Option for the military: low-power nuclear power plants

42
Option for the military: low-power nuclear power plants
Schemes of promising micro-nuclear power plants - pressurized water, helium, fast neutron reactor. Source: atomic-energy.ru


Small forms of nuclear power plant


Domestic engineers did not start developing low-power nuclear power plants yesterday or even the day before yesterday. If you delve into history nuclear engineering, then at the end of the 50s you can find a unique project TES-3. This is a caterpillar self-propelled energy vehicle designed for remote areas of the Soviet Union.



The mobile nuclear power plant produced up to 1 kW, consisted of four chassis tank T-10: on the first one, a water-cooled reactor was mounted, on the second, a steam generator, on the third, a turbogenerator, and on the fourth, a control module. The weight of the unique complex was 310 tons, the autonomy was up to 250 days, and it was the first experience of this kind in the world. The experimental setup worked from 1961 to 1965 with virtually no breakdowns, which confirmed the promise of this direction.

The next step was the Pamir-630D, the development of which started in 1965, but the prototypes were assembled only in 1985. Engineers tested a single-loop reactor with a coolant based on dinitrogen tetroxide on a mobile unit, which predetermined the complexity of the design. It was assumed that, unlike the caterpillar chassis, the wheelbase of the MAZ would allow moving along the roads of public infrastructure. If not for Chernobyl and the phobias associated with it, the Pamir could have been brought to mind and put into general use.


One of the machines of the TES-3 complex

In the 60s they experimented with mobile nuclear power plants in the United States. In particular, they built an experimental ML-1 for the needs of the Pentagon. Unlike Soviet technology, the installation was packed in four shipping containers and tried to be adapted for air transport. Everything was done in six blocks, but the output power was lower than the design, and the project was closed.

The topic of mobile nuclear power plants is extensive and interesting, if readers have an interest in this story, then it is quite possible to delve into the technical features of pilot projects.


Product "Pamir-630D"

Much larger than mobile land platforms are floating nuclear power plants, for example, the Russian project Akademik Lomonosov. In 2019, Akademik provided the first electricity to the town of Pevek in the Chukotka Autonomous Okrug. The ship has two pressurized water reactors with a capacity of up to 70 MW and the option of seawater desalination. Estimated service life - up to 40 years.

In the future, optimized floating OPEB units with a capacity of 100 MW will appear, which are smaller in size compared to the Akademik Lomonosov and in the final cost. But these projects are good for the coastal areas of the Far North, especially those adjacent to the Northern Sea Route.

And what about objects of strategic importance remote from the "mainland"?

Non-peaceful nuclear power plants


Power supply of remote facilities of the Russian Ministry of Defense is one of the priority tasks of military development. The Arctic is not going anywhere from us, but there will be more and more encroachments on it by NATO every year. You can, of course, import coal and fuel oil in the old fashioned way, but it is much more efficient (and more effective) to install a small nuclear power plant. The only negative is that in the event of war, the destruction of the reactor can cause a small environmental disaster. It is enough to look at the passions around the Zaporozhye NPP to understand all the nuances of the military use of the civilian atom.

At one time, the Ministry of Defense launched the Grom-2016 research project, the purpose of which was to estimate the cost of power supply for army facilities in the far North. We are talking about units stationed on Wrangel Island, the archipelagos of Novaya Zemlya, Severnaya Zemlya, Franz Josef, the New Siberian Islands and Cape Schmidt. A floating nuclear power plant like the Akademik Lomonosov can be fitted to each base, but it is expensive, and the power of the ship's reactors is excessive.

Over time, the results of the study were supposed to be extrapolated to objects in the depths of Russian territory. The required electric power for each military facility does not exceed 1,0–2,0 MW, which is several times less than the operating and even planned floating nuclear power plants.

It should be noted that the authors of the project from the St. Petersburg Research Institute of Military System Research of the Logistics of the RF Armed Forces have chosen the scheme of thermionic nuclear power plants as a priority. For reference, such devices are used to power spacecraft, they are compact, but also quite expensive.

