“Academician Lomonosov” for Chukotka and prospects for “Rosatom”

83
On August 23, the newest Akademik Lomonosov floating power unit was removed from the port of Murmansk, and its towing to the duty station, Pevek (Chukotka Autonomous District) began. In the coming weeks, the PEB will arrive at the site, after which its preparation for work will begin. The operation of the power unit will begin before the end of the year. It is expected that these events will most seriously affect the development of domestic and foreign energy systems.


Towing the "Academician Lomonosov" during the tests, April 2018




From project to PEB


The laying of a floating power unit for a floating nuclear power plant (FNPP) took place in April 2007 at the Sevmash plant (Severodvinsk). Then for the construction of several years. The following year, it was decided to transfer the construction to the Baltic Plant (St. Petersburg). At the end of June 2010, the completed vessel was launched and continued its completion afloat. The installation of reactor and generating equipment was carried out.

At the beginning of 2018, the PEB was prepared for testing. In April, he was sent from St. Petersburg to Murmansk, to the base of the Atomflot FSUE. In summer, the loading of nuclear fuel began, and in November two reactors were launched. Complex tests of the power unit were completed at the end of April 2019. On August 23 towing of the unit to the duty station began.

The constructed “Academician Lomonosov” will work as part of a more complex complex, which also has coastal infrastructure. The construction of the necessary facilities in the city of Pevek started in 2016 and was completed in the bulk. In the near future, the power unit will arrive at the duty station, where it will be connected to the onshore facilities and prepared for the start of full operation.

The task of the "Academician Lomonosov" is the power supply of Pevek and the nearest settlements of the Chukotka Autonomous Okrug. FNPP will provide the population and the economy with electricity and heat. This is a partial replacement of the Bilibino NPP. After a few years, it will be decommissioned, and the FNPP will allow maintaining the required generation.

Nuclear power plant


The Akademik Lomonosov SEB is a self-propelled rack-type vessel with double sides and a double bottom. The vessel has a developed superstructure, which provides volumes for reactors, power equipment and domestic premises. The longest unit reaches 144 m with a maximum width of 30 m. Displacement - 21560 t. There is no propulsion system of its own and therefore needs towing assistance to move the power unit. During operation, the PEB remains at the necessary coastal facilities and is connected to communications.


Floating power unit during towing in Pevek, August 2019


The basis for the power plant are two reactor units KLT-40С developed by OKBM them. Afrikantov connected to two steam turbine plants. Using reactors and other on-board equipment, electricity is generated and water is heated. In the nominal mode, “Academician Lomonosov” should provide 60 MW of electricity and 50 Gcal / h of heat to the shore. By reducing the output of warm water, energy capacity can be brought up to 70 MW. There is a mode of increased heat transfer - 145 Gcal / h at 30 MW of electricity. An additional function of the FNPP is the desalination of sea water - estimated from 40 to 240 thousand cubic meters of fresh water per day.

The declared characteristics allow the new type of FNPP to provide heat and electricity to a settlement with 100 thousand inhabitants. For comparison, the entire population of the Chukotka Autonomous Okrug is about half that.

The work of the PSU is provided by a crew of 70 people. For them, on board the vessel there are cabins, a galley with a dining room, a library, etc. A medical unit with modern equipment is provided. The presence of powerful heat sources on board made it possible to organize a bath and a sauna.

Onshore facilities built in Pevek include protective and energy systems. So, the place at the pier for the "Academician Lomonosov" is protected by a special pier, which prevents the passage of waves or a pile of ice. In this case, the hydrothermal characteristics of the water area remain at the desired values. Systems have been deployed on the shore to receive energy and heat from the side of the PSU and to transfer them to existing lines.

The assigned lifetime of the FNPP is 40 years. Before the factory repair, the station will work for 12 years. All basic operations during operation are carried out by the power unit independently and using the equipment on board. However, some operations and procedures can only be performed in a shipyard.

The prospects of the FNPP


"Academician Lomonosov" is not yet in operation, but there are already all reasons for optimism - both in the context of a specific project, and in relation to the entire direction. The first domestic floating nuclear power plant has been successfully completed and is heading to the duty station and will soon be able to show its full potential.



The existence of the Akademik Lomonosov PEB demonstrates the ability of the Russian industry to create such complex projects of a special kind and of special significance. With appropriate orders, Rosatom and the United Shipbuilding Corporation may build new FNPPs to work in other areas. In addition, a new generation of such power plants is already being developed, based on other technologies.

The main objective of the FNPP is the power supply of remote areas where the construction of power plants of a traditional look is unprofitable or impossible. So, at the stage of development of the "Academician Lomonosov" several options for the location of the future station were considered - it could go to Chukotka or stay in Severodvinsk. The transfer of PEB to Kamchatka was also considered. Later, after the city of Pevek was chosen as the duty station, statements were made about the need to deploy the 5-7 FNPP in different parts of the country.

Serial construction of the FNPP will make it possible to solve the problems of energy supply in hard-to-reach regions isolated from common energy systems and supplied mainly by sea. First of all, this applies to the cities of the Arctic and the Far East.

However, the solution to such problems is not simple and cheap. The project "Academician Lomonosov" has been repeatedly criticized because of the considerable cost, which also increased during construction. Nevertheless, we are talking about an infrastructure project of great importance, laying the foundation for the development of regional economies, and therefore payback issues may go by the wayside.

international market


With the FNPP project, Rosatom can enter the international market. It is already known that some foreign countries experiencing problems with energy supply are showing interest in such developments. Negotiations are underway with the states of Southeast Asia, the Middle East and Latin America. Also, some island countries are interested in the topic.



The construction of floating power plants requires special competencies that are available in only a few countries. Thus, the presence of PEB and FNPP projects gives Russia special advantages in the international market of energy systems and power plants. There is every reason to believe that Rosatom and USC will succeed in turning the interest of potential customers into real contracts.

Our country already has experience in the “export” of nuclear power plants, which may attract new customers. In addition, the launch of the operation of the Academician Lomonosov will be a good advertisement for our FNPPs. While there is every reason for positive forecasts, and you can count on obtaining the desired results.

However, attempts to promote the FNPP in the world may face opposition from a third party. So last news about towing the "Academician Lomonosov" to Pevek entailed a shaft of publications in the foreign press, some of which are clearly critical. They mention the whole set of stamps about the dangers of nuclear energy, and also stipulate various threats to the station.

It is hardly possible to say with certainty that such publications are solely concerned with nature and people. They are very similar to the attempts that have already taken place to spoil the reputation of the project and, accordingly, worsen its commercial prospects. It is possible that this is an attempt at unfair competition.

On the eve of launch


In the coming weeks, Akademik Lomonosov will arrive at the duty station and will be docked on-board systems with coastal infrastructure. By the end of the year, commissioning will take place, and Chukotka will receive a new energy facility of special significance. Moreover, such events will be important not only for the Autonomous Okrug, but also for several industries and for the whole country.

The success of the first floating nuclear power plant will be the impetus for the construction of new such vessels for their own needs and for export. In the near future, the only FNPP will be operated in Pevek, but in the future such facilities may appear in other places - both in Russia and abroad. Perhaps in the future this direction will be developed, and we can talk about a real revolution in the energy sector. In the meantime, the main task is to launch the "Academician Lomonosov" at the designated duty station.
83 comments
Information
Dear reader, to leave comments on the publication, you must sign in.
  1. +23
    5 September 2019 05: 55
    How much does it cost, how much does it cost ... And how much does a NEW aircraft development cost? Or missiles? We even make a new installation, three prices are obtained from the serial one. And you design work, both experimental, and elementary - improvements, correction of errors ... That's why "Lomonosov" took so long to build, and it cost a lot ...
    Reactors can become twice as powerful in such a giant ... As an engineer, I really like this project. Obvious prospects, reduced cost in case of "serial production", and the possibility of project development. In all directions - both in terms of the power of the unit and in terms of geography of application. Nice project!
    And radiophobia ... Radiophobia is an artificial agiotage. Who Lost Competence in the Nuclear Industry? USA! Well ... "green grapes" ...
    1. +6
      5 September 2019 06: 58
      That's right. And if you still figure out how much it will cost to build a TPP in Chukotka?
      1. +10
        5 September 2019 07: 51
        Quote: Evil Echo
        And if you still figure out how much it will cost to build a TPP in Chukotka?

