DOCSLIB.ORG

The Uncertain Future of Nuclear Power

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
The Uncertain Future of Nuclear Power The Uncertain Future 9 of Nuclear Energy Frank von Hippel, Editor A research report of the International Panel on Fissile Materials September 2010 Research Report 9 International Panel on Fissile Materials The Uncertain Future of Nuclear Energy With contributions by Matthew Bunn, Anatoli Diakov, Ming Ding, Tadahiro Katsuta, Charles McCombie, M.V. Ramana, Tatsujiro Suzuki, Susan Voss, Suyuan Yu Frank von Hippel, Editor www.fissilematerials.org September 2010 © 2010 International Panel on Fissile Materials ISBN 978-0-9819275-7-2 This work is licensed under the Creative Commons Attribution-Noncommercial License. To view a copy of this license, visit www.creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/3.0 Table of Contents About the IPFM i Explanatory Note iii Summary 1 1 Introduction 5 2 Costs 21 3 Countrystudies 27 4 Advancedreactortechnology 43 5 Once-throughversusplutoniumrecycle 53 6 Risksfromlarge-scalereleasesofradioactivity totheatmosphere 59 7 Nuclear-weaponproliferation 63 8 Institutionalrequirements 73 9 Publicacceptance 79 10 Policyrecommendations 83 References 87 Contributors 105 The Uncertain Future of Nuclear Energy Figures Figure1. Growthofglobalnuclear-powercapacity. 2 Figure2. Nuclearcapacityinstalledbyyear. 2 Figure3. Afissionchainreactioninaslow-neutron reactor. 6 Figure4. GovernmentenergyRD&Dexpenditures intheOECDcountries. 8 Figure5. Power-reactorcapacitybycountry. 10 Figure6. TwoNuclearEnergyAgencygrowth scenariosfornuclearpowerto2050. 14 Figure7. Exampleofcompositionoffreshandspent light-waterreactorfuel. 16 Figure8. Currentspentfueldispositionstrategies. 18 Figure9. Pressurizedlight-waterreactor. 20 Figure10. Rangesof2007-2008“overnight” constructioncosts. 21 Figure11. FrenchandU.S.nuclearreactoraverage constructioncostsbyyear. 23 Figure12. PlansforRussiannuclearpowerexpansion asof2007. 37 Figure13. Totalfissionandbreederresearch,development anddemonstrationfundingintheOECDcountries. 44 Figure14. UraniumResourceAvailability. 46 Figure15. Drycaskstorageofolderspentfuelata U.S. nuclearpowerplant. 58 Figure16. Cesium-137contaminationlevelsaround theChernobylnuclearpowerplant. 60 Figure17. EpidemicofthyroidcancerinBelarus followingthe1986Chernobylaccident. 61 Figure18. Theglobalnuclearsafetyregime. 74 Figure19. Attitudestowardnuclearpowerbycountry. 81 Tables Table1. Globaldistributionofnuclearpowercapacity in2008. 9 Table2. Countriesthathaverecentlyexpressedaninterest inacquiringafirstnuclearpowerplant. 13 Table3. Centrifugeandlaser-enrichmentplants, operating,underconstructionandplanned. 17 Table4. Civilianspent-fuelreprocessingplants. 19 Table5. Countrystatusforspentfuelreprocessing. 54 The Uncertain Future of Nuclear Energy About the IPFM TheInternationalPanelonFissileMaterials(IPFM)wasfoundedinJanuary2006. It is an independent group of arms-control and nonproliferation experts from seventeen countries, including both nuclear weapon and non-nuclear weapon states. The mission of the IPFM is to analyze the technical basis for practical and achievablepolicyinitiativestosecure,consolidateandreducestockpilesofhighly enricheduraniumandplutonium.Thesefissilematerialsarethekeyingredients innuclearweapons,andtheircontroliscriticaltonucleardisarmament,halting theproliferationofnuclearweaponsandensuringthatterroristsdonotacquire nuclearweapons. Both military and civilian stocks of fissile materials have to be addressed. The nuclear weapon states still have enough fissile materials in their weapon and navalfuelstockpilesfortensofthousandsofnuclearweapons.Onthecivilian side, enough plutonium has been separated to make a similarly large number ofweapons.Highlyenricheduraniumisusedincivilianreactorfuelintensof locations.Thetotalamountusedforthispurposeissufficienttomakehundreds