DOCSLIB.ORG

India: Protests Against Koodankulam Nuclear

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
India: Protests Against Koodankulam Nuclear FEBRUARY 8, 2007 | No. 652 INDIA: PROTESTS AGAINST KOODANKULAM NUCLEAR PROJECT INDIA: PROTESTS AGAINST KOODANKULAM NUCLEAR Our most decent, most democratic and most lameduck Prime PROJECT 1 Minister Manmohan Singh signed a deal for four additional USA: NRC MUST REVIEW nuclear plants at Koodankulam with the Russian President Putin N-TERRORISM IN CALIFORNIA on January 27, 2007 even before the public hearing process was LICENSING 2 held for the same. The first hearing was held on October 6. Some SWEDEN: LEAKED REPORT 700 to 800 people unexpectedly turned up and the group REVEALS SAFETY BREACHES AT included many rural women who were not reluctant to speak FORSMARK 3 their minds. The meeting prematurely ended in chaos. The SWEDEN: NUCLEAR CHALLENGE second hearing was scheduled for January 31. TO ENVIRONMENTAL CODE (652.5782) SACCER - Alarmed by the Koodankulam authorities cunningly FAILS 4 plan of the Koodankulam authorities to ducked and conveniently claimed that NUCLEAR POWER POLICY IN take water from the Pechiparai irrigation they were setting up desalination plants EUROPE 5 dam in Kanyakumari district, several with Israeli technology and hence they farmers' organizations and fisherpeople's were not going to take Pechiparai dam ENERGY (R)EVOLUTION: A associations started organizing against water. When we pointed out their claim SUSTAINABLE WORLD ENERGY that dangerous move. This dam water in the official EIA report and in a recent OUTLOOK 6 plan was recorded in the official EIA journal article written by a senior nuclear IN BRIEF 8 (Environmental Impact Assessment) official, they claimed that they were all report that the Koodankulam authorities mistakes. Typical nuclear behaviour! had prepared for the additional four nuclear power plants they were planning The TNPCB (Tamil Nadu Pollution at Koodankulam. Control Board) was going to hold the postponed public hearing for the Several meetings were organized in Koodankulam nuclear power plants III, IV, October 2006 to plan the centenary V and VI on January 31, 2007 at 10:30 celebrations of the Pechiparai Dam and am at Koodankulam. The newspaper ads to think about the ways and means of said that the hearing would be held at preventing the Koodankulam authorities the town hall at Koodankulam but later from usurping the irrigation water from we found out that the public hearing us to use it in the wasteful and would be held at one of their own dangerous nuclear programs. The newly meeting halls in the nuclear power set up "Kanyakumari District Water project township itself. Resources Protection Federation" organized a massive public meeting on The public hearing announcement November 4, 2006 at Thuckalay to indicated that the possible issue of discuss the threats to our water displacement of the local people would resources from various quarters, also be dealt with in the meeting. This including the nuclear dragon. The last straw broke the proverbial camel's back for the Koodankulam public. They all kinds of ridiculous ground plans to Thoothukudi districts of Tamil Nadu into were already deeply disturbed by the explain that they could have upto eight the deadly nuclear trap. The local press facts that the promised 10,000 jobs plants on the existing land. Our most and other media who are pampered by never came and the proclaimed decent, most democratic and most the nuclear ads and booze (and what economic boom never happened. lameduck Prime Minister not) do not want to report anything that When they were also going to be (White)Manmohan Singh signed the is unpleasant for the nuke bosses. The kicked out of their village, the deal for the four additional nuclear political parties that speak so much Koodankulam people said 'enough is plants at Koodankulam with the about the Tamil race and its welfare, enough', founded the "People's Rights Russian President Putin on January 27, tend to think that the people of the Movement" and organized protest 2007 even before the public hearing southern districts are Martians who marches, fasting, road blocks and so was held for the same. Perhaps he deserve to be nuked. The religious forth on three consecutive days in late knows that the whole public hearing elements are busy with their January 2007. exercise is a sham and a fraud on the enlightened escapades. people of India. Seeing the latest developments in So the local people are left to fend for Koodankulam, the neighboring fishing The plan for Koodankulam seems to ourselves. We are organizing slowly, and farming villages also rose up with include six Russian-made VVER steadily but surely. Wish us luck and do fresh energy and enthusiasm. None of nuclear power plants producing 6000 something in your area too for the them want to have four more additional MW power, two Indian-made fast danger of nuclearism is taking over the nuclear power plants in their midst and breeder plants producing 400 MW entire globe. they also want to stop the construction power each, a possible reprocessing of the first two plants. plant, and also a weapons