        It is not enough to build, it is necessary to ensure the delivery of fuel annually. So the floating nuclear power plant is practically no alternative project for the industrial development of the northern territories, and the associated "northern sea route"
        1. 0
          15 October 2019 22: 01
          There I just dug coal between Plamenny and Ryrkaypiy with an excavator. And you should always count! Gromyko came to open the Bilibino nuclear power plant, he was gloomy, at the banquet then instead of a toast he asked, "WHAT M ... HAVE INvented to BUILD A NPP HERE." I cannot say anything about the floating nuclear power plant. Let's see what they do. Maybe it will grow together, I don't know. But from experience, just in case, I don't believe in fairy tales. Got wiser over the years
    2. +1
      5 September 2019 08: 31
      The project is certainly good, but for whom? People from those lands fell at the first opportunity. The climate is evil.
      1. +7
        5 September 2019 08: 36
        Quote: Civil
        People from those lands fell at the first opportunity. The climate is evil.

        There are very few people there. Those who wanted to have already been piled. And when the house is warm and the salary is HIGH, you can adapt to the climate. The station in Pevek is being put up for growth. And she's afloat. Will not be needed in Chukotka, they will be towed to a more promising place wassat
      2. +3
        5 September 2019 10: 39
        Quote: Civil
        People from those lands fell at the first opportunity.
        ... and as many come ...
      3. 0
        5 September 2019 16: 02
        The climate is changeable, but resources are a worthwhile thing. You can work on duty.
    3. 0
      5 September 2019 09: 35
      Where's the security item? What happens if the molten core gurgles in seawater? How will the reactor be cooled in case of emergency shutdown
      1. 0
        5 September 2019 12: 14
        So initially you need to do so so as not to "gurgled".
        1. 0
          5 September 2019 16: 08
          Quote: Nycomed
          So initially you need to do so so as not to "gurgled".

