reactor technology, is discussed. The impact of the proposed fission-fusion hybrid reactor to future nuclear power generation technology will reply on the success of the ITER-scale (500MW fusion power) Tokamak to burn plasma continuously in the predictable future. The main challenges and prospects of the strategy are also analyzed. The preliminary analysis has shown that the fission in the subcritical blanket driven by fusion neutrons can effectively amplify the energy carried by fusion neutron and maintain breeding of fissile material and tritium. It has been found from the results of a conceptual design that this new type of fusion-fission hybrid reactor may meet the requirement of China’s long-term sustainable development of nuclear energy.

An Initial Study on Modeling the United States Thermal Fuel Cycle Mass Flow Using Vensim

2008 ◽  
Author(s):  
Samuel Brinton ◽  
Akira Tokuhiro
Keyword(s):  
Mass Flow ◽  
Nuclear Power ◽  
Nuclear Energy ◽  
Flow Model ◽  
Fuel Cycle ◽  
Spent Fuel ◽  
Uranium Ore ◽  
Plant Construction ◽  
Mox Fuel ◽  
Fuel Fabrication

According to current forecasts, nuclear power plant construction and nuclear-generated electricity production is projected to increase in the next half-century. This is likely due to the fact that nuclear energy is an ‘environmental alternative’ to fossil fuel plants that emit greenhouse gases (GHG). Nuclear power also has a much higher energy density output than other alternative energy sources such as solar, wind, and biomass energies. There is also growing consensus that processing of low- and high-level waste, LLW and HLW respectively, is a political issue rather than a technical challenge. Prudent implementation of a closed fuel cycle not only curbs build-up of GHGs, but can equally mitigate the need to store nuclear used fuel. The Global Nuclear Energy Partnership (GNEP) is promoting gradual integration of fuel reprocessing, and deployment of fast reactors (FRs) into the global fleet for long-term uranium resource usage. The use of mixed oxide (MOX) fuel burning Light Water Reactors (LWR) has also been suggested by fuel cycle researchers. This study concentrated on modeling the construction and decommissioning rates of six major facilities comprising the nuclear fuel cycle, as follows: (1) current LWRs decommissioned at 60-years service life, (2) new LWRs burning MOX fuel, (3) new (Gen’ III+) LWRs to replace units and/or be added to the fleet, (4) new FRs to be added to the fleet, (5) new reprocessing and MOX fuel fabrication facilities and (6) new LWR fuel fabrication facilities. Our initial work [1] focused on modeling the construction and decommissioning rates of reactors to be deployed. This is being followed with a ‘mass flow model’, starting from uranium ore and following it to spent forms. The visual dynamic modeling program Vensim was used to create a system of equations and variables to track the mass flows from enrichment, fabrication, burn-up, and the back-end of the fuel cycle. Sensible construction and deployment rates were benchmarked against recent reports and then plausible scenarios considered parametrically. The timeline starts in 2007 and extends in a preliminary model to 2057; a further mass flow model scenario continues until 2107. The scenarios considered provide estimates of the uranium ore requirements, quantities of LLW and HLW production, and waste storage volume needs. The results of this study suggest the number of reprocessing facilities necessary to stabilize and/or reduce recently reported levels of spent fuel inventory. Preliminary results indicate that the entire national spent fuel inventory produced over the next ∼50 years can be reprocessed by a reprocessing plant construction rate of less than 0.07 plants/year (small capacity) or less than 0.05 plants /year (large capacity). Any larger construction rate could reduce the spent fuel inventory destined for storage. These and additional results will be presented.

scholarly journals International cooperation in the sphere of peaceful uses of nuclear energy as a resolution of energy supply and nuclear proliferation problems

2009 ◽  
pp. 163-174
Author(s):  
M. V. Zharkih
Keyword(s):  
Comparative Analysis ◽  
International Cooperation ◽  
Nuclear Power ◽  
Nuclear Energy ◽  
Large Scale ◽  
Fuel Cycle ◽  
Nuclear Proliferation ◽  
Advantages And Disadvantages ◽  
The Us ◽  
Made In

Comparative analysis of the Russian and the US initiatives. The article gives an outline of such a promising branch of international cooperation as cooperation in the sphere of peaceful uses of nuclear energy, in particularly its multilateral aspects – initiatives of States based on the multilateral principle of uses of nuclear power. The comparative analysis of the two large-scale initiatives in the field ofmultilateral approaches to the nuclear fuel cycle – these are the Russian initiative on the development of the Global infrastructure of nuclear energy and the American Global nuclear energy partnership –made in the article discloses the main principles of work of the abovementioned mechanisms of interaction as well as their advantages and disadvantages. The goal of such an analysis is to figure out which one has a greater potential for international security and future development of the nuclear energy sector.

La situazione dell'energia nucleare nel mondo: un quadro di sintesi

2009 ◽  
pp. 19-36
Author(s):  
Maurizio Cumo
Keyword(s):  
Radioactive Waste ◽  
Nuclear Power ◽  
Nuclear Energy ◽  
Fuel Cycle ◽  
Technological Development ◽  
Reactor Technology ◽  
The World ◽  
Points Of View ◽  
Generation Costs ◽  
Jel Classifications

- This article gives an overview of the situation of nuclear power in the world and analyzes the problems of this source of energy from different points of view: the generation costs, fuel cycle, particularly with regard to the resources of uranium and radioactive waste, and the programs of technological development of new reactors.Key words: Nuclear energy, generation costs, uranium resources, radioactive waste, new reactor technology.JEL classifications: L94 Q40 Q31

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document