ofHiroshima-typebombs,adesignpotentiallywithinthecapabilitiesofterrorist groups. ThePanelisco-chairedbyProfessorR.RajaramanofJawaharlalNehruUniversity inNewDelhiandProfessorFrankvonHippelofPrincetonUniversity.Itsmembers includenuclearexpertsfromBrazil,China,France,Germany,India,Ireland,Japan, South Korea, Mexico, the Netherlands, Norway, Pakistan, Russia, South Africa, Sweden,theUnitedKingdomandtheUnitedStates.ProfessorJoséGoldemberg of Brazil stepped down as co-chair of IPFM on July 1, 2007. He continues as a memberofIPFM. IPFMresearchandreportsaresharedwithinternationalorganizations,national governmentsandnongovernmentalgroups.Ithasfullpanelmeetingstwiceayear incapitalsaroundtheworldinadditiontospecialistworkshops.Thesemeetings andworkshopsareofteninconjunctionwithinternationalconferencesatwhich IPFMpanelsandexpertsareinvitedtomakepresentations. Princeton University’s Program on Science and Global Security provides administrativeandresearchsupportfortheIPFM. IPFM’s initial support is provided by a five-year grant to Princeton University fromtheJohnD.andCatherineT.MacArthurFoundationofChicago. The Uncertain Future of Nuclear Energy i ii Explanatory Note This report is a shortened version of a second draft of the chapter on nuclear energy that is to appear in the 2010 report of the Global Energy Assessment (GEA). It is being published as an IPFM report with the permission of the GEA becauseitprovidesusefulbackgroundforIPFMstudiesrelatingtonuclearpower. ItdoesnotincludeasubstantialsectiononfusionenergyauthoredbyProfessor RobertGoldstonofPrincetonUniversity,whichwillappearintheGEAreport.It hasnotyetbeensubjecttofinalreviewandrevisionforinclusionintheGlobal EnergyAssessment.Theviewsexpressedhereshouldthereforenotbeattributed totheGEA. Some topicsthatwillbecoveredinotherGEAchaptersarenotcoveredhere— orcoveredonlybriefly.Theseincludethehealthimpactsofroutinereleasesof radioactivityfromthenuclearfuelcycle. Someofthecountrystudiesthatappearhereinabbreviatedformwereauthored asfollows: • China,ProfessorSuyuanYuandDr.MingDing,TsinghuaUniversity. • India,Dr.M.V.RamanaofPrincetonUniversity. • Japan, Professor Tadahiro Katsuta, Meiji University; and Professor TatsujiroSuzuki,TokyoUniversity.* • Russia, Professor Anatoli Diakov, Moscow Institute of Physics and Technology;andSusanVoss,independentconsultant. Leadauthorsonothersectionsare: • Institutionalrequirements,ProfessorMatthewBunn,HarvardUniversity. • Publicacceptance,Dr.M.V.Ramana. Dr. Charles McCombie, Executive Director of the Geneva-based Association for Regional and International Underground Storage, advised on the section on radioactivewasteaswellascommentingveryhelpfullyontheentirereport. * NowamemberofJapan’sAtomicEnergyCommission The Uncertain Future of Nuclear Energy iii Summary In the 1970s, nuclear energy was expected to quickly become the dominant generatorofelectricalpower.Itsfuelcostsareremarkablylowbecauseamillion timesmoreenergyisreleasedperunitweightbyfissionthanbycombustion.But itscapitalcostshaveproventobehigh.Safetyrequiresredundantcoolingand control systems, massive leak-tight containment structures, very conservative seismicdesignandextremelystringentqualitycontrol. The routine health risks and greenhouse-gas emissions from fission power are small relative to those associated with coal, but there are catastrophic risks: nuclear-weapon proliferation and the possibility of over-heated fuel releasing massivequantitiesoffissionproductstothehumanenvironment.Thepublicis sensitivetotheserisks.The1979ThreeMileIslandand1986Chernobylaccidents, along with high capital costs, ended the rapid growth of global nuclear-power capacity(Figures1and2). Today,therearehopesfora“nuclearrenaissance”butnuclearenergyinWestern Europe and North America, which together account for 63 percent of current globalcapacity,isbeingdoggedagainbyhighcapitalcostsanditisnotyetclear