          Your Chernobyl nuclear power plant was built with the expectation that it would certainly explode. Academician Aleksandrov shouted at all meetings that VVER was reliable as a samovar.
          1. 0
            5 September 2019 23: 35
            Well, yes, yes, with such a calculation and was built. Somewhere at the end of the construction, they received information on new studies, according to which it turned out that it was necessary to work with the Chernobyl NPP very carefully, but decided not to change anything. The Leningrad NPP was just as dangerous, but they did not do experiments there because almost the capital.
    4. -5
      5 September 2019 10: 38
      Quote: Mountain Shooter
      How much, how much ...
      Could give pensioners!
      1. +11
        5 September 2019 11: 23
        1. This project is economically viable in all respects ... 2. On the issue of safety, the project has been worked out no worse than our nuclear power plants. (We have safety requirements for nuclear power plants one of the most stringent in the WORLD !!!) 3. On issues of departing and arriving: residents consume a small fraction of the energy required by enterprises. And there will be enterprises and new residents. 4. And to those who wish to give pensioners everything, I recommend starting with yourself and allocating part of their budget to a pensioner to a neighbor ... Stop whining that you need to give away everything: go earn more, pay ALL taxes and you look and pensioners will raise pensions.
        1. 0
          5 September 2019 16: 05
          I'm afraid to start trampling you. Those who are used to the current head are.
        2. 0
          7 September 2019 11: 00
          1 - All the same, pensioners!
          2 - Or the IAEA would not have missed.
          3 - You say this energy?
          4 - Yes, yes! Everything is better to ME! And you a little. I share sometimes.
          smiley sarcasm always and everywhere you need to sculpt? Or "give it to pensioners" - like a red rag?
          1. 0
            7 September 2019 19: 06
            Yes, it’s best to always sculpt sarcasm emoticon. It’s hard to know how to get into someone else’s head and guess))
  2. The comment was deleted.
  3. +4
    5 September 2019 06: 53
    Question. How will maintenance docking required for boats be carried out? And where .... And if it will be in St. Petersburg then who will stand in Pevek for these couple of years?
    1. +5
      5 September 2019 10: 22
      The understudy is likely. And the more such stations will be around the world, the more profitable will be their operation - one doubler will be able to close not one station, but exactly three pieces.
      1. 0
        5 September 2019 11: 25
        Do you think that several thousand designers did not provide for maintenance issues, including maintenance of the craft ??? It’s strange to even suppose ...
        1. -3
          5 September 2019 21: 58
          Nobody asked the designers, they just carried out the POLITICAL and CORRUPTION order. The technological cycle of the said NPP is 12 years. In 12 years, it will have to be dragged to St. Petersburg for a year (because even Severomorsk will not be able to cope with the reloading of the reactors), who will provide Pevek with electricity and heat this year is a question that the current authorities do not care about, it will be after 2024. It is strange to assume the opposite, that someone in the current government is concerned with the question of what will happen in 12 years. Not to mention the cost. Back in 2007, German Gref, then the Minister of Economy, said that the cost of kWh produced by this nuclear power plant would be twice as expensive as that of a thermal power plant in the same region. For all his shortcomings, he always counted money correctly. And the cost of the Lomonosov project itself has more than tripled since 2007. The Lomonosov NPP will not be able to replace the Bilibino NPP due to the remoteness from Bilibino, the construction of power lines and, moreover, heating mains in Bilibino will make the specified energy golden in the literal sense of the word. In general, the article, like everyone else under the pseudonym "Kirill Ryabov", is a complete ..., stupid reprint from Wikipedia, even without a critical understanding of words and numbers. Just one phrase about 240 THOUSAND cubic meters of desalinated water per day is worth something. If Cyril is bad with physics, then there is no need to "lead" on it. A cubic meter of water weighs a ton. That is, if you believe "Wikipedia" (namely, its article was reprinted by "Kirill"), "Lomonosov" can desalinate 240 THOUSAND TONS OF WATER PER DAY! Does anyone believe that this is real? I have already written, I have to repeat myself: there is a strong impression that under the pseudonym "Ryabov Kirill" a team of authors is working, fulfilling a specific order for "optimism", moreover, random authors who are completely "out of topic". Facts "for": a large number of articles in a short time, their low quality (up to a complete lack of knowledge of the material and copying of Wikipedia articles), a complete lack of feedback on critical comments. I suggest paying less attention to the "noodles" signed by "Kirill Ryabov", otherwise your ears may get torn.
          1. +3
            6 September 2019 13: 24
            Yes, of course we are optimists, but you are a comrade, apparently, an all-out proverb. )) Yes, the project was going on hard, but it was overpayed for it, as in the whole world for pilot samples of new projects (see US carriers and littoral, new gold tanks of South Korea, etc. etc. etc. Even if the result is successful - it is ALWAYS very expensive). Everything New costs a lot of money - because technology requires break-in, etc. In general, that explain common truths ...
            Recharging after 12 years on such a NEW project is quite a normal time for itself. And it will be necessary to provide temporary support (for 1 year) of the energy infrastructure will be done without any problems (see. Providing Crimea with energy).
            And tying a policy to any undertaking is completely stupid .. This project has been hatched by Rosatom for the second ten years, like many other already implemented NPP-2012 projects, etc.
            And of course, I’ll ask, separate flies and patties: mistakes and illiteracy of project lighting does not mean illiteracy of the given project !!!
            Live more positively !! fellow
            1. -3
              6 September 2019 13: 49
              With pleasure I will live more positively, as soon as there are grounds. 12 years before recharge is normal? Are you laughing? The Gerald Ford reactor does not require a restart for 50 years. Although the operating conditions of the reactor on an aircraft carrier cannot be compared with the conditions of a power plant. Back in 2018, Rosatom announced "successful tests" of a reactor for nuclear submarines with a recharge time equal to the service life of the nuclear submarine (that is, at least 30 years). This is not a five to ten years difference, it is times. It's not even funny about providing energy to the Crimea. You just don't tell the Crimeans how it was "without problems" and "quickly." Worse only with water and sewage - in five years without real progress. It is understandable that the year of absence of the "barge with reactor" will somehow be blocked. But what's no problem? And for what money? Something the consequences of the flood in Tulun still cannot cover, and the city cannot even be called average. I did not write a word about the illiteracy of the PERFORMANCE of the project, the PERFORMANCE is worthy. I talked about the LOSS, DANGER, and UNSUFFICIENCY of the project itself. Considering all sorts of "Poseidons", "Petrels", "bases on the Moon", it is somehow too much expensive and it is not clear what the necessary projects are for. We are not the USA or even South Korea, the standard of living is lower. Maybe it's better to get involved in the economy?
              1. +2
                6 September 2019 15: 32
                Stop mixing salty, sweet and prickly !!! Nuclear power plants and Burevesnik, bases on the moon, etc. You re-read what you write.
                And now, in order of your questions:
                1. 12 years before recharge is a long time for a pseudo "stationary" floating nuclear power plant. At modern nuclear power plants, precharge is carried out once every 24 months !!!
                2. No need to confuse reactors on ships and submarines and a floating station - these are two different products intended for completely different tasks !!!. Will your reactor on the nuclear submarine also be able to give out megawatami heat to the heating system? And electricity at a constant level of consumption constantly issue ?? no ..
                3. Even on Wikipedia it is written how backups and additional energy supply will be carried out - do not be too lazy to read ... There they also build thermal power plants and lines from the Bilibino NPP are pulled and ..
                4. You wrote "..about the LOSS, DANGER and UNSUFFICIENCY of the project itself ..." And how did you assess it? You are probably a financier who every day calculates the cost-effectiveness of delivering electricity to remote areas, or a designer of nuclear reactors? Or do you work as a liquidator of the consequences of accidents ??
                On this project, I communicated with the nuclear scientists on work at the design stage, and for some reason, for them, this is an interesting and progressive project ... which opens up new orders and development prospects for them, but for you it is "UNUSUAL" .. Strange.
                5. Well, and the last thing you write "... too much expensive and it is not clear what the necessary projects are for ..." Yes, there are many expensive projects, but this does not mean that they are all unnecessary. Maybe the question is that you do not know the specific purpose of these projects. Maybe you came across them only on the monitor screen and did not communicate with experts on these topics (I'm not talking about myself).
                In our country, a tendency has developed that they largely nod to the West, but at the same time they are not ready to apply their examples. Example: in Japan there is a certain analogue of our welfare fund, so they invest money from it in infrastructure projects: new ports, roads, land development with a payback of more than 50 years !!!! And no one says that it is not necessary !!!
                And when they do it with us, you say that this is not necessary ...
                And I don’t need to give examples that they steal ... I am aware of this, but it’s better to let them steal and build, rather than steal and do not create anything ... So we’ll slide into the Stone Age))))
                1. -1
                  6 September 2019 17: 23
                  Ok, let's point by point.
                  1. The reactor on the "Lomonosov" ship, KLT-40S, and the previous generation, the first such was put on a ship back in 1988, already in 2010, RITM-200 went instead of such. And this is a super expensive project, because is everything "new" and "new" in it?
                  2. Do you think turbines on an aircraft carrier or nuclear submarines are driven by a thermocouple? Or battery power? The same superheated steam, the same megawatts. The output (mind you, not the thermal reactor) power of the Ohio turbines is 45 megawatts. And this is a submarine of 19000 tons, not an aircraft carrier of 100.000 tons. In addition to propulsion turbines, there are also turbine generators that provide consumers with electricity, and they are not weak either. And to issue megawatts to a propelled turbine or for heating - to a reactor "on a drum", all the more, all the same, "native" steam does not go anywhere directly from it, it only heats water (VVER) - radiation safety.
                  3. At a nuclear power plant, the reactor operates in cooler conditions than on a ship, especially on a warship. All loads, their "peaks" are known in advance, all slowly, a rank-and-file man. This is not combat maneuvering, especially in the event of a sudden enemy attack or threat.
                  4. It's great that the lines are drawn. You do not read "Wikipedia", you sometimes even look at the map. From Pevek to Bilibino 240 km. This is if in a straight line, across the Chaunskaya lip. How to pull a power line or a heating plant through it? Bypassing the lip "a little further" - 360 km. Do not forget, this is 68 degrees north latitude, Pevek is even further north. Can you imagine a heating plant of 360 versts in the local conditions? And the cost of heat for it? Even power lines are not easy - permafrost after all.
                  5. Building CHP is good. They will carry fuel oil for her by the "northern delivery". Then why nuclear power plant? And CHP, and NPP, and power lines. Maybe something on the list is superfluous? Considering the cost.
                  6. I am not a financier, once again I have to refer you to G. Gref, 2007: "The cost of a kilowatt is $ 7200. It is SEVEN times more expensive than at a thermal power plant." Then the project itself was estimated at 9 billion rubles, in 2015 it already "got out" at 37,3 billion rubles.
                  7. About nuclear scientists. A real life case. In the "turbulent years" the son of a Jewish glazier sometimes broke windows in shops nearby. Survived. This project is interesting for nuclear engineers, but for the rest? Nobody has canceled economic feasibility yet.