Russia has mastered the production of small-sized thermionic nuclear power plants of the Buk and Topaz types, producing from 2,5 to 7 kW. The weight varies depending on the version within 900–1 kg, and the resource is scanty - no more than a year. It is supposed to develop a prototype of a thermionic nuclear power plant, located in a concrete shaft with a diameter of 000 meters, a depth of about a meter and covered with a removable cap on top. Such a compact reactor should produce at least 0,42 kW of electricity and serve for about 100 years.

The cost of one "mine"-based nuclear power plant is about a billion rubles. The total development costs only on paper exceed eight billion rubles. However, this is only one of the options provided - other types of products appeared in the final report.

A plant with a classic turbogenerator was ten times more powerful and three times more expensive. The estimated development cost is about 8,6 billion. Military engineers propose to take as a basis the developments of the 60-80s, including the TPP-3 and Pamir-630D mentioned above. Each module of a small-scale nuclear power plant should not be longer than 16 m, wider than 3,2 m and higher than 4 meters. The mass is declared within 120 tons.

Interestingly, the report mentions a special “task of remote monitoring and control of the state of the object with the possibility of its liquidation in the event of an imminent threat of capture by the enemy.”


Nuclear reactor - Converter "Topaz". There is a proposal to use the developments under this project to supply power to remote military garrisons. Source: wikipedia.org

No matter how fantastic the scientific developments of the military look, they have quite tangible ground under them. This is already being done abroad. The Americans are working on the Delithium program, which includes several projects. The smallest is the E-Vinci series from Westinghouse. Requirements for nuclear power plants - more than eight years of autonomous operation, installation at the facility in 30 days, generation of heat and electricity with a total capacity of 5 MW to 13 MW. One module of such a miracle installation should fit in a standard container and weigh no more than 40 tons.

The first prototypes are expected by 2025. Work is also underway on the Holos micro-modular nuclear power plant from Filippone and Associates LLC. This unit should be delivered to garrisons remote from the mainland by C-5 and C-17 aircraft.

It is interesting that among the priority goals of building small-sized nuclear power plants is to reduce the loss of army convoys. The logic is as follows - Holos reduces the need for military facilities in liquid fuel, which means there will be fewer burning fuel trucks. According to statistics, in Afghanistan, the Americans lost 0,042 people per convoy, in Iraq - 0,026 people. From an economic point of view, Holos will pay off at the place of deployment no earlier than in 500 days.

The use of small nuclear power plants for military purposes will not fundamentally change the theater of operations, but it can become a powerful incentive for the development of the corresponding civilian direction. As has happened more than once in history.
42 comments
Information
Dear reader, to leave comments on the publication, you must sign in.
  1. +14
    11 February 2023 04: 52

    Big car... smile
    Interestingly, the snow in Pevek is now white or black ... after all, there was a coal-fired power supply station ... there were complaints about the environment.
    Write, dear Author, a continuation about this topic ... no doubt it is interesting. hi
    1. +12
      11 February 2023 11: 09
      Write, dear Author, a continuation about this topic ... no doubt it is interesting. hi

      I fully approve and support good
      1. +2
        11 February 2023 21: 51
        I join the thanks to the author! Let's wait for the continuation of the topic! hi
    2. +3
      11 February 2023 14: 02
      Chaunskaya CHPP is still working.............
  2. +12
    11 February 2023 05: 40
    Written well. We look forward to continuing, interesting! good drinks
  3. +6
    11 February 2023 06: 33
    Military developments inevitably move into the civilian sector, otherwise it is very ruinous.
  4. Eug
    +3
    11 February 2023 06: 54
    Hmm .. can't these installations be used as VNEU for NPLs? Or as the main engine for mini-nuclear submarines? Especially if it is realistic to make such an installation with natural (without pumps) circulation of the 1st circuit ..
    1. +5
      11 February 2023 11: 16
      can these installations be used as VNEU for NPLs?