thatnewconstructionwilloffsettheretirementofoldcapacity.Costescalation is more contained in East Asia, where the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA)expects42to75percentofglobalnuclearcapacityexpansionby2030to occur—mostlyinChina.China’stopnuclearsafetyregulatorhasraisedconcerns, however, about “construction quality and operational safety” [New York Times, 16 Dec. 2009] and, even for its high-nuclear-growth projection, the IAEA does notexpectnuclearpowertosignificantlyincreaseitscurrentshareofabout15 percentofglobalelectric-powergeneration. Themostimportantdangerfromfissionisthatitstechnologyormaterialsmaybe usedtomakenuclearweapons.Ofthethirty-onenationsthathavenuclearpower today,sevenarenuclear-weaponstates1andalmostalltheothershavetheirnon- weaponstatusstabilizedbyeitherbeingpartoftheEuropeanUnionandNATOor anotherclosealliancetotheUnitedStates.Suchstabilizingarrangementsdonot existforthemajorityofthecountriesthathaveexpressedaninterestinacquiring their first nuclear power plants (See Introduction, Table 2). Of these, some are suspectedofhavingmixedmotivesfortheirinterestinfissiontechnology. 1 In historical order: the United States, Russia, the United Kingdom, France, China, India andPakistan.IsraelandNorthKoreahavenuclearweaponsbutdonothavenuclearpower plants. The Uncertain Future of Nuclear Energy 1 2 GWe GWe 400 200 30 25 35 10 15 50 20 25 30 35 10 15 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 5 1967 1954 [IAEA-PRIS, 9January 2010]. [IAEA-PRIS, 9January 2010]. Figure 1.Figure Figure 2.Figure 1969 1957 1971 1960 1973 1963 Growth of global nuclear-power capacity (GWe) Nuclear capacity installed by year (GWe) 1975 1966 1977 1969 1979 1981 1972 1983 1975 1985 1978 1987 1981 1989 1984 1991 1993 1987 1995 1990 1997 1993 1999 1996 2001 1999 2003 2002 2005 2007 2005 2009 2008 Thedominantnuclearpowerreactortypetoday,thelight-waterreactor(LWR),is relativelyproliferationresistantwhenoperatedona“once-through”fuelcycle.It isfueledwithlow-enricheduranium(LEU),whichcannotbeusedtomakenuclear
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Bfd3bbcbd97066fa41086d0bc3b
    [email protected] www.po-mayak.ru FSUE “Mayak” PA 3 4 FSUE “Mayak” PA www.po-mayak.ru [email protected] Federal State Unitary Enterprise «Mayak» Production Association is the first Russian nuclear industrial site. Present-day PA «Mayak» is an up- to-date and dynamically developing enterprise of the State Atomic Energy Corporation «Rosatom». «Mayak» PA is the leading Russian and one of the biggest world manufacturers of sealed radionuclide sources. The product mix offered today by «Mayak» PA to domestic and foreign customers, includes more than 200 codes of alpha-, beta-, gamma- and neutron sources with various dimensional and radiation specifications, and with reactor isotopes Cobalt-60, Iridium-192, fission isotopes Caesium-137, Americium-241, Plutonium-239, Promethium-147, Strontium-90, etc., as their active material, as well as bulk isotopes with Carbon-14 and Helium-3 gas among them. Ionising sources are widely used for various scientific and technical applications such as radiation processing equipment, oil-well logging, industrial NDT instruments, gamma-radiography, various process control and measurement instruments and other gauges, and also in medicine. At present, acting under the Federal Law dated 11.07.2011, No. 190- FZ, «Mayak» PA accepts for long-term storage and re-processing the disused ionising sources operated in Russia and made both by «Mayak» PA and other manufacturers and Mayak’s origin sources operated outside Russia. At present «Mayak» PA has become an independent player in the market of re-sourcing of radiation facilities and machines. «Mayak» PA offers «from cradle to grave» service package that covers the entire life-cycle of the sources from their manufacture to disposal and allows working directly with organisations operating Mayak’s origin sources.