                  1. 0
                    7 September 2019 11: 30
                    Let's continue:
                    1. Yes, there are two KLT-40S reactors on Lomonosov, but this does not mean that the finished reactor for some kind of icebreaker and nuclear submarines was simply transferred to a barge ... Why KLT is also understandable: the floating nuclear power plant project is more than two decades old and was taken into First of all, a proven and reliable solution. If they used RHYTHM it would be even more expensive .... And the new and the latest is the opportunity to build the NEWEST infrastructure around, to some extent, a standard nuclear island. Or is there already a lot of examples in the world when an aircraft carrier heats the city near which it stands, and we just copied the project ??
                    Each nuclear power plant is a unique object of infrastructure ..
                    2. Yes, turbines spin steam on an aircraft carrier, but generates heat. But these power units (aircraft carrier and nuclear power plant) have different tasks .. even loading, nuclear fuel, monitoring and maintenance, processes for shutting down and starting up the reactor, safety, etc. etc. and they are organized in different ways ...
                    3. Cooler conditions work ??? Will you tell the residents of Fokushima ...)) And have all the load peaks on the shipable reactors been predicted and calculated for a long time or are they creative on the go ??
                    4. I.e. when we know how to pull an oil pipe through permafrost, but we can’t deliver a power line ?? It is clear that they will not drive heat to such a range ...
                    5. Why are there so many boiler houses and power lines in your area ?? Is it really impossible to build one big one and everyone will be happy ?? It is precisely because these structures cover the volume of demand with a reserve for all types of energy, in case of repair, in case of an accident, etc. What's new here, am I telling you ?? You all know that ...
                    6. I already wrote about the cost of new projects, why repeat. Yes, but Gref didn’t tell you how much it will cost to bring in fuel all the time and how much and how much the entire infrastructure will cost? If there is no FNPP, then it will be necessary to build not 1 TPP, but 2-3 and drag more fuel and ....
                    And I would not refer to Gref in the current situation: he seems to be a competent financier, but he has already begun to periodically blizzard, like Chubais and Medvedev chase: poor people and not people in general, and other "deep" thoughts from the heights of his flight ..
                    7. The benefit is simple to offer: when the whole project will be worked out.
                    Well, again, the FNPP on Novaya Zemlya will be needed unexpectedly to provide some sort of transshipment military or industrial base: they drove 2 pcs. For a couple of years, the FNPP imposed infrastructure and voila (well, voila, in words, such a complicated project))). Is there still an alternative to such solutions ?? I don’t see any responsibility yet .. The same thing is to ensure the Northern Sea Route: they heard that new ports are being laid in the north, they also need to be provided with energy ...
                    So our country is big and there are no prospects for everything new in it))
                    1. 0
                      8 September 2019 10: 35
                      Dear, please provide figures and acts, and not general reasoning in the form of "blah blah blah".
                      1. 0
                        8 September 2019 14: 24
                        Dear VO colleague. You may essentially have nothing to object to healthy logic. Again, perhaps the topic of atomic energy is not very close and familiar to you from work. I will say to myself: I try not to get into topics in which I understand very little. I think this is the right approach for communication.
                        And about "blah blah blah.." I will say the following: re-read your previous arguments and arguments: "about ... LOSS, DANGER and UNSUFFICIENCY ..", "... they just carried out a POLITICAL and CORRUPTION order.. "," .."bases on the moon" are somehow a bit too expensive and it is not clear what the necessary projects are for ..."and others based on your subjective fabrications. It does not remind you of excerpts from the yellow press, not based on "..facts and figures .."??
                        Perhaps you and I will not reach a compromise on this topic. Therefore, good luck to you in your endeavors, abstract assessment of current events and success in life.
                      2. -1
                        8 September 2019 18: 54
                        Thanks for the recommendation of "abstractness", I would be glad, but by the nature of my work I pay very handsome taxes, although I am a pensioner. I support about 20-25 more pensioners like me. So I wish you “abstractness” in such a situation. What you call my "fabrications" is confirmed by figures and facts. But your opuses about the "advanced project", "elementary confirmed profit", "construction of 2-3 thermal power plants", "have you heard that new ports are being laid", "2 floating nuclear power plants have been adjusted", "bases on Novaya Zemlya" have anything been confirmed? Don't trust Gref? Perfectly! Bring your calculations, or someone else's. Lossiness, danger and inexpediency - my fabrications? No problem - bring FACTS against, not reasoning. When did the construction of the TPP in Bilibino begin? Especially 2 or 3? When did the construction of the transmission line between Bilibino and Pevek begin? When did the construction of 2 floating nuclear power plants for Novaya Zemlya (or the Northern Sea Route, it does not matter) begin? When are these projects AT LEAST planned to be completed with our everlasting "time shift to the right"? FACTS IN THE STUDIO! Or don't "shake the air". Good luck.
                      3. -1
                        9 September 2019 16: 36
                        No question, let's go through my opuses: "advanced project".
                        I have not heard that something similar was invented abroad and applied in practice. The need for such projects has already been confirmed, incl. foreign negotiations. Isn't this, incl. emphasizes "elementary proven benefit"? The fact that the floating nuclear power plant will provide the city with heat and electricity will confirm the benefits? Or when that day comes, you also say - it means nothing ?? Sawing and corruption ??
                        And how did you predict the transition to the future development of the nuclear industry? Immediately the invention of the atomic reactor in a schoolboy's backpack ??
                        About "brought 2 floating nuclear power plants" - this is a very likely development of this topic, if the reactor confirms its inherent capabilities. And even if it does not confirm and further the project will not develop, then the solutions laid down in it will be used by the engineering and scientific staff (and this is a couple of hundred institutes and factories) in future projects of ROSATOM. As well as the questions of the possible development of the nuclear power industry on the BN-800 rector were tested.
                        And as for when everything will be built, I will answer simply:
                        In 2010, when our military industry handed over several planes a year and everyone shouted that it would be garbage to us at least 10-20 pieces a year, I wrote that we had to wait until it gained production momentum and there was money for it.
                        When they began to hand over 20-30 pieces, everyone shouted that at least 100 pieces were needed for happiness. etc. and the like ..... Do not be like these insatiable comrades who want everything at once and immediately and preferably yesterday ..
                        Stop blaming what thousands and tens of thousands of your fellow citizens do and are building. Whoever stands above this project, the construction participants fulfilled their obligations and made the project as expedient as possible, safe, etc. If you work in the energy sector and are faced with Atomic standards, you should know that it was not the Tajiks who gathered on their knees in Cherkizon. In the creation of the product participated a lot of smart people smarter than you and me.
                        If a product has been created, and it will fulfill most of the tasks laid down in its program, this is the success of this enterprise.
                      4. -1
                        11 September 2019 09: 24
                        Cherkizon has not existed for a long time. Did not hear? The fact that nothing like our FNPP is being built abroad does not indicate their technological backwardness, but specifically about the economic inexpediency of this project and its INITIAL unprofitableness. Or do you seriously believe that the United States, where nuclear aircraft carriers are on stream, France, which has built a nuclear aircraft carrier, even China and India, which each have two OPERATING aircraft carriers in the Navy, are not capable of creating something like the Lomonosov? It is simply NOT NEEDED by ANYONE. It's interesting about the negotiations. Please write down with whom you specifically talked. The fact that the floating nuclear power plant will provide heat and electricity to the WHOLE city is good. Question: how much does it cost? We do not live in a fantasy novel, the cost has not yet been canceled. If electricity and heat for FNPP clients will cost seven times more (you haven’t provided any calculations against you yet), "at whose expense is the banquet"? If such money cannot be extracted from their (the inhabitants of Pevek) pockets, then it will be extracted from ours with you. The law of conservation of energy in economics acts on as fast as in physics, but just as inexorably. And the success of an enterprise in the 21st century is well characterized by the desire of investors to participate in a profitable business and get money for it. Someone invested in a floating nuclear power plant? Let not foreign ones, let at least our commercial structures. Here is the answer about the prospects of this project. About hundreds of institutes and factories - you are just kidding me. I can send a photo of the Volgograd tractor (the only manufacturer of BMD WAS) winter 42 - 43 and summer 2010 - in the photo of the war it is less destroyed. BMD-4M with the transfer of production to Kurgan is not a modernization, but a FORCED measure, because there is nowhere to produce more, the unique equipment of VgTZ was sold ON METAL. And so everywhere. "Uralvagonzavod", which sold the T-90 for export four times more (also a characteristic fact) than to its own army, is bankrupt. How is this possible? Judging by Rogozin and Lomonosov, "effective managers" have made their way to outer space and "atomics" (as you write). I really want Russia to be a great power. But the greatness of the state is not in the Potemkin villages (and Lomonosov is one of them), but in real deeds. I don’t hate, I want (quite justifiably) that the people's money (including mine) was spent reasonably and efficiently. And this is not possible as long as those who spend them are accountable only to the "king." The subjective view is subjective. Your simple answer "when everything is built", sorry, "did not work." Previously, there was a specific question: "when did the construction start?" Nothing to say?
                      5. -1
                        11 September 2019 18: 46
                        You again began to bring salty and blue into a heap. I don’t need to tell about closed and open tractor factories .. I have been to different factories, including the military, and I can give examples of complete devastation and complete modernization of production ..
                        And enough about your aircraft carriers to push me. FNPP is NOT A CARRIER, but primarily a nuclear power plant. And now let's go over your cool guys who do not build such products out of pity for us (which does not overshadow our endless joy).
                        The United States - in the nuclear industry, devastation (both in management and modernization), which has never happened before .. And they can rivet aircraft carriers, but nuclear power plants are already having difficulty ...
                        France - yes, one of our main competitors in the world for the construction of nuclear power plants .... These fellows are trendy, although they raped 10 years ago problems from the merger of Siemens and Areva.
                        China - all major world players are building nuclear power plants for them. At the moment, the largest and most promising market in terms of construction volumes. BUT China itself is only taking its first steps in building nuclear power plants. I can tell you a few examples of their shoals from China during the construction of Rosatoms of the TienWan NPP. At the moment, not a competitor for similar nuclear power plants.
                        India is about the same as China, only trying to master this topic.
                        Germany - there used to be great fellows, and then, for the sake of populism, they bent their nuclear industry in one pose ..