production Source and contact: SACCER (South facility. This dangerous "temple of Asian Community Center for Education Taken aback by this popular upsurge science and technology" will be the and Research) promoting life-long, life- and groundswell, the authorities quietly biggest nuclear facility in the entire wide and life-deep education postponed the public hearing once world. S.P. Udayakumar, 42/27 Esankai Mani again. The nuclear authorities from the Veethy, Parakkai Road Jn, Nagercoil topmost boss to the bottommost peon With the public hearing postponed 629 002, Tamil Nadu, India tried in vain to reassure the people that indefinitely, the nuclear authorities are Tel: +91-4652-240657/253295 nobody would be displaced. Typical scheming on how to trick the people of Email: [email protected], nuclear behaviour! They came up with Tirunelveli, Kanyakumari and [email protected] USA: NRC MUST REVIEW N-TERRORISM IN CALIFORNIA LICENSING On January 16, 2007 the United States Supreme Court refused to hear Pacific Gas & Electric's (PG&E) appeal backed by the Bush Administration for a review of the San Francisco-based 9th Circuit Federal Court of Appeals' decision concerning the environmental impacts of nuclear terrorism. The lower court had ruled that the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) must hear the case of the San Luis Obispo Mothers for Peace, Sierra Club and Peg Pinard, collectively MFP, as a requirement of the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA). (652.5782) NIRS - The Mothers For 9/11 attacks, that terrorism was "too attacks and acts of sabotage at nuclear Peace (MFP) had challenged the speculative and remote" to be applied power plants. The ruling potentially construction license for a dry cask in any of its site-specific proceedings. effects seven additional licensing radioactive waste storage system at hearings including 20-year license California's Diablo Canyon nuclear PG&E had argued to the high court that extensions for the Oyster Creek, power plant on the consequences of a an environmental impact statement on Palisades, Pilgrim and Vermont Yankee successful terrorist attack. The NRC the consequences of terrorism isn't nuclear power stations and challenges dismissed the hearing request by a required under federal law and "would to an Early Site Permit application for similar Order that has been applied in place an unnecessary and duplicative new construction at Mississippi's Grand earlier National Environmental Policy burden" on the power company. Gulf nuclear power plant, an application Act (NEPA) hearing requests including a to construct and operate an industrial NIRS challenge to license extensions The Supreme Court justices' decision, irradiator in Hawaii, and the state of for Duke Power's Catawba and without comment, opens the door to Utah's appeal of the NRC license McGuire nuclear power stations. In all further legal actions where NRC handed to Private Fuel Storage for an those cases, the federal agency dismissed public challenges on the Away-From-Reactor nuclear dump in concluded, just over a year after the environmental impacts of terrorist Tooele County, Utah. NIRS was 2 NUCLEAR MONITOR 652 involved in two of those seven legal space for irradiated fuel rods in densely The licensing board's decision against challenges. packed nuclear waste storage pools. Massachusetts signals NRC's While the court ruling bars PG&E from intentions to ignore the Supreme "After the events of September 11, off loading the nuclear waste from the Court's rejection in the other legal 2001, it is only reasonable that the pools into storage casks until it circuits. significant health and environmental complies with a hearing it does not halt risks of terrorist attacks be considered the construction of the onsite storage Meanwhile, the NRC Commissioners when designing and building nuclear facility itself. Current onsite nuclear voted on January 29, 5-0, to reject facilities," said MFP spokesperson waste storage designs in the United requirements for nuclear power plants Jane Swanson. The NRC must now States consist of a variety of cask to defend against September 11th style issue a new environmental assessment designs that are openly congregated on attacks. Commission Chair Dale Klein addressing the impacts of an concrete pads. claimed that the nation's nuclear power intentional attack on the proposed plants are structurally robust and can radioactive waste dump. The focus of Within days after the Supreme Court withstand any aircraft attack without MFP is to require a new environmental decision, a NRC licensing board significant consequences. The assessment that would not only dismissed a legal challenge by the Commission also rejected requirements evaluate consequences but Massachusetts Attorney General for a for nuclear power plants to have consideration of hardening onsite hearing on the consequences of a enough defense forces to repel a storage of nuclear waste by building successful terrorist attack on the ground or water borne attack by a berms around more robust casks that nuclear waste storage pool in Vermont force of 19 suicidal attackers are dispersed over the reactor site.