      In short, you can't.
      The whole problem is in the control of the fission reaction, at nuclear power plants it takes place in a more stable mode, at submarines the load is variable, it is necessary to constantly adjust the reactor power.
      it is realistic to make such an installation with natural (without pumps) circulation of the 1st circuit ..

      Natural circulation is inefficient due to a small temperature difference, if the condensation temperature is lowered, then the whole point of this undertaking disappears.
      1. 0
        12 February 2023 20: 50
        Can't you build a hybrid? The reactor would constantly produce a certain power, feeding the batteries and capacitors, and they would compensate for the load at certain moments ...
        1. 0
          14 February 2023 12: 49
          Can't you build a hybrid?

          A hybrid power plant is always a compromise, and not the best solution. An example of a diesel-electric submarine while you are walking under a diesel engine, you are carrying ballast in the form of batteries, as soon as you switch to an electric ship, a diesel engine with a supply of fuel goes into ballast.
          Any power plant is designed for a specific load, nuclear plants are good for stable loads.
          To some extent, the symbiosis of nuclear power plants and classical hydroelectric power plants and thermal power plants, and there is such a "hybrid" problems begin as soon as the load starts to jump. A good example is the situation on the 404th, as soon as our transformers and thermal power plants began to knock out, we had to turn off the nuclear power plant.
  5. KCA
    +10
    11 February 2023 08: 02
    It seems to me that the topic of small-sized nuclear power plants is a little secret, that's what the Poseidons have in their guts, with a total mass of a drone of 100 tons, no more than half can occupy the nuclear power plant, and I doubt that there is a steam drive from the second circuit, there is clearly a turbine and a generator electric current, Poseidon is uninhabited, but radioactive radiation will burn all the electronics, and hence the protection at the level, it’s not difficult to put even the maximum 50 tons on any chassis or in a container
    1. 0
      17 March 2023 11: 33
      Quote: KCA
      Poseidon is uninhabited, but radioactive radiation will burn all electronics
      Oh, is it true? laughing laughing laughing
      But how does electronics work at the most ordinary, civilian nuclear power plants?
      Sensors are everywhere, even in the reactor...
      Levels, flow rates, temperatures...
      https://www.niiis.nnov.ru/production/ptsAscTpNps/izdeliya/uran_duu/

      IMPLEMENTS
      • Non-contact automatic measurement of the level of non-boiling liquid products, including viscous, inhomogeneous, precipitating, explosive, radiation;
  6. -1
    11 February 2023 08: 27
    to spend several billion on the fact that the station would produce 100 kW? either this is a mistake or it is very expensive and costly. Then it is better to start fuel oil in barrels
    1. +4
      11 February 2023 11: 26
      this is a mistake or very expensive and costly. Then it is better to start fuel oil in barrels

      How will you deliver fuel oil into space?
      Who will refuel the diesel generator set at an uninhabited lighthouse on the northern sea route?
      1. 0
        12 February 2023 19: 38
        Quote: Popandos
        How will you deliver fuel oil into space?

        On August 18, 2021, Voyager 1 passed 23 billion kilometers from the Sun. It has been flying since 1977. There is no fuel oil. There is no TENPP.
        RTG on Ru-238 gave 7 kilowatts, now 400 watts. It flies itself.
        total weight: 798 kg.
        and the minimum mass of the YaEU-25M (10kW) = 1820.
        There is a very big problem with heat 873K (-efficiency) must be put somewhere. The area of ​​the radiators will be approximately equal to the area of ​​the solar panels.
        Quote: Popandos
        Who will refuel the diesel generator set at an uninhabited lighthouse on the northern sea route?

        -isotope source - will be stolen and misused.
        They will kill themselves and someone else.
        1998, July Korsakov Port, Sakhalin Oblast A disassembled RITEG belonging to the RF Ministry of Defense was discovered at a scrap metal collection point.
        1999 Leningrad region RTG looted by hunters for non-ferrous metals. A radioactive element (background near - 1000 R/h) was found at a bus stop in Kingisepp.