                        As for investors, I’ll just say, I didn’t see you as investors in the construction of American aircraft carriers ... Is this an indicator that they are not wealthy ?? NO. It’s just that investors don’t immediately run into all the projects ... they need to be shaken yet, and some of them are initially closed for external investments)) Like the SU-57 or MIG-35, for example ... As soon as they began to order themselves at once, and those who wish to appear ..
                        I don’t need to give examples off-topic .. But Lomonosov, by the way, got to Pevek and, despite all the claims to him, is systematically moving according to the work plan for commissioning !. As the saying goes, the dog barks, and the caravan goes ...
                        And when it starts giving heat not drawn on cardboard, electricity will have to come up with new justifications for why this is a bad project (expensive, money was taken from pensions, etc.))
                      6. -1
                        11 September 2019 20: 14
                        Are the Su-57 and MiG-35 closed to foreign investors? Don't be ridiculous, for many years the MiG-35 "shoved" India, it did not work, the Su-57 after a complete failure with India is now trying to "shove" Erdogan at the highest level. Of course, the construction of American aircraft carriers is closed to ANY investors, this is a matter of the country's defense capability. But the floating nuclear power plant is a civil project, closing it to investors is an impenetrable stupidity. If it is really closed - give the FACTS, you yourself wrote about its "export potential" and even about "negotiations" (forgot the specific question: with whom negotiations?), I think, just NOBODY WANTS to spend money on an initially unprofitable enterprise.
                        I am glad that "the caravan is on its way" and "will give unpainted warmth", but I will not have to "invent" new justifications that this is a LOST project: you have not refuted even my "old" ones with figures and facts. In general, give at least some specifics.
                      7. -1
                        12 September 2019 11: 01
                        For fighters, reread what I wrote: "... It's just that not all projects at once investors are running ... they need to be shaken again, and some are initially closed for external investment)) Like the SU-57 or MIG-35, for example ... As soon as they began to order themselves immediately and those who wish appear ... "The message is simple what the fighters did first (India doesn’t count - they went according to a similar export version program), then they ordered for themselves and only then the questions were asked whether it was possible to put somewhere else ...
                        And in terms of numbers, I haven’t heard a single figure from you about the loss-making of the project, except for Gref’s words in 2007, which cannot be taken for granted from such a financial populist ...
                        Moreover, if everything is so bad in this industry, then why do we continue to build nuclear power plants both here and we around the world: China, Turkey, Belarus, India .. probably the Kremlin’s corruption and political orders are also sitting there and they incriminate ?? And do the French do the same ?? Strange unanimity)))
                        I think you have no answer to this question ... or are there specific numbers ??
                      8. 0
                        12 September 2019 16: 52
                        In addition to the numbers "from Gref" (you somehow still have not cited others), I also gave figures for the cost, distances, orders for equipment for our army and exports, etc. But your numbers are very good - there is not ANY one. Are the Su-57 and MiG-35 closed to foreign investors? They were "pushed" at the design stage not only in India, read. But again you prefer to "pull" out of the text selectively what is beneficial. Therefore, I repeat: the Su-57 and MiG-35 are military projects, and the Lomonosov is civilian. Restrictions for him on finding investors, by definition, are not as tough as for military projects. Hey, where are the investors? And do not confuse God's gift with scrambled eggs: yes, nuclear power plants have been built, they are building and will be building. But (!) Ordinary nuclear power plants, on "solid ground", not "barges with reactors". Once again I ask you to simply THINK: if out of 31 countries that already have nuclear power plants and more than a dozen countries capable of building nuclear power plants (including China and South Korea), NOT ONE is interested in floating nuclear power plants, what does this mean? Although among the countries with nuclear power plants there are many marine (I will not list, the list is too long), and there are northern marine ones (Canada, Sweden, Finland, Great Britain). And for the southern ones (such as, for example, the United Arab Emirates), the "great desalting capacity" of Lomonosov becomes an important point. Hey, where is the interest? Where are the negotiations (by the way, you "unobtrusively skipped" the question: "Who did you talk to?")? Or over the more than 10 years that it was built, experts from different countries did not bother to evaluate the project? Well, yes, they are "backward" and "stupid", but we with "Great Helmsman" and specialists "a la Rogozin" are 100 years ahead of them. Something suggests that the inhabitants of Pevek and (or) Bilibino are harsh there next winter Medvedev will say: "There is no heat, but you are holding on."
                      9. -1
                        12 September 2019 22: 44
                        Your cited figures about the cost of the project from VIC or the media have never shown that the project is unprofitable or profitable .. You just announced the amount and that's it .. The distance to which power lines must be pulled is a short distance for our open spaces. A couple of years ago, in a helicopter, in 6 hours I flew around 13 control points (260 km) of the oil pipeline on which our teams were modernizing. This is a terrible scary rassotcheniya 300-400 km of power lines. We are completing the second Nord Stream, we are throwing a pipe into China, and you tell me about the horrors of the "construction of the century" of power transmission lines on the frozen ground ... Don't tell me ..
                        About dozens of countries that can build nuclear power plants, read my previous comments. And why no one was interested, it was not because of great skill and small desire, but because of the lack of ability and necessity (obviously for France or South Korea there is no need to build mobile nuclear power plants extending thousands of kilometers from the construction plant) ..
                        And stop telling me that the military industry is a closed industry, and whoever you want to come to the nuclear industry ... The nuclear industry is a strategic component of the country's energy security ... If you didn’t know about this, then it’s a pity .. And who got into it not allowed ...
                        So stop shaking the air: corruption-guarding warships guard our borders, dangerous nuclear power plants produce safe energy for decades, and stupid managers successfully steer huge corporations (which for some reason do not fall apart and bring revenue to the country) ... Stop complaining that the grass was greener and etc.
                        And I will tell you as a pensioner that you are also a participant in recent history, who participated in the collapse of a huge country ... And do not tell that this happened without your participation ...
                      10. -1
                        13 September 2019 14: 00
                        Are some state-owned corporations generating revenue for the country? Is it possible in more detail, with names and numbers? Gazprom, for example, is in debt as in silks, and not to the "adversaries", but to its "contractors" belonging to the Rutenbergs, etc. (and the amount of debt for the "pipe that we are throwing into China" is very good, read). The debts of the Venezuelan state-owned company to Rosneft do not even go into any gates, they are "settled" by the Presidents, transferring them into debts to the state (i.e. Sechin gave a loan, the state will return it, and they will charge me the budget, adding VAT or something else, although you don’t need it, you fly helicopters for this money. I flew the same on them, and the same thing for people's money. But this was in the North Caucasus and instead of the "bread pipe" there were "Czechs"). Roscosmos is almost (or already) at a loss, because nobody wants to insure its launches at the old rates, for 8 months of this year 16 launches were made into space (with Rogozin's promise to the president to launch 45 in a year), in China - 17, from the Vostochny cosmodrome - WHOLE 1. How much money is spent on this spaceport, can not be found anywhere. No less than 200 billion rub. "Theft of about 13 billion. rub. ", T. Golikova, Chairman of the Audit Chamber, December 2013 Or is she like Gref, "no faith"? Give numbers from those who "have faith." I’ve brought at least some figures. How do you deal with them? Hooray, you wrote 260 km, at least one number! In which region? What is "modernization"? Rust removal? Painting? Replacing a larger diameter pipe? Replacement of pumping stations? Mowing grass around? Is modernization more expensive than construction? 260 km less than 360? Again you "pull out" instead of a specific answer. I mentioned and specifically pointed out the Nordic countries with a long coastline, weak transport infrastructure in its area and serious experience in operating (and some building) nuclear power plants: Sweden, Finland, Canada, Great Britain (FNPPs on the Falklands - what is not an option?). And also deserted, where great desalination opportunities are very welcome - the UAE. You write about France and South Korea. Mixed up nothing? How are you with geography? Do not confuse "industry" and "investment". "To start up" investments means to give away some or all of the property in the facility, possibly some technologies. Who is stopping you from "giving away" a civilian object? Or the Lomonosov reactors, model 1988. more secret than reactors in Bushehr and a dozen more nuclear power plants built and under construction abroad by Sredmash, and then by Rosatom? There is both demand and investors for such power plants, but there is no Lomonosov. "Dangerous nuclear power plants for decades ..." - these are your words, not mine. I wrote that it is "Lomonosov" that is dangerous, and most importantly - it is unprofitable from the word HOPELESS - give the FACTS against. I did not write about the danger of OTHER NPPs. Unfortunately, I do not have time to even briefly go through all your "opuses", I will give one more figure: "SP-2" HAS ALREADY CREATED 31 jobs in the EU. Taking into account family members, he already literally feeds at least 100.000 people in "hungry" Europe. Find how much he feeds in Russia (I honestly don't know), then it will be a discussion, and not "blah blah blah" from your side. By the way, your "we are completing the second northern stream" will last at least two years, I am ready to offer a bet. Judging by gasoline prices, tax increases, pension reform, "garbage" reform, "optimization" of medicine, a WHOLE 10% of budget places in universities (and even then not in all) and other delights that "fell" on us 27 years after how I "participated in the collapse of a huge country", "revive" you are many times more successful.
                      11. 0
                        13 September 2019 16: 20
                        Just a quote from RBC dated 13.09.2019/2011/2016: "Former vice president of the United Aircraft Corporation (UAC) and ex-general director of PJSC" Aviation Complex named after S.V. Ilyushin ", son of the head of" Roscosmos "Alexey Rogozin was appointed head of the company, leading the development of the transport interchange hub (TPU) "Nagatinskaya." square "Zarakh Iliev and God Nisanov. Alexey Rogozin was a deputy of the Moscow Regional Duma of the fifth convocation (2016-2017), in 2019 he became deputy head of the department of property relations of the Ministry of Defense. In March XNUMX, Rogozin Jr. was appointed to the UAC. In April of the same month, he was approved by the general director of the Ilyushin Aviation Complex (Il PJSC) .He left his posts in the aircraft industry in April XNUMX Yes." End of quote.
                        Another quote: "Alexey Dmitrievich Rogozin (born September 21, 1983, Moscow), In 2005 he graduated with honors from the Moscow State University of Economics, Statistics and Informatics.
                        From 2005 to 2008 - graduate student of the Moscow State Institute of International Relations (University) of the Russian Ministry of Foreign Affairs,
                        Since 2013 - graduate student of Tula State University, applicant for the degree of candidate of technical sciences.
                        2016 - professional retraining under the program "Industrial and Civil Engineering", Academy of the Ministry of Construction of Russia "Roskapstroy".
                        Awesomely educated and effective manager! Complex them. Ilyushin, during the period from April 2017 to April 2019, he simply "got up from his knees", launched the production of aircraft, etc. For the rest of the information, lead or look for yourself, BEFORE pouring mud on others?

