Contribution of the Research and Design Institute of Electrical Technology to the formulation of a strategy for the development of nuclear power in Russia

Abstract

The results of investigations performed by specialists at Research and Design Institute of ElectricalTechnology together with other enterprises, institutes, and organizations concerning the formulation of a strategy for the development of nuclear power in Russia in the first half of the 21st century are presented. The individual stages of the work, key assumptions, ideas, and recommendations, on which the strategy is based, the initiatives which the President of the Russian Federation advanced at the millennium summit held at the United Nations, and the international INPRO project initiated by Russia are examined. It is concluded that innovative development and a transition to building as quickly as possible nuclear power objects that meet the requirements and demands of the new century are necessary.The energy component of nuclear technology began outside the framework of the plans developed for energy construction in the USSR. The first nuclear power plant in the world was built in response to the political problem of competing with the West for leadership in projects selected for this purpose. It did not open up either a technological line for energy construction, since it was not a step in the implementation of a government program. Ten years separated it from the next step -the commissioning of the first power generating units in 1964 at the Novovoronezh and Beloyarskaya nuclear power plants. The first domestic dual-purpose reactor ÉI-2 was built as part of a defense program, and its energy component was no more than an ancillary problem. Both reactors were built at Research and Design Institute of Electrical Technology under the leadership of N. A. Dollezhal. The efforts of I. V. Kurchatov, under whose initiative, by a decision of the Council of Ministers of the USSR, the first power generating program was adopted back in 1956, turned out to be futile, and all projects were cut back even in 1959.The country returned to planning a nuclear power only in 1966, adopting one program after another, never completing any one of them. However, in the context of the present article it should be noted that all programs were based on an analysis of energy and economic needs. A discussion of the technological problems was the fate of sporadic scientific councils, which sometimes occurred primarily at the I. V. Kurchatov Institute of Atomic Energy or the Physics and Power Engineering Institute. Public appearances by leaders of the industry did not remain unnoticed by the scientific community. An example is the report by A. P. Aleksandrov at the seventh world energy conference in Moscow [1] or the paper by N. A. Dollezhal and Yu. I. Koryakin in the journal "Kommunist" [2]. The former was the basis for active expansion of geological exploration for uranium, and the latter was the first to raise the question of the desirability of concentrating all ener-

Corrosion in Advanced Nuclear Reactors

“…Because of their excellent heat transfer ability, liquid metals such as lead alloys and sodium alloys have been proposed as coolants for advanced reactors. 17,18 Sodium alloys were selected in most of the international fast reactor programs, including the U.S. EBR-II reactor, which ran as an experimental facility in Idaho for 30 years and the BN-800 commercial facility currently running in Russia. Sodium was chosen for a combination of its high heat transferability, its ability to support a fast neutron spectrum in a low-pressure system, and its relatively benign corrosion of stainless steel.…”

Necessity of nuclear fuel cycle closure

“…The focus on fast reactors with a nuclear fuel cycle was formulated in the strategy for development of the industry during the first half of the 21st century [1]. The present article reports the results of research performed at the Research and Development Institute of Power Engineering (NIKIET) which confirm on a new level the need and urgency for transitioning to a closed nuclear fuel cycle (NFC) [2][3][4].This research was performed using several dynamic systems models describing the nuclear power system of the country as a whole, including all its principal components, i.e., aggregated models of real objects of the same type, such as nuclear power plants with definite types of reactors, plants producing fuel and reprocessing irradiated fuel, and uranium enrichment plants. Possible directions for development were evaluated, comparing on the basis of selected criteria scenarios accepted for examination and reflecting different initial prerequisites and conditions: 1) the need for large-sale nuclear power, capable of considerably improving the fuel balance of the fuel-energy complex as a whole, is postulated;…”

“…The focus on fast reactors with a nuclear fuel cycle was formulated in the strategy for development of the industry during the first half of the 21st century [1]. The present article reports the results of research performed at the Research and Development Institute of Power Engineering (NIKIET) which confirm on a new level the need and urgency for transitioning to a closed nuclear fuel cycle (NFC) [2][3][4].…”

“…Total natural uranium consumption according to scenarios T1 (1), T2 (2), T3 (3) and the yearly in scenario T2 (4) (a), total (1) and yearly(2) in scenarios F2 (b) and F1 (c).…”