        - wind generator or solar battery. If weather conditions do not allow: standby diesel.
        You still need to serve.
        At the Irbensky sea lighthouse, located near the Mikhailovskaya Bank in the Irben Strait of the Baltic Sea, there was an RTG, at present the Irbensky lighthouse is powered by solar energy and has a backup diesel generator ...
        1. 0
          14 February 2023 13: 03
          You are correct, but what if you need a local energy source of 3~5 megawatts?
          And the fact that RITEGs were stolen is not the fault of the inventors, but the state.
  7. +6
    11 February 2023 09: 04
    Interesting topic, definitely! I look forward to a more detailed article!
  8. +4
    11 February 2023 09: 36
    direction is promising. Traditional fossil sources are finite, alternative sources are unstable. So without options, micro-nuclear power plants will appear in nature and in use, the question is when they will bring them to the payback level.
    1. +4
      11 February 2023 10: 49
      Our latest nuclear submarines have very good reactors. In the civilian version, they are on the icebreakers of the latest series. And not bad power and dimensions.
      I think they are already in operation and at certain facilities. Only now it is not advertised until a certain time of operation.
      Poseidon's engine-reactor is not an atom. He is part of the charge.
      1. +3
        11 February 2023 11: 34
        Quote: svoroponov
        Our latest nuclear submarines have very good reactors.

        Who ever considered payback in the Navy? But at the Pole, for example, there are no such reactors at stations, and even at Chinese ones, although China is being driven. that in miniature they are ahead of the rest.
        It doesn’t pay off yet, as they said above - it’s CHEAPER to carry a solarium.
        And Poseidon... And spacecraft. The fact is that, for example, americium was stuffed there on the lunar rover, I worked with this muck, and I responsibly declare that americium will not go into civilian life in principle. Fuck everything around even without accidents, it's possible in space on a torpedo - whoever thinks about destruction there.
        True, on the lunar rover, there is not quite a reactor, it would be more correct to call it a heating system ...
        1. +2
          12 February 2023 06: 31
          Quote from Bingo
          But at the Pole, for example, there are no such reactors at stations, and even at Chinese ones, although China is being driven. that in miniature they are ahead of the rest.

          Are you talking about the South, or what? So there is a completely non-nuclear zone! "Mikhail Somov" did not just cuckle in the ice a couple of times for half a year, there was nothing to release from captivity, there were not enough capacities of simple icebreakers.
        2. 0
          17 March 2023 11: 48
          Quote from Bingo
          But at the Pole, for example, there are no such reactors at stations, and even at Chinese ones,
          The Americans had such a station in Antarctica (McMurdo)
          She worked for 10 years, 1962-1972.
          But on this type of reactor there was an accident with acceleration on prompt neutrons and the program was closed.
    2. 0
      11 February 2023 14: 51
      So without options, micro-nuclear power plants will appear in nature and in use, the question is when they will bring them to the payback level.


      And why micro when you can build large nuclear power plants if the question is about the exhaustion of fossil energy sources.
      1. +2
        11 February 2023 17: 48
        It’s not advisable everywhere - polar stations, high mountains - you can’t lay power lines there, garrisons in the outskirts somewhere, again villages, some kind of urban settlement in the Far North - where is a full-fledged nuclear power plant? And pulling a power line from it for a thousand kilometers to the nearest large consumer is idiocy
        1. 0
          12 February 2023 18: 59
          As a result, a very "niche" solution with a small market is obtained, how many of these urban settlements are there in the Far North.
          1. 0
            14 February 2023 12: 57
            how many of these urban settlements are there in the Far North.