    [Show full text]
  • Global Nuclear Markets – Market Arrangements and Service Agreements
    INL/EXT-16-38796 Global Nuclear Markets – Market Arrangements and Service Agreements Brent Dixon Leilani Beard June 2016 The INL is a U.S. Department of Energy National Laboratory operated by Battelle Energy Alliance DISCLAIMER This information was prepared as an account of work sponsored by an agency of the U.S. Government. Neither the U.S. Government nor any agency thereof, nor any of their employees, makes any warranty, expressed or implied, or assumes any legal liability or responsibility for the accuracy, completeness, or usefulness, of any information, apparatus, product, or process disclosed, or represents that its use would not infringe privately owned rights. References herein to any specific commercial product, process, or service by trade name, trade mark, manufacturer, or otherwise, does not necessarily constitute or imply its endorsement, recommendation, or favoring by the U.S. Government or any agency thereof. The views and opinions of authors expressed herein do not necessarily state or reflect those of the U.S. Government or any agency thereof. INL/EXT-16-38796 Global Nuclear Markets – Market Arrangements and Service Agreements Brent Dixon Leilani Beard June 2016 Idaho National Laboratory Nuclear Systems Design & Analysis Division Idaho Falls, Idaho 83415 Prepared for the U.S. Department of Energy Office of Energy Policy and Systems Analysis Under U.S. Department of Energy-Idaho Operations Office Contract DE-AC07-05ID14517 Forward The U.S. Department of Energy’s Office of Energy Policy and Systems Analysis (EPSA) requested an assessment of global nuclear markets, including the structure of nuclear companies in different countries and the partnerships between reactor vendors and buyers.
    [Show full text]
  • CONTENTS Back to Contents
    NEWSLETTER #8 (244) AUGUST 2021 CONTENTS Back to contents ROSATOM NEWS TRENDS Kudankulam, High Five! Nuclear Technology Saves Lives Arctic Sea Lane ROSATOM GEOGRAPHY Russian Atom Reaches New Heights NEWSLETTER #8 (244) AUGUST 2021 ROSATOM NEWS Back to contents Представители ТВЭЛ, ENUSA, ENSA и IDOM подписывают меморандум we are prepared to launch mass Kudankulam, construction of Russian- designed power units with the state-of-the-art Generation High Five! III+ reactors at other sites in India. This possibility is stipulated in our existing Construction of Kudankulam Unit 5 agreements,” Director General of Rosatom has been officially kicked off. This is Alexey Likhachev said at the ceremony. the third stage of the Indian nuclear project carried out by Rosatom. Kudankulam profile The ceremony of pouring the first concrete for the basemat of Kudankulam Unit 5 The fifth power unit is constructed within located in the same-name town in the Indian the framework of a Russian- Indian treaty state of Tamil Nadu was held on June 29. signed in November 1988 and amended in June 1998. Since then, Rosatom has “The nuclear construction project in constructed and put in operation two power Kudankulam has been a symbol of close units of the Kudankulam Nuclear Power collaboration between Russia and India Plant. The first of them was connected to for many years. But it is not the time to the Indian national power grid in October rest — Rosatom possesses all the most 2013, followed by the other in August 2016. advanced nuclear energy technologies. In The two units have VVER-1000 reactors, the a partnership with our Indian colleagues, most powerful in India.