Load more

Recommended publications
  • From Gen I to Gen III
    From Gen I to Gen III Gabriel Farkas Slovak University of Technology in Bratislava Ilkovicova 3, 81219 Bratislava [email protected] 14. 9. 2010 1 Evolution of Nuclear Reactors Generation I - demonstration reactors Generation II - working in the present Generation III - under construction 14. 9. 2010 2 Generation IV - R&D 14. 9. 2010 3 Expected development in nuclear technologies Prolongation of lifetieme of existing nuclear reactors Construction of new reactors in frame of Gen. III and IV . Figure 1 Replacement staggered over a 30-year period (2020 - 2050) Rate of construction : 2,000 MW/year 70000 60000 Lifetime 50000 prolongation 40000 Generation IV 30000 Actual reactors 20000 Generation III+ 10000 0 197519801985199019952000200520102015202020252030203520402045205020552060 14. 9. 2010 Average plant life : 48 years 4 Nuclear in Europe (Nuclear ~ 32% of total EU electricity production) SE, 7.3% UK, 7.9% SP, 5.8% BE,4.8% CZ, 2.5% GE, 16.3% FI, 2.4% BU, 1.8% Other 12.4% SK, 1.7% HU, 1.4% LT, 1.1% FR, 45.5% SI, 0.6% NL, RO, 0.5% 0.4% Source PRIS 14. 9. 2010 5 Central & Eastern Europe - Nuclear Landscape Russia Lithuania Ukraine 6 VVER440 Poland 1 RBMK 1300 2 VVER440 8 VVER1000 Min. of Energy 13 VVER1000 NNEGC State owned 11 RBMK 1 BN600 4 Graph Mod BWR Czech Republic Rosenergoatom State 4 VVER440 owned 2 VVER1000 CEZ/ 67% State Romania owned 2 Candu PHW Nuclearelectrica State owned Slovak Republic 4/6 VVER440 Bulgaria ENEL 67% owned 2/4 VVER1000 NEC State owned Hungary Armenia 4 VVER 440 1 VVER440 MVM State owned Armatomenergo, State owned 14.
    [Show full text]
  • Vver and Rbmk Cross Section Libraries for Origen-Arp
    VVER AND RBMK CROSS SECTION LIBRARIES FOR ORIGEN-ARP Germina Ilas, Brian D. Murphy, and Ian C. Gauld, Oak Ridge National Laboratory, USA Introduction An accurate treatment of neutron transport and depletion in modern fuel assemblies characterized by heterogeneous, complex designs, such as the VVER or RBMK assembly configurations, requires the use of advanced computational tools capable of simulating multi-dimensional geometries. The depletion module TRITON [1], which is part of the SCALE code system [2] that was developed and is maintained at the Oak Ridge National Laboratory (ORNL), allows the depletion simulation of two- or three-dimensional assembly configurations and the generation of burnup-dependent cross section libraries. These libraries can be saved for subsequent use with the ORIGEN-ARP module in SCALE. This later module is a faster alternative to TRITON for fuel depletion, decay, and source term analyses at an accuracy level comparable to that of a direct TRITON simulation. This paper summarizes the methodology used to generate cross section libraries for VVER and RBMK assembly configurations that can be employed in ORIGEN-ARP depletion and decay simulations. It briefly describes the computational tools and provides details of the steps involved. Results of validation studies for some of the libraries, which were performed using isotopic assay measurement data for spent fuel, are provided and discussed. Cross section libraries for ORIGEN-ARP Methodology The TRITON capability to perform depletion simulations for two-dimensional (2-D) configurations was implemented by coupling of the 2-D transport code NEWT with the point depletion and decay code ORIGEN-S. NEWT solves the transport equation on a 2-D arbitrary geometry grid by using an SN approach, with a treatment of the spatial variable that is based on an extended step characteristic method [3].