                        Read more at RBC:
                        https://www.rbc.ru/business/12/09/2019/5d7a11129a79471da4d54bbc?utm_referrer=https%3A%2F%2Fzen.yandex.com%2F%3Ffrom%3Dspecial&utm_source=YandexZenSpecial

                        Read more at RBC:
                        https://www.rbc.ru/business/12/09/2019/5d7a11129a79471da4d54bbc?utm_referrer=https%3A%2F%2Fzen.yandex.com%2F%3Ffrom%3Dspecial&utm_source=YandexZenSpecial

                        Read more at RBC:
                        https://www.rbc.ru/business/12/09/2019/5d7a11129a79471da4d54bbc?utm_referrer=https%3A%2F%2Fzen.yandex.com%2F%3Ffrom%3Dspecial&utm_source=YandexZenSpecial
                      12. 0
                        13 September 2019 17: 59
                        Mdaaa ... again pulled by liberal dogmas ... Are we talking about the FNPP or about corruption and others like them ??
                        The FNPP safety examples are simple: in Russia the most stringent requirements safety for the implementation of nuclear projects. This is a dogma, provided with a bunch of requirements, certifications, approvals and tolerances (do you need federal law enumerations or resolutions?). If you have not come across this industry - why then ranting ???
                        Regarding who and where is building what in the world - you don’t read my arguments at all about the campaign ... All cool builders no need in the construction of mobile nuclear power plants (I'm talking about France and South Korea).
                        To develop such a product on order for the UAE (in which it is easier to receive solar energy) is expensive even for sheikhs !!! That's when it will be a run-in solution, then they will start considering it for the order. Example: No one orders new warships to be built in other countries from scratch, all order ships already issued and deemed successful (possibly with some upgrades).
                        You are interested in our work on the oil pipeline. We re-equipped checkpoints and control rooms with modern automation and telemetry, as well as updated and strengthened security systems and instrumentation.
                        And on the issue that we were given the construction of pipelines to China and Europe, except for losses. We, as a Russian integrator, among others, received large orders for work, construction and modernization. The chain placed orders at Russian factories for the production of transformers (for example: I supplied transports for 40 kVA incl. ШМР and ПНР to Bratsk and Angarsk), switchgear, automation and telemetry systems, uninterruptible power systems and autonomy (for example: block autonomy containers for NPS in the Baltic), etc. etc.
                        And that’s all:
                        - work and salaries to old and new employees (i.e. jobs),
                        - experience in creating modern systems,
                        - development Russian business (namely, he worked for such a company),
                        - tax deductions to the state,
                        - etc. etc..
                        Or do you think that all these pipes are only drawn on the map, but in fact they are "Potemkin Villages" ??? And I know that all of this exists, is being introduced and applied in practice and is beneficial to our country, because I saw, touched and climbed through the mud on these pipelines.
                        And yes !! we are trying to revive Russia from below and at the middle level .. we work a lot, pay taxes, try to promote innovations (I include the FNPP, etc. and the like), and we don’t sit and sulk that everything is around and only the collapse of the country are engaged.
                        Perhaps you don’t see the transformations that are taking place in the country, because you only watch TV and movies on YouTube Navalny ?? For example, I don’t watch television at all, we don’t even have television at home ... But what they steal and promote their own is a human being (this happens worldwide!!). And I do not think that this should not be tackled. NECESSARY!! But it makes no sense to sit and look for only the negative in everything! Look for the positive and rely on it in life and expand it ...
                      13. 0
                        16 September 2019 12: 25
                        Hooray! Finally, at least some facts! Very glad, without irony and sarcasm. This is DISCUSSION. Sorry, time is limited, so I’ll go not in importance (it would be right), but in the course of your text.
                        1. Enough about France and South Korea. The "cool builder" of Great Britain would probably fit a floating nuclear power plant on the Falklands (I already wrote), especially since the Falklands have been "returned" (for example) to Argentina, the floating nuclear power plant can be "overtaken". "Cool operators" Canada, Sweden, Finland could at least be interested in our project, or, out of "bourgeois solidarity", give an order for something similar to other "cool performers". Expensive for the UAE? You are laughing. There is more of our latest technology for the ground forces (starting with the BMP-3) in the UAE dwarf army than in the Russian army. And they build land-based nuclear power plants (it turns out that the solar one is not cheaper than the nuclear one?), It is hardly cheaper (the 1st block - 2,5 billion dollars, excluding the project cost). Where is the interest? Conclusion: the project itself is NOT PROFITABLE economically.
                        2. Glad for you as a Russian integrator. But it is you who do not read my arguments: it is precisely due to debts to such integrators that Gazprom is now unprofitable, and these debts are paid off at the expense of taxes, that is, excuse me, my money as well. An interesting "division of labor" - some profit (they are few, but "their own"), with others - compensation.
                        3. I'm glad for all these "chains", "daughters", etc. I gave the figures for jobs in the European Union (these are the figures of their trade unions, not employers, they are unlikely to be wrong). Moreover, these are jobs created AGAIN, and not saved from bankruptcy and reduction. Do you have figures for at least SAVED jobs in the Russian Federation thanks to, for example, "SP-2"? And what about the newly created ones?
                        4. "Pipes" are the only things that exist "in fact". But refining capacities, especially the basis of the foundations of any developed economy: MACHINERY, we have not just in the "corral", but in collapse. In my city there are several enterprises of the aerospace industry, as they used to say, of "all-Union scale". After the US abandoned the RD-180 engines, the engine builders are standing and are being reduced, the rocket builders, even with 45 launches per year with new insurance rates, were close to losses, with 16 - there is nothing to talk about. New cadres are not being trained, vocational schools and technical schools have been liquidated as a class, for the training of a QUALIFIED worker, who, for example, is engaged in the production of sheets for the sheathing of a launch vehicle, the college takes a lot of money. Where do they come from a simple guy or from "RCC-Progress" with 16 launches a year? At the machines - grandfathers over 60, and their pension is not indexed - they also work. Sorry, uploaded, this is not pumping crude oil.
                        5. Don't talk about dirt. The dirt that you can't wash off is when you need to explain to the mother why I brought 24 conscripts back, and her son was brought earlier and in a coffin. There was no war (officially). Repetition of the past: "The operation in Syria is over, the troops have been withdrawn" (whose words?). And the coffins are coming.
                        6. The transformation I see. And I am optimistic. I have both my beloved women: my sister and my wife, who worked officially all their lives (even in the dashing 90s), earned good money, paid all the required taxes, and as a result, should receive a POVERTY pension five years later. Another five years in hard labor. With a trillion dollar federal budget surplus. For what? Sechin's face or your optimism? By the way, the relatives in Lyantor are "very happy" about the changes. They have been working and living there since 1988.
                        7. If I "sat and looked for negativity" my family would have nothing to eat. Thank God we are not in poverty. And without a positive, my personal medium business, about which you are writing (I have seen a lot of such "help" since 2010 from the Federal Tax Service Inspectorate, Roskomnadzor, etc.), would have died long ago, or would have brought me to a heart attack ... Two points:
                        1. Golden words: "I do not take a bribe, I feel sorry for the State." In 1991, when the Union was destroyed (which you and I accused of) I was 20 years old. I am not delighted with the USSR, but, 28 years after it, comparing it with the current Russian Federation, it is really offensive for the State, first of all, for medicine, education, and social services.
                        2. To my son next February 20. Born after the USSR. I am glad that he does not read this site. After g ... in the 90s, I had no complaints about my parents. But the country in its current form I am ashamed to pass him on. Perhaps it's time to think: what will we leave for the children? Not in terms of the house, land, "attendants" - "godfather" will be replaced - everything will be taken away. And in terms of SYSTEM: science, education, medicine, the main thing is the STATE, which protects them, and does not feed deputies and "cardinal's guards" at their expense. Or are we not yet mature enough?
            2. 0
              15 September 2019 05: 17
              2 reactors, recharging is not necessary at the same time on both. Reactors are also recharged at ordinary nuclear power plants, but they do not cease to produce electric energy.
              1. 0
                17 September 2019 16: 00
                Unfortunately, the problem is that conventional nuclear power plants are initially built with an infrastructure designed for recharging reactors "on site" (after all, it is physically impossible to "overtake" a stationary nuclear power plant to the place of recharging). Due to this, construction becomes more expensive, operation becomes cheaper. In the case of Lomonosov, this is not possible. In Pevek there is no infrastructure capable of recharging at least some reactor. Such equipment is not very cheap, and taking into account delivery to Pevek (by "Northern Delivery" or by air, there are no other options) it becomes literally golden. As far as I know, "civilian" reactors (icebreaking ones, including the KLT-40 "Lomonosov") could not "recharge" even Severodvinsk, "sharpened" for nuclear submarines. It remains Peter, where these reactors were installed on ALL, without exception, civil and military surface vessels (ships). Recharging the Lomonosov reactors using the "one-by-one" method will simply require twice to "drag" it to St. Petersburg with all the ensuing consequences. I have already written, I repeat: the so-called. The "newest" project, into which billions of the people's money have been "invested" with reactors of the 1988 model, is not a reason, it is a direct instruction to the prosecutor's office to check "where is the money, Zin?"
  4. +6
    5 September 2019 07: 31
    An additional function of the FNPP is the desalination of sea water - estimated from 40 to 240 thousand cubic meters of fresh water per day.