    [Show full text]
  • Rosatom: Continuous Nuclear Contamination of the Area Around the Mayak Complex
    Greenpeace Justice for Section International People and Planet Case Studies Rosatom: Continuous nuclear contamination of the area around the Mayak complex Russian nuclear corporation Rosatom has been Company activity responsible for a series of nuclear accidents at its Nuclear power and power engineering assets, as well Mayak complex, and victims have been unable to as nuclear power plant (NPP) and facilities of full nuclear secure either justice or remedy in part due to the fuel cycle design and construction.5 Rosatom is also impunity of the state-owned company in Russian responsible for part of the military nuclear activities of courts. Russia, including in Mayak. The company has a range of other businesses, including power generation in its Problem Analysis existing nuclear plants; it has a renewable division with increasing investments in wind; and it has uranium mining The Kyshtym nuclear disaster, caused by the Mayak and nuclear weapon development, amongst others. nuclear complex, was the third worst nuclear disaster in history. Despite this the Mayak nuclear complex, whose Country and location in which core business is reprocessing spent nuclear fuel, remains in the violation occurred operation. Local residents are affected both by the historical contamination and by the emissions from current activities. Ozyorsk, Chelyabinsk Oblast, the Southern Urals region, Today Mayak is run by Rosatom, Russia’s state nuclear Russia corporation. This case illustrates how the Russian state and its flagship company work closely together to continue their Summary of the case operations, despite the negative impacts on both public Rosatom’s Mayak Combine is part of the Russian state health and the environment.
    [Show full text]
  • Mayak" Plant: Case History and the First Version of a Computer Simulator
    LBL-36212 RAC-1 The Cascade of Reservoirs of the "Mayak" Plant: Case History and the First Version of a Computer Simulator M.V. Mironenko, M.Yu. Spasennykh, V.B. Polyakov, S. Ivanitskii, A.V. Garanin, A.G. Volosov, and I.L. Khodakovsky, Vernadsky Institute of Geochemistry and Analytical Chemistry of the Russian Academy of Sciences, Moscow, Russia A.B. Smirnov, G.Yu. Mokrov, Y.G. Glagolenko, and Eu.G. Drozhko Production Association "Mayak," Ministry of Atomic Energy, Chelyabinsk-65, Russia July 1994 Lawrence Berkeley Laboratory University of California Berkeley, California 94720 t~» This work was supponed by the U.S. Department of Energy, Office of Environmental Management, Office of Technology Development, and the Office of Energy Research, Office of Basic Energy Sciences, under Contract No. DE-AC03-76SF00O98. DISTRIBUTION OF THIS DOCUMENT IS UNLIMITED T ABSTRACT The improvement of the ecological conditions at waste storing reservoirs is an important task of the restoration activity at Production Association (PA) "Mayak" (South Urals). The radionuclides, mostly ^Sr, 137Cs, and chemical pollutants deposited in the reservoir water and in the bottom sediment are very dangerous sources for the contamination of Techa River below the reservoirs and the contamination of groundwater in the suirounding formations. The spreading of radioactive contaminants has both hydrogeological and the chemical features. The thermodynamic approach used to account for physical-chemical interactions between water and the bed rocks based on Gibbs free energy minimization of multicomponent system (H-O-Ca-Mg-K-Na-S-Cl-C-Sr) permitted to calculate the corresponding ionic and complex species existing in the solutions, and to characterize the processes of precipitation and dissolution.