    [Show full text]
  • A Comparison of Advanced Nuclear Technologies
    A COMPARISON OF ADVANCED NUCLEAR TECHNOLOGIES Andrew C. Kadak, Ph.D MARCH 2017 B | CHAPTER NAME ABOUT THE CENTER ON GLOBAL ENERGY POLICY The Center on Global Energy Policy provides independent, balanced, data-driven analysis to help policymakers navigate the complex world of energy. We approach energy as an economic, security, and environmental concern. And we draw on the resources of a world-class institution, faculty with real-world experience, and a location in the world’s finance and media capital. Visit us at energypolicy.columbia.edu facebook.com/ColumbiaUEnergy twitter.com/ColumbiaUEnergy ABOUT THE SCHOOL OF INTERNATIONAL AND PUBLIC AFFAIRS SIPA’s mission is to empower people to serve the global public interest. Our goal is to foster economic growth, sustainable development, social progress, and democratic governance by educating public policy professionals, producing policy-related research, and conveying the results to the world. Based in New York City, with a student body that is 50 percent international and educational partners in cities around the world, SIPA is the most global of public policy schools. For more information, please visit www.sipa.columbia.edu A COMPARISON OF ADVANCED NUCLEAR TECHNOLOGIES Andrew C. Kadak, Ph.D* MARCH 2017 *Andrew C. Kadak is the former president of Yankee Atomic Electric Company and professor of the practice at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology. He continues to consult on nuclear operations, advanced nuclear power plants, and policy and regulatory matters in the United States. He also serves on senior nuclear safety oversight boards in China. He is a graduate of MIT from the Nuclear Science and Engineering Department.
    [Show full text]
  • Future EQ Perspectives for Russian Global New-Build Projects
    Future EQ Perspectives for Russian Global New-Build Projects Natalia Amosova Principal Consultant Lean Six Sigma Black Belt [email protected] +41 79 458 77 13 Prepared for 2020 Curtiss-Wright EQ Technical Meeting November 2020 November, 2020 Curtiss-Wright EQ Technical Meeting 2020 - [email protected] 1 The Water-Water Energy Reactor “VVER” Development and generations + Total number of 106 VVER‘s build since 1960 + Three generations in operation: + VVER-440 + VVER-1000 + VVER-1200 (AES-2006) + Generation III+ under construction: + VVER-1300 (TOI) + New designs developed for future projects: + MIR-1200 + VVER-1500 + VVER-1700 + VVER-600 November, 2020 Curtiss-Wright EQ Technical Meeting 2020 - [email protected] 2 Rosatom Group + Russian government owned corporation, responsible for all nuclear applications + Consists of over 350 specialized companies throughout the whole fuel cycle, of which relevant for us: + Rosatom Overseas (RAOS) - vendor for VVER outside of Russia + AtomEnergoProm (AEP) - designer of the plant + AtomStroyExport (ASE) – main contractor for the international NPP construction + Titan-2 - main contractor for the international NPP construction + AtomEnergoMash (AEM) – Main equipment manufacturer + World leader in todays‘ newbuild portfolio + 28 VVERs under construction (international and domestic) + Total new-build portfolio >130 B. USD November, 2020 Curtiss-Wright EQ Technical Meeting 2020 - [email protected] 3 The Overseas New-Build Projects Overview Rosatom Overseas (RAOS) Plant name Country Unit number
    [Show full text]
  • Advanced Sodium Fast Reactor Power Unit Concept
    International Conference on Fast Reactors and Related Fuel Cycles: Challenges and Opportunities (FR 09 ) Advanced Sodium Fast Reactor Power Unit Concept a a a V.M. Poplavsky , A.M. Tsybulya , Yu.E. Bagdasarov , b b b b B.A. Vasilyev , Yu.L. Kamanin , S.L. Osipov , N.G.Kuzavkov , c c V.N. Yershov , M.R. Ashirmetov a FSUE “SSC RF-IPPE”, Obninsk, Russia b JSC “Afrikantov OKBM”, Nizhny Novgorod, Russia c JSC “SPb AEP”, St. Petersburg, Russia KYOTO, JAPAN 7-11 December 2009 Russian Experience in Development and Implementation of BN Sodium Fast Reactors for NPPs Reactor Development Construction Operation BN-350 1960 - 1965 1965 - 1973 1973 -1998 BN-600 1963 - 1972 1972 - 1980 1980 - in operation 1975 - 1983 BN-800 Under construction Planned for 2014 2002 - 2004 BN-1600 1980's - - BN-1800 2002 - 2005 - - BN-1200 From 2006 - Planned for 2020 Main Tasks and Goals of BN-1200 Development Provide competitiveness against advanced power units with other reactor plants and fossil power plants. Enhance safety to eliminate the need for population protection measures beyond the NPP site in case of any feasible accidents. Ensure the breeding ratio of 1.2 (Stage 1), 1.3-1.35 (Stage 2) for the mixed uranium-plutonium oxide fuel and 1.45, for the nitride fuel. Prepare putting into operation of the reactor series within 2-3 years after the pilot power unit start-up. Approaches to BN-1200 Development Use largely approved BN-600 technical solutions and solutions implemented in the BN-800 as a basis for reactor plant reliable operation.