            And how many cities need fresh water? And desalinators need a lot of energy.
            1. 0
              16 February 2023 10: 40
              If you need a lot of energy, then again it is more profitable to build a large nuclear power plant.
    3. 0
      12 February 2023 22: 34
      direction is promising. Traditional fossil sources are finite, alternative sources are unstable. So without micro-nuclear options there will be

      Now (2018) there are 451 nuclear power plants in operation in the world,
      and 59 more are under construction, with
      in 2017, five stations were permanently shut down, and four more a year earlier. According to the forecasts of the International Energy Agency (IEA), by 2030, global electricity consumption will increase by 18%, and by 2050 - by 39%.
      With the current dynamics of demand, proven reserves of uranium will last approximately 118 years.
      With oil it's easier:
      This list of countries by proven oil reserves is based on US CIA estimates published in The World Factbook as of 2018.
      https://nonews.co/directory/lists/countries/oil-reserves
      And there is also coal (it will last for 1000 years)
  9. +5
    11 February 2023 12: 52
    And why is there a black and white photograph of a transport handling unit? He comes from the Strategic Missile Forces, does not fit the topic of the article in any way. Unless the tractor is the same as that of the Pamirs - the 537th mazyuka.
  10. +3
    11 February 2023 14: 48
    I regularly read the IAEA report on mini nuclear power plants, it comes out twice a year on average, now there are about 70 different projects of mini nuclear power plants in the world with a capacity of up to 300 MW, but so far it is apparently very far from widespread distribution, even though nuclear power plants are mini, but still this Nuclear power plants and in full growth raise safety issues, issues with waste, the price of the energy received is such that it is cheaper to actually start fuel oil / diesel fuel / gas.
    1. +2
      11 February 2023 16: 59
      the price of the energy received is such that it is actually cheaper to start fuel oil / diesel fuel / gas.

      You write nonsense!
      The price of electricity generation at nuclear power plants is one of the lowest.
      The cost of producing one kilowatt-hour of electricity at the Rostov NPP is only 1,3-1,4 rubles. It is at this price that Volgodonsk nuclear scientists sell electricity to the wholesale market.
      At the same time, the price for the population in the January receipt is 5,65 rubles.
      In Russia, it is high time to switch to predominantly generation at nuclear power plants, with the phased closure of coal-fired TPPs in the first place.
      Modular mini-nuclear power plants could be the optimal solution in this matter, allowing to significantly improve the environmental situation in many regions of Russia.
      The need for electric power of a city with a population of 100 thousand people = 20 MW + industrial production.
      1. 0
        12 February 2023 02: 54
        You write nonsense!


        While you wrote nonsense and with such aplomb, and here are large nuclear power plants (the Rostov NPP you mentioned), the conversation is about fundamentally different nuclear power plants, the so-called SMR (Small Modular Reactor), here is the IAEA report on almost all projects in the world https://aris.iaea .org/Publications/SMR_booklet_2022.pdf

        Modular mini-nuclear power plants could be the optimal solution in this matter, allowing to significantly improve the environmental situation in many regions of Russia.


        And solar energy could also become, it would seem, here it is a huge thermonuclear reactor, shine, take it and use its energy, but there are nuances. Read the 400-page report on various projects, there are a lot of interesting ones, but everywhere there are gaps, though mini, but everything is exactly like a nuclear power plant, and as a gas-fired mini thermal power plant, you can’t just put it in settlements, the cost of these modular nuclear power plants is not even small, autonomous you can’t do them, and for safety you will need the constant presence of engineering personnel, serious security, since a terrorist attack at such a nuclear power plant and a terrorist attack at a conditional gas mini-CHP are different in consequences, plus the issue of waste, due to lower efficiency, the total SMR will produce more waste than one patient NPP.

        The need for electric power of a city with a population of 100 thousand people = 20 MW + industrial production.


        Well, it’s strange in Russia not to provide a city with a population of 100 thousand with gas, well, either this village is not in a vacuum, but in a conditional region then build large nuclear power plants that provide electricity to the region and neighboring regions can.
      2. +1
        12 February 2023 22: 45
        The cost of producing one kilowatt-hour of electricity at the Rostov NPP is only 1,3-1,4 rubles.