    [Show full text]
  • State Atomic Energy Corporation Rosatom
    STATE ATOMIC ENERGY CORPORATION ROSATOM. STATE ATOMIC ENERGY CORPORATION ROSATOM. PERFORMANCE IN 2019 PERFORMANCE IN 2019 PERFORMANCE OF STATE ATOMIC ENERGY CORPORATION ROSATOM IN 2019 TABLE OF CONTENTS Report Profile 4 CHAPTER 7. DEVELOPMENT OF THE NORTHERN SEA ROUTE 122 7.1. Escorting Vessels and Handling Cargo Traffic along the Northern Sea Route 127 CHAPTER 1. OUR ACHIEVEMENTS 6 7.2. Construction of New Icebreakers 128 History of the Russian Nuclear Industry 8 7.3. New Products 128 ROSATOM Today 10 7.4. Digitization of Operations 128 Key Results in 2019 14 7.5. Activities of FSUE Hydrographic Enterprise 129 Key Events in 2019 15 7.6. Plans for 2020 and for the Medium Term 130 Address by the Chairman of the Supervisory Board 16 Address by the Director General 17 CHAPTER 8. EFFECTIVE MANAGEMENT OF RESOURCES 132 Address by a Stakeholder Representative 18 8.1. Corporate Governance 135 Financial and Economic Results 20 8.2. Risk Management 141 8.3. Performance of Government Functions 155 CHAPTER 2. STRATEGY FOR A SUSTAINABLE FUTURE 22 8.4. Financial and Investment Management 158 2.1. Business Strategy until 2030 24 8.5. ROSATOM Production System 164 2.2. Sustainable Development Management 28 8.6. Procurement Management 168 2.3. Value Creation and Business Model 34 8.7. Internal Control System 172 8.8. Prevention of Corruption and Other Offences 174 CHAPTER 3. CONTRIBUTION TO GLOBAL DEVELOPMENT 40 3.1. Markets Served by ROSATOM 42 CHAPTER 9. DEVELOPMENT OF HUMAN POTENTIAL 176 3.2. International Cooperation 55 AND INFRASTRUCTURE 3.3. International Business 63 9.1.
    [Show full text]
  • Plans for Spent Nuclear Fuel Reprocessing at Mayak PA up to 2030
    Plans for Spent Nuclear Fuel Reprocessing at Mayak PA up to 2030 IAEA Contact Expert Group Workshop: Economic Aspects of Spent Fuel Management: Reprocessing and Direct Disposal 6-7 October 2011, Stockholm, Sweden FSUE MAYAK PA MAYAK PA Facilities Federal State Unitary Enterprise MAYAK Production Association 2 SNF Reprocessing Goals Conversion of spent nuclear fuel into safe form Nuclear material recycling Product manufacturing for various industry sectors Federal State Unitary Enterprise MAYAK Production Association 3 Short History Establishment and Development of RT-1 Facility 1967 - start-up of RT facility construction 1971 – arrival of the fist trainload of SNF 1977 – put in operation of the first two process lines 1984 – mastering of BN SNF reprocessing 1988 – start-up of the vitrification facility operation 1988 - put in operation of the third process line 1996 – start-up of the HLW fractionation facility operation 5 000 t SNF have been reprocessed within the total facility operation period Federal State Unitary Enterprise MAYAK Production Association 4 Principal Activities at the RT-1 Facility Full-scale reprocessing of spent nuclear fuel of - power reactors WWER-440 and BN-600, - reactors of transport ship facilities, - research reactors, - industrial reactors Production of recycled uranium of the call-off quality low enriched uranyl nitrate fusion cake middle enriched triuranium octaoxide Radioisotope production: Cs-137, Kr-85, Am-241, Pu-238, Sr-90, Pm-147 Federal State Unitary Enterprise MAYAK Production Association 5 Electric
    [Show full text]
  • TENEX Coporate Booklet
    ABOUTAbout TENEX TENEX TENEX, Joint Stock Company (brand name TENEX operates in strict accordance with TENEX) is one of the world’s leading suppliers legal requirements, international quality and of nuclear fuel cycle (NFC) products with an safety standards. TENEX shares the values impeccable reputation and its history dating for of sustainable development and takes a over half a century. responsible approach to managing economic, social and environmental impacts, guided by Year of the principles of openness and respect for the 1963 establishment interests of all stakeholders. TENEX is the main organization of the «Sales and trading» division of Rosatom State Nuclear Energy Corporation (ROSATOM), with NFC Logistics, Joint-Stock Company, Joint Stock Company “Saint-Petersburg “IZOTOP”, Uranium One Group, Joint-Stock Company and foreign subsidiaries performing marketing and