    [Show full text]
  • Nuclear Fuel for VVER Reactors. Current Status and Prospects
    6th International Conference on WWER Fuel Performance, Modelling and Experimental Support 19–23 September 2005, Albena Congress Center, Bulgaria TVEL Corporation Nuclear fuel for VVER reactors. Current status and prospects 19-23 September, 2005 V.L. Molchanov Nuclear fuel for VVER reactors Main factors determining burnup and operating life of nuclear fuel Fuel assembly performance Fuel rod performance Core physics Technical and economic indicators Nuclear fuel for VVER reactors. Current status and prospects 2 Nuclear fuel for VVER reactors Post-irradiation Operating tests: experience: Core physics: 1) Design criteria are fulfilled; 1) New design 1) Oxide layer on fuel constraints which allow rod (FR) cladding does 2) 5 TVSA stayed at to introduce loading not exceed 15 µm; Kalinin-1 for 6 years up pattern like complete to burnup of 59 2) Fission Gas Release «in-out»; MW×days/kgU; does not exceed 3%; 2) Flexible fuel cycles 3) 12 working 3) Satisfactory assemblies (WA) condition of cladding. operated at Kola-3 for 6 years up to burnup of 57 MW×days/kgU. Nuclear fuel for VVER reactors. Current status and prospects 3 Post-irradiation fuel studies JSC TVEL arranges for post- irradiation studies of full-scale fuel assemblies. During the studies the following is determined: - geometry parameters; - condition of FA components; - properties of zirconium-based materials and fuel composition; - oxidation and hydrating degree; - causes of fuel rod failure. 3 мм 25 мкм Nuclear fuel for VVER reactors. Current status and prospects 4 Nuclear fuel for VVER-440 reactors Type 2004 2005 2006 2007 3.82% (WA and FA SA vibration resistant V-230 Kola NPP design and for V-230 reactors) V-213 4.25% (second generation of WA and FA SA ) Dukovany NPP V-213 3,82;4,38% 4,25% Mohovce NPP V-213 3,82% 4,25% V-230 3,82% Bogunice NPP V-213 3,82% 4,25% Paks NPP V-213 3,82% Novovor.
    [Show full text]
  • VVER Core Design and Safety Analyses
    Nuclear Fuel/Fuel Engineering VVER Core Design and Safety Analyses The standard tool for VVER core design is the advanced APA-H (ALPHA-H, PHOENIX-H, and ANC-H) code system evolved from the well- known and time-proven APA nuclear design code system. APA-H is a flexible tool that can be used for all nuclear design and steady-state safety related calculations and analyses for all VVER cores including VVER-440, VVER-1000 and all newer designs such as VVER-1200, VVER-1500 and VVER-TOI. The Westinghouse VVER thermal-hydraulic (TH) technology includes the sub-channel code VIPRE-W and, Departure from Nucleate Boiling (DNB) correlations for advanced fuel designs. To improve DNB analysis accuracy and for improved DNB margins, Westinghouse has specifically developed empirical DNB correlations for VVER fuel designs containing grid spacers with- or without mixing vanes. For example, the use of the Background WVHI DNB correlation, for non-mixing vane fuel allows increasing the core design power peaking Westinghouse core design and safety analysis factor limit by three percent without any capabilities for VVER reactors lead to customer restrictions and without changing the plant safety success in multiple areas. Examples include fuel analysis of record. Additional DNB margin can be and core designs, supporting power uprate gained with Westinghouse TH statistical design projects, plant optimization projects, design procedures which provide an improved reconstitution, modernization projects, safety methodology for uncertainty treatment of reactor upgrades,
    [Show full text]
  • Highlights of Aerb Activities at a Glance
    HIGHLIGHTS OF AERB ACTIVITIES AT A GLANCE During the year 2015-16, the Atomic Energy Regulatory Board (AERB) continued to carry out safety monitoring and regulatory supervision of nuclear and radiation facilities under its purview. AERB continued its regulatory safety oversight on Indian operating nuclear power plants (21 units), nuclear power projects (2 under site evaluation, 5 under construction and 1 under commissioning), several fuel cycle facilities, research units and large numbers of radiation facilities spread across the country. All operating nuclear power plants and fuel cycle facilities under AERB's purview operated safely during the year and radioactive