    In the morning I wrote a stinging comment on the figures given in the article. The comment was deleted, but some of the numbers were left.
    For the information of the author (again) "from 40 to 240 thousand cubic meters ... per day" in translation from volume units to weight units will amount to approximately 40 to 240 thousand tons of fresh water. I started looking for where these wild numbers came from. And found:
    If the station’s capacity is fully put into processing sea water, then it will be able to produce 240 thousand cubic meters of fresh water per day.
    Read more at https://www.pravda.ru/economics/1038770-energy/

    So the author is a humanitarian.
    1. 0
      5 September 2019 08: 08
      That's what the author has.
      An additional function of the FNPP is the desalination of sea water - estimated from 40 to 240 thousand cubic meters of fresh water per day.


      Here is what you write:
      Quote: Amateur
      If the station’s capacity is fully put into processing sea water, then it will be able to produce 240 thousand cubic meters of fresh water per day.


      Well, what is the author wrong about? request
      1. +3
        5 September 2019 08: 45
        If the station’s capacity is fully put into processing sea water, then it will be able to produce 240 thousand cubic meters of fresh water per day.

        This is not written by me, it is the website of the Pravda newspaper. (which, as you know, always writes the truth and nothing but the truth).
        This is 166 tons of fresh water per second + at least another 666 tons of so-called. "brine" (salted waste water) = 832 tons of water every second.
        In order to miss such an amount of water at a speed of 10 m / s (36 km / h), a pipe with a diameter of 100 meters will be required.
        Any questions?
        1. +7
          5 September 2019 10: 15
          Any questions?

          Is eating. Even a "humanist" cannot make as many arithmetic mistakes as "amateur")). Literally in everything!
          Elementary calculations "in the mind" say: 1) 240t / 000h = 24t / h / 10s = less than 000t / s
          2) Your 166t / s at 10m / s are passed by a pipe with a cross-section of 16,6 sq.m (elementary 166/10) Question to the amateur: what will be the diameter of the pipe with a cross-section of 16,6 sq.m? laughing
          1. +1
            5 September 2019 16: 35
            240 cubic meters of water per day.
            10 cubic meters per hour
            167 cubic meters per minute
            2,8 cubic meters per second.

            What is impossible here?

            And this is the maximum amount based on the power of the station.

            40 cubic meters per day
            1667 per hour
            2,7 per minute
            0,45 per second.

            Does this indicator bother you too?

            Here in the summer I found that in 2015 Minsk spent 450 thousand cubic meters per day.
            What did you write about the size of the pipe? laughing

            Do you really think that all this flow should be put into a single pipe?
        2. +2
          5 September 2019 10: 42
          Quote: Amateur
          Any questions?
          Just think, decimeters have become meters!
  5. 0
    5 September 2019 07: 49
    It makes no sense to consider economic feasibility, environmental safety and cost for an infrastructure project of great importance, laying the foundation for the development of regional economies, and therefore payback issues may go by the wayside.
    It looks like the lessons of history do not teach anything when they write that "the issues of recoupment may fade into the background." With this approach, the prospects of potential customers in real contracts look doubtful, because the rest of the world is used to calculating the return on projects.
  6. +3
    5 September 2019 08: 56
    The FNPP is a very profitable thing, especially for underdeveloped countries and regions around the world. If we stake out this direction of nuclear energy, then it has very great prospects. The main thing is to put it in such conditions so as not to fall under the action of natural disasters. After all, it can be brought along the river even inside the country.
    1. -5
      5 September 2019 10: 26
      FNPP is a very profitable thing, especially for underdeveloped countries ...

      There is nothing profitable in it, even for rich countries. Russia will not build such (for itself) any more. In the early 80s, it seems that they also "built" this (for "icebreaker" reactors) ...
      1. 0
        5 September 2019 10: 28
        It’s Medvedev himself who told you that you’ve gotten great friends.
      2. +3
        5 September 2019 13: 07
        5 more will be under construction
        1. -4
          5 September 2019 14: 38
          5 more will be under construction

          Truth? Why not 7? (as they said from Rosatom)
          And an aircraft carrier ... And a reusable rocket ... And ... wink
          All these are words. In contrast to the top-ridden, for this block it was difficult to find a place of application (initially the military needed for Severodvinsk ..). It is too big to be installed in small settlements (and a smaller block would become completely "golden"), and too small to be profitable ... There is enough fuel in the north :)), and the problems with delivery are exclusively managerial.
          This block began to be built in 2007. Apparently Rosatom did not have other orders then, and personnel and competencies should be maintained. Now both Boreas, and Ash-trees, and icebreakers ...
          1. 0
            5 September 2019 14: 44
            voiced about 5 in Rosatom, it may not be, but judging by their achievements and contracts around the world, they will build floating nuclear power plants
  7. +3
    5 September 2019 09: 09
    There is a need for a station of this type! The main thing is that it is mobile and has a service life of 40 years! By the end of 2021, it is planned to decommission all power units at the Bilibino NPP, and this is minus 36 MW of power for Chukotka! The Chaunskaya CHPP is also in a wildly worn state and requires summer coal delivery to operate. Therefore, Lomonosov simply covers the energy needs of two power plants which will be decommissioned in the coming years.
    P.S. The only concern is the connection of the FNPP, and if new communications were built to the shore, then the coastal from Chaunskaya CHPP are not in better condition than the station itself.
  8. +6
    5 September 2019 09: 41
    The success of the first floating nuclear power plant will be the impetus for the construction of new such vessels for their own needs and for export. In the near future, the only FNPP will be operated in Pevek, but in the future such facilities may appear in other places - both in Russia and abroad. Perhaps in the future this direction will be developed, and we can talk about a real revolution in the energy sector.
    Another vivid illustration of what happens when an inept agitator tackles a topic about which he has not the slightest idea and blindly smokes a Wikipedia article.
    What "Perhaps this direction will develop in the future"?
    This direction in the world has long been developed. Just open the World Nuclear Association website (https://www.world-nuclear.org/information-library/nuclear-fuel-cycle/nuclear-power-reactors/small-nuclear-power-reactors.aspx) to find out what In addition to Russia, the United States, Canada, Britain, China, South Korea, Japan, India, Pakistan, Argentina, and South Africa develop nuclear reactors for small energy designed to power remote and inaccessible areas.
    China is completing the construction of its first floating nuclear power plant for the bulk islands ACPR50S and plans to commission it next year. The construction of 20 such nuclear power plants is planned.

    Moreover, at least three firms compete in this market in China itself.
    And the author says "perhaps this direction will develop in the future." Maybe the author, besides "writing", try to "read".
  9. -1
    5 September 2019 10: 26
    The calculation is a bit strange - for example, for every three out of 100 thousand of the city’s population, there is an electric kettle with a power of 2 kW (the cold one is even more), for example, they all come home from work in the evening and turn on the kettles. 60MW is not enough :). And there are also electric stoves, microwave ovens, street lighting, water heaters, etc. only at home. In general, it is doubtful to me about 60 MW in a city with a population of 100 thousand.

    And interestingly, electricity tariffs will be reduced for the population and industry?
  10. +6
    5 September 2019 10: 54
    good
    The idea of ​​a marine floating nuclear power plant is very good. It solves many nuclear safety issues. And not just security - recycling after running out of resources, too.
    1. 0
      5 September 2019 11: 45
      Quote: voyaka uh
      And not just security - recycling after running out of resources, too.

      Well, you and the ulcer, Alex Yes
      1. +3
        5 September 2019 12: 54
        No. This is not due to causticity. The disposal of nuclear reactors is a huge problem, due to which some countries do not build nuclear power plants at all.
        The developed reactors remain as ... dangerous Egyptian pyramids. Occupying a place and in potential - leakage of radiation into groundwater.
        And disposal is an expensive and complicated process.
        1. -1
          5 September 2019 13: 19
          Quote: voyaka uh
          The developed reactors remain as ... dangerous Egyptian pyramids.