sales activities in the key operations regions included into its management contour. BUSINESSBusiness Profile NEWNew business streams BUSINESS Uranium Spent Nuclear Years of experience in the global market allows TENEX group to act as a global development platform. U products Fuel Products The business diversification strategy provides for the development of several areas: «biofuels» and «rare PROFILETENEX supplies all key regional segments of TENEX promotes to the global market the STREAMSmetals» (lithium, etc.). The first is associated with the development of «green» energy, and the second - the global market with uranium products such environmentally friendly technological
    [Show full text]
  • The Plutonium Challenge-Environmental Issues
    Plutonium Overview The Plutonium Challenge Environmental issues he environmental concerns about plutonium stem from its potentially harmful effects on human health. Unlike many industrial materials whose Ttoxicity was discovered only after years of use, plutonium was immediately recognized as dangerous and as requiring special handling care. Consequently, the health effects on plutonium workers in the United States and the general public have been remarkably benign. Nevertheless, the urgency of the wartime effort and the intensity of the arms race during the early years of the Cold War resulted in large amounts of radioactivity being released into the environment in the United States and Russia. These issues are being addressed now, especially in the United States. Science and international cooperation will play a large role in minimizing the potential health effects on future generations. Environmental Consequences of the Cold War The environmental problems resulting from wartime and Cold War nuclear operations were for the most part kept out of public view during the arms race between the United States and the Soviet Union. On the other hand, concerns over health effects from atmospheric testing were debated during the 1950s, leading to the 1963 Limited Test Ban Treaty, which banned nuclear testing everywhere except underground. The U.S. nuclear weapons complex was not opened for public scrutiny until the late 1980s, following a landmark court decision on mercury cont- amination at the Oak Ridge, Tennessee, facilities of the Department of Energy (DOE) in 1984. In the Soviet Union, all nuclear matters, including environmental problems in the nuclear weapons complex, were kept secret.
    [Show full text]
  • Nuclear Navy United States Atomic Energy Commission Historical Advisory Committee
    Nuclear Navy United States Atomic Energy Commission Historical Advisory Committee Chairman, Alfred D. Chandler, Jr. Harvard University John T. Conway Consolidated Edison Company Lauchlin M. Currie Carmel, California A. Hunter Dupree Brown University Ernest R. May Harvard University Robert P. Multhauf Smithsonian Institution Nuclear Navy 1946-1962 Richard G. Hewlett and Francis Duncan The University of Chicago Press Chicago and London The University of Chicago Press Chicago 60637 The University of Chicago Press Ltd., London Published 1974 Printed in the United States of America International Standard Book Number: 0-226-33219-5 Library of Congress Catalog Card Number: 74-5726 RICHARD G. HEWLETT is chief historian of the U. S. Atomic Energy Commission. He is coauthor, with Oscar E. Anderson, Jr., of The New World, 1939-1946 and, with Francis Duncan, of Atomic Shield, 1947-1952. FRANCIS DUNCAN is assistant historian of the U.S. Atomic Energy Commission. He is the coauthor of Atomic Shield. [1974] VA Contents Illustrations vii Foreword ix Preface xi 1 2 3 4 Control The The The of the Idea Question of Structure Sea and the Leadership of Responsi- 1 Challenge 52 bility 15 88 5 6 7 8 Emerging Prototypes Toward Nuclear Patterns of and a Nuclear Power Technical Submarines Fleet Beyond Management 153 194 the Navy 121 225 9 10 11 12 Propulsion Building Fleet The for the the Nuclear Operation Measure Fleet Fleet and of Accom- 258 297 Maintenance plishment 340 377 Appendix 1: Table of Organization Abbreviations 404 393 Notes 405 Appendix 2: Construction of the Sources 453 Nuclear Navy 399 Index 461 Appendix 3: Financial Data 402 V Illustrations Charts 8.