discharges as well as doses to occupational workers were well within prescribed limits. The radioactive releases from NPPs remained well within the limits authorized by AERB and the effective dose to public around the NPP sites was far less than the annual limit of 1 mSv (1000 micro-Sievert) prescribed by AERB. The maximum individual radiation dose among occupational workers has also remained well below the annual limit of 30 mSv prescribed by AERB. Key Achievements during the year, Ø Completed the development and deployment of the AERB's e-governance initiative for e- Licensing of Radiation Applications 'e-LORA’ o More than 35000 X-ray units declared in the system and 23,500 equipment registered o Increase in the approval of Radiological Safety ofcers (RSO) o Signicantly contributed in reduction of review time o AERB received the “SKOCH Smart Governance Award -2015” for e-LORA
    [Show full text]
  • Configuration of A=2 Based Tokamak for Testing of Reactor Technologies
    Russian Federation Agency for Atomic Energy (ROSATOM) ConfigurationConfiguration ofof A=2A=2 basedbased tokamaktokamak forfor testingtesting ofof reactorreactor technologiestechnologies (TRT)(TRT) E.Azizov1, Yu.Arefiev1, O.Buzhinskij1, V.Dokuka1, O.Filatov2, V.Krylov2, P.Khayrutdinov1, V.Korotkov2, A.Krasilnikov1, A.Lopatkin3, A.Mineev2, N.Obysov4, V.Cherkovets1, E.Velikhov5 1State Research Center of Russian Federation, Troitsk Institute for Innovation and Fusion Research (TRINITI), Troitsk, Moscow Region, 142190, Russia 2D.V. Efremov Scientific Research Institute of Electrophysical Apparatus (NIIEFA), Metallostroy, St. Petersburg, 196641, Russia 3Research and Development Institute of Power Engineering, Moscow, 101000, Russia 4Russian Federation Agency for Atomic Energy, Moscow, 101000, Russia 5Russian Research Center “Kurchatov Institute”, Moscow, Russia St. Petersburg, 2005 ITER - principal step on the way to fusion power. ITER is to demonstrate the feasibility of: - ignition and long fusion plasma burning in an efficient unit; - integration of the basic systems of the future DEMO reactor into the acting facility; - real safety of fusion reactors. ITER is cannot help in solving the following problems: - radiation resistive materials; - test and development of systems and components with necessary resources required for steady state operation; - control of reactor processes in steady state burning; - effective stationary systems of auxiliary plasma heating; - closed fuel cycle; - effective blanket. Of great importance is the creation
    [Show full text]
  • Development of an Experimental Reactor VVER-SKD 30 MW on Supercritical Water Novikova G
    AtomFuture-2017 XIII International Youth Scientific and Practical Conference “FUTURE OF ATOMIC ENERGY - AtomFuture 2017” Volume 2017 Conference Paper Development of an Experimental Reactor VVER-SKD 30 MW on Supercritical Water Novikova G. S. and Bogoslovskaya G. P. Obninsk Institute for Nuclear Power Engineering of the National Research Nuclear University MEPhI, Studgorodok 1, Obninsk, Kaluga region, 249040, Russia Abstract The results of neutron-physical calculations of various variants of the location of the VVER-SKD core of 30 MW on the water of supercritical parameters are considered. The calculation is made for various fuel loads: uranium, plutonium and thorium, which in the future is considered as one of the main energy resources of the nuclear industry. Studies show that it is advisable to design a reactor with a single-pass flow of coolant and a reflector of at least 20 cm. Corresponding Author: Novikova G. S. Keywords: supercritical water parameters, VVER-SKD, low-power reactor, [email protected] experimental reactor Received: 23 December 2017 Accepted: 15 January 2018 Published: 21 February 2018 1. INTRODUCTION Publishing services provided by Knowledge E Specific feature of 21st century’s technology based on 238U will be the use of nuclear power units ensuring fuel breeding ratio (BR) no less than unity, instead of 0.5 in Novikova G. S. and Bogoslovskaya G. P.. This article modern VVER [2, 5]. is distributed under the terms of The experience of industrial operation of NPP with fast breeder reactor cooled by the Creative Commons Attribution License, which liquid sodium, has shown the possibility of obtaining HF values in the range 1-1.2.