          So I assumed, and knowing your rich imagination and unbridled imagination, I suggested that you are hinting at the possibility of losing the FNPP in the depths of the sea ..... bully
          So what do you think is good about the "Egyptian pyramid" afloat?
          1. +6
            5 September 2019 13: 29
            The good thing is 1) that it can be towed away from crowds in case of an accident.
            2) that it can be towed to a disposal site equipped as it should. And again, far from housing.
            1. 0
              5 September 2019 13: 33
              I take my words (about an ulcer) back hi
        2. 0
          15 September 2019 05: 18
          Just towed to a safe place.
  11. +4
    5 September 2019 11: 51
    Entertaining statistics:
    Pevek population for 2019 - 4 thousand people
    The cost of the Lomonosov project for 2015 is 37 billion rubles.

    But this information simply deserves to be given completely, at least for the sake of further analysis:
    [/ quote] The technological cycle of the FNPP implies a 12-year campaign, after which the floating power unit must be towed to a specialized enterprise for the average repair and reloading of nuclear fuel, which takes a year. As a result, the FNPP cannot be the only source of energy supply and requires the construction of a backup energy source, which will provide consumers with electricity and heat at the time when the FNPP undergoes repair and refueling. To reserve the FNPP in Pevek, it is planned to build a new CHPP with a capacity of 48 MW, with an estimated cost of 18,9 billion rubles [16].

    Due to Pevek’s territorial remoteness from Bilibino, FNPP will not be able to fully replace the decommissioned Bilibino NPP (first of all, in terms of heat supply to Bilibino). In this regard, it is planned to build a standby diesel power plant with a capacity of 24 MW and a boiler-house operating on diesel fuel with a total cost of 13,1 billion rubles in Bilibino. In addition, the construction of power lines worth 30,2 billion rubles [quote] is necessary for the delivery of the FNPP capacity to the Bilibino region

    Amazing !!!
    The best way to raise Russia is to get people to learn economics. Learn continuously, systematically, at all levels
    1. -4
      5 September 2019 13: 14
      and what are your numbers? who needs them? propose to close the city and relocate people from there? Yes. expensive but necessary
      1. +2
        5 September 2019 13: 48
        and what are your numbers? who needs them?
        Masterpiece phrase !!! Words worthy to be cast in metal or carved in granite !!!
        1. +1
          5 September 2019 13: 49
          stop writing nonsense
          1. 0
            5 September 2019 13: 50
            Are you convincing yourself, or me?
            1. 0
              5 September 2019 13: 52
              this applies to the author who wrote about the economy
              1. 0
                5 September 2019 14: 00
                Yes, about the economy, the author, in fact, did not write anything. He wrote about the energy supply of the economy. And the economy there is gold mining. There are interesting points there.
      2. +4
        5 September 2019 14: 05
        The numbers show the discrepancy between the result and the effort.
        And additional emphasis. The so-called "infrastructure" project does not solve any of the pressing problems for the solution of which it seems to have been created. That's all.
        1. -1
          5 September 2019 14: 26
          a new nuclear power plant is much more expensive
  12. +3
    5 September 2019 15: 12
    Nevertheless, we are talking about an infrastructure project of great importance .......... and therefore payback issues may go by the wayside.


    Rosatom’s FNPP project can enter the international market.


    no payback plus international market ?! It is logically somehow not combined. This can only be sold in Chukotka, Antarctica and on Mars.
  13. 0
    5 September 2019 16: 10
    Quote: Sfurei
    2. On the safety issue, the project was designed no worse than our nuclear power plants. (We have the most stringent safety requirements for nuclear power plants in the WORLD !!!)


    What is there a melt trap? and where is she with him, under the bottom?

    I sincerely hope that all possible risks are worked out, just a word about it in the article
  14. 0
    5 September 2019 17: 48
    good deed
  15. -1
    5 September 2019 18: 09
    Yes, the project is grandiose, with global perspectives. Such a block in the Crimea (in Kazantip) - and fully we can put on a water and energy blockade from Ukraine. Deliver to the island of Matua - and you can start building a naval base, cheap energy will not interfere with the enclave of Kaliningrad. And to fit such a Cuban - and "Caliber" with "Daggers" can be based free of charge. Here are the mattress toppers and regret the INF Treaty!
    1. 0
      5 September 2019 19: 28
      You yourself will lie on Kazantip embracing on the beach with this floating reactor! One of the ecologically clean places. And it’s good that they didn’t finish the plant there. I have been relaxing in the summer in Shchelkino for several years. In Crimea, there are many places where you can moor the PAES. And by the mind, a nuclear power plant in the Crimea is not needed.
      The question is, why in Bilibino not to build a couple of new blocks at nuclear power plants and not to invent an atomic barge?
      She would have come in handy a lot.
    2. +1
      5 September 2019 20: 00
      The last time in 2006 the tsunami was 20m high on the island of Matua. And shakes quite often. I wonder how the block will be protected in this case?
  16. 0
    5 September 2019 23: 52
    Mountain shooter (Eugene), dear, about radiophobia, please tell the residents of Nenoksa, they are waiting for the specialists of Roshydromet, Rospotrebnadzor and the Ministry of Emergency Situations, otherwise the RF Ministry of Defense did not let either of them go to the training ground or to Nenoks. Look: http://tv29.ru/new/index.php/bk-obshchestvo/20582-severyane-priglashayut-v-gosti-glavu-rospotrebnadzora At the same time, the Russian Ministry of Defense made hostages of members of the military families that live in the village of Sopka, yes schoolchildren from Nenoksy. From the school in Sopka (where children from Sopka and children from Nenoksa study there) to the fountain pontoons that were bombed on 08.08.2019/XNUMX/XNUMX, it is easy to measure the distance on the cards.
    To the military in Severodvinsk email. there was enough energy and enough. At the beginning of 2000. the guys from TGK-2 promised that they would modernize the Severodvinskaya CHPP-1. But the money went to Cyprus, TGK-2 nearly went bankrupt. Then new ones composed fairy tales: "Here the gas pipeline will come to Severodvinsk - we will switch CHPP-2 to gas. We will reduce the tariffs for electricity and hot water several times both for the population and for the GRCAS factories! You will be patient for 5-10 years and we will fix everything!" Then they considered whether the "Sharks" could work as power plants. It turned out that they could, but not for long - too much needs to be changed in them. After that we decided to make "Lomonosov". Indeed, they laid it at Sevmash. But, suddenly, geniuses from the economy, they remembered about the "northern" ones in Severodvinsk, saw electricity tariffs, calculated transport costs and decided to build in St. Petersburg ...
    "Where, in case of an accident, everything from the floating nuclear power plant will flow from the core?" - and I have a question.
    Yes, something the media are silent that with the town of a separate company of the Russian Guard, which will guard the station ...
    In 12 years, it seems that my native Severodvinsk will meet "Academician Lomonosov", even though our leaders have been telling us fairy tales about the Far East in all media for three days in a row. It seems that there are fewer and fewer specialists in the repair of nuclear submarines in the Far East every day. From the Pacific Fleet of the nuclear submarines "Samara" and "Bratsk" to "Zvezdochka" Dutchman "Transshelf" (formerly ours) has already brought several years ago ...
  17. +1
    6 September 2019 23: 45
    Quote: Vol4ara
    Quote: Nycomed
    So initially you need to do so so as not to "gurgled".

    Your Chernobyl nuclear power plant was built with the expectation that it would certainly explode. Academician Aleksandrov shouted at all meetings that VVER was reliable as a samovar.

    Before you hammer on the clave, study the materiel. Hint: there was no VVER at Chernobyl, Yandex to help
  18. 0
    19 November 2019 15: 35
    I wonder how the operation will begin if the Pevek-Bilibino line is not even yet under construction? I work as a surveyor engineer in a company that brings this project to life. A month ago, the Bilibino-Peschanka line was put into operation with a branch to Kikura (370 km have been built since the summer of 2017). While it is being powered from the Bilibino NPP, which will be decommissioned in 2 goals. Only surveys have been done under the Pevek-Bilibino line, we will begin construction in December this year. There is about the same amount of work, only more topographical conditions. So two years at least until Pevek connects with the Bilibino line, and through it with end consumers (first of all, the GOK being built on Peschanka is the fourth copper deposit in the world). And until then, the station, except that Pevek himself, will try ...