    [Show full text]
  • List of Congress Delegates № Company Name Surname Position 1 AB Engineering St
    List of Congress Delegates № Company Name Surname Position 1 AB Engineering St. Petersburg Alexandr Alexandrov General Director 2 AB Engineering St. Petersburg Ekaterina Antonen Progect manager 3 AEM-Technology Evgeniy Pakermanov General manager 4 AEOI Rais Ali 5 AF-Consult Roberto Gerosa President International Division 6 Afrikantov OKBM Mechanical Engineering Boris Vasilyev Chief Designer 7 Afrikantov OKBM Mechanical Engineering Feliks Lisitsa Adviser of Director 8 Afrikantov OKBM Mechanical Engineering Igor Shmelev Head of Department 9 Afrikantov OKBM Mechanical Engineering Oleg Kondratenkov Head of Communications Department 10 Afrikantov OKBM Mechanical Engineering Valentin Budilov Head of Bureau 11 Afrikantov OKBM Mechanical Engineering Vitaliy Petrunin First Deputy Director 12 Afrikantov OKBM Mechanical Engineering Vladimir Galushkin Leading Engineer 13 Afrikantov OKBM Mechanical Engineering Yulia Kolesova Engineer 14 Afrikantov OKBM Mechanical Engineering Yuriy Fadeev Chief Designer 15 Agency for Atomic Energy of Hungary Kristof Horvath Deputy Director 16 AKKUYU NPP Alexander Superfin General Director 17 AKME JSC Natalia Zaitseva Strategic Development and International Relations 18 Alexandrov Research Institute of Technology Vyacheslav Vasilenko Director General 19 Alstom Andrey Lavrinenko Regional VP GPS Russia 20 Alstom Alexandr Tsvetkov General director 21 ALVEL Jan Love Consultant 22 ALVEL Josef Belac Chairman of the Board of Directors 23 Amirkabir University of Technology Hossein Afarideh 24 ANDRA Gerald Ouzounian Director international Division 25 ANDRA Jelena Bol 26 Arako Rovshan Abbasov General Director 27 Areva Lyudovik Devos Head of the Delegation 28 Areva Olga Dementieva Project Manager 29 Areva Ludovic Devos Chief representative in Rusia and the CIS 30 Areva Ingo Koban Vice President 31 Areva Luc Oursel President 32 Areva Od Martino Marketing Manager 33 ARMZ Uranium Holding Co.
    [Show full text]
  • Rickover and the Nuclear Navy Rickover and the Nuclear Navy
    The Preface on pages xvii-xix has been altered to correct a typesetting error in the printed book. All of the text is unchanged, but sections of the text have been rearranged to place paragraphs in the proper order. Rickover and the Nuclear Navy Rickover and the Nuclear Navy THE DISCIPLINE OF TECHNOLOGY by Francis Duncan Naval Institute Press Annapolis, Maryland Published 1989 by the United States Naval Institute Annapolis, Maryland Copyright © 1989 on the foreword All rights reserved. Prepared by the Department of Energy; work made for hire. Library of Congress Cataloging-in-Publication Data Duncan, Francis, 1922- Rickover and the nuclear navy : the discipline of technology / by Francis Duncan. p. cm. Includes bibliographical references. ISBN 0-87021-236-2 1. Rickover, Hyman George. 2. Nuclear submarines—United States— History. 3. Admirals—United States—Biography 4. United States. Navy—Biography. I. Title. V63.R54D86 1989 359.3'2574'0973—dc20 89-39097 CIP This edition is authorized for sale only in the United States, its territories and possessions, and Canada. Printed in the United States of America 9 8 7 6 5 4 3 2 First printing Contents Foreword vii Preface xvii Acknowledgments xxv 1. Common Denominators 1 2. Submarines 17 3. Thresher 52 4. Surface Ships—First Battles 99 5. Surface Ships—The Alliance with Congress 115 6. Surface Ships—Legislating Nuclear Power into the Fleet 147 7. Technology and Diplomacy: The Multilateral Force 170 8. Shippingport 190 9. The Devil Is in the Details 232 10. Independence and Control 252 11. Discipline of Technology 279 Appendix 1.
    [Show full text]