    [Show full text]
  • Plutonium Disposition in the BN-800 Fast Reactor: an Assessment of Plutonium Isotopics and Breeding
    Science & Global Security, 22:188–208, 2014 Copyright C Taylor & Francis Group, LLC ISSN: 0892-9882 print / 1547-7800 online DOI: 10.1080/08929882.2014.952578 Plutonium Disposition in the BN-800 Fast Reactor: An Assessment of Plutonium Isotopics and Breeding Moritz Kutt,¨ Friederike Frieß, and Matthias Englert Interdisciplinary Research Group Science, Technology and Security, Technische Universitat¨ Darmstadt, Alexanderstraße, Darmstadt, Germany According to the Plutonium Management and Disposition Agreement, which was signed in 2000 and amended in 2010, Russia and the United States agree to dispose of 34 tons of excess weapon plutonium each. Russia plans to use the plutonium as fuel in its sodium-cooled fast reactors BN-600 and BN-800. This article analyzes BN-800 core models with and without breeding blankets for the plutonium isotopic vector in spent fuel, plutonium production in breeding blankets, breeding ratios for different plutonium concentrations in fuel, and possible annual material throughput. It finds that any spent fuel in the core contains less than 90 wt% plutonium-239, but using breeding blankets the reactor can be configured to be a net producer of plutonium, even with a breeding ratio below one, and that plutonium produced in blankets will be weapon-grade. INTRODUCTION In 1998, U.S. president Bill Clinton and Russian president Boris Yeltsin re- leased a joint statement offering to withdraw 50 metric tons (MT) of plutonium each from their respective military stockpiles.1 It was agreed that this pluto- nium should be rendered unusable for nuclear weapons either by irradiation in existing commercial reactors or by immobilization.2 In 2000, Russia and the United States agreed on the “Plutonium Manage- ment and Disposition Agreement” (PMDA).
    [Show full text]
  • Westinghouse Partnership with Idaho National Laboratory and Leadership in Nuclear Energy (LINE) Commission
    Westinghouse Non-Proprietary Class 3 © 2012 Westinghouse Electric Company LLC. All Rights Reserved. Westinghouse Partnership with Idaho National Laboratory and Leadership in Nuclear Energy (LINE) Commission Highlighting the Value of the Idaho National Laboratory to Industry Presented by John Goossen VP of Innovation and SMR Development Westinghouse Electric Company Westinghouse Non-Proprietary Class 3 © 2012 Westinghouse Electric Company LLC. All Rights Reserved. Westinghouse Electric Company • Westinghouse Electric Company provides fuel, services, technology, plant designs and equipment to utility customers in the worldwide commercial nuclear electric power industry • More than 60 years of nuclear experience • Nearly 50 percent of the nuclear power plants in operation worldwide, and nearly 60 percent in the United States, are based on Westinghouse technology • We are only company operating under the name of George Westinghouse’s original company 2 Westinghouse Non-Proprietary Class 3 © 2012 Westinghouse Electric Company LLC. All Rights Reserved. Today’s Westinghouse Nuclear Services Nuclear Power Plants Focused on operating plant Specializing in the success through reliable technology operation, maximized power of new nuclear power output and better (shorter, plants and component more predictable) outages manufacturing Nuclear Fuel A single-source fuel Nuclear Automation provider for PWR, BWR, Instrumentation and control VVER, AGR and Magnox systems to enhance the reactors worldwide reliability of nuclear plant control and safety systems 3 Westinghouse Non-Proprietary Class 3 © 2012 Westinghouse Electric Company LLC. All Rights Reserved. Nuclear Services Focus on being a full-service engineering supplier: •PWR OEM •Hardware Design and Manufacture •BWR OEM •Spare Parts 4 Westinghouse Non-Proprietary Class 3 © 2012 Westinghouse Electric Company LLC.
    [Show full text]