        Hard to believe:
        IAEA report from 1989 contradicts your data
        https://www.iaea.org/sites/default/files/32304781823_ru.pdf
        Yes, and a fresh look from RosAtom is enough - completely different numbers
        https://rosatom.ru/upload/docs/Poln_zatr.pdf
    2. +2
      11 February 2023 22: 19
      The smaller the nuclear power plant, the lower its efficiency, and the greater the share of "parasitic" heat it produces relative to generation. Also, due to the size of a mini-nuclear power plant, it is often difficult to ensure its proper level of safety and controllability-redundancy in design (and dimensions especially). And you have to choose more expensive solutions than for a typical nuclear power plant (relative to% in the price of the entire structure).
      So the idea is good, but I would bet more on providing autonomous objects than on settlements. In us. points there is no requirement for "quick deployment" - you can build a full-fledged large thermal power plant with a larger warehouse and higher efficiency. The city will exist for more than 10+ years, and an autonomous object is not a fact.
  11. 0
    11 February 2023 17: 19
    The Warsaw women would be modernized for small nuclear reactors, and the problem with an air-independent installation, which they have not been able to solve for more than 15 years, will be solved by itself.
  12. +1
    11 February 2023 17: 31
    I remember how in the 90s there was some "scientific and design" excitement district ... mini? micro? -NPP! This excitement was spurred on by the problem of disposing of "submarine" nuclear reactors! They were going to use the "decommissioned" reactors in the "far north" and "in every way"! 1. Someone suggested "burying" reactors in existing mines ... 2. And someone to acquire suitable ships (for example, container ships ...) and place reactors removed from submarines there ... 3. And finally - then (!), without removing nuclear reactors from decommissioned submarines, "convert" these submarines into "compact" nuclear power plants, which can be relocated where necessary! By the way, at the same time there were proposals to use decommissioned nuclear submarines as cargo ships for delivering goods to the same "norths" "year-round"!
  13. +1
    11 February 2023 21: 51
    We have interesting developments based on Ritm-200 reactors and low-power nuclear power plants. The first one is already under construction. In Yakutia, which.
  14. +1
    11 February 2023 22: 12
    Thermal emission is a dead end, because the efficiency is negligible, its rather rapid drop, due to radiation exposure to the elements. And yes, the price is relative to the reliability-durability-efficiency-power parameter. For space, this is generally a suitable and interesting solution (due to the lack of alternatives and the limit on parasitic thermal power that needs to be dissipated somehow and with something), as a ground-based compact (according to the indicated dimensions) energy source - this will be a rare insanity .
    It is much more practical to experiment with reactors like the American Kilopower, which can be unified both for potential interplanetary missions or vehicles, and for ground conditions.
    Of course, the larger the heat engine, the more efficiency can be squeezed out of it - however, in this case, it does not seem logical to me to count on some single and relatively large solution "for military facilities". Military objects consume differently, and it is better to develop a small modular design such as Kilopower, a battery from which can be placed on the spot, creating the desired generation (without excess) and, at the same time, suitable as a solution for more compact missions (including potentially Lunar, for example).

    An example with Kilopover is given in no way in terms of the power of this product - I think that the power (electric) of a unified reactor should be in the range of 100-200 kW. If the efficiency of TPP-3 was about 15% (8.8 MW thermal, 1.5 MW electrical), then, taking into account the smaller design but better materials and 60 years of progress in the nuclear industry, with an efficiency no worse, the thermal power of the product will be approximately 600 kW with such parameters -1.2 MW. This, in turn, can be dispelled and used much more flexibly than a 1-2 MW monster with an efficiency of approx. 20+% (and 5-10 MW of thermal power, the dispelling of which will be natural hemorrhoids).

    I summarize - I consider the capacities for a "typical" solution of 1-2 MW to be redundant and poorly unified with other areas. By design - no alternative generator turbine.
    According to the heat carrier - water-water or on melts.
    Of course, I am by no means an expert, just because I see it much more promising and universal.
  15. 0
    12 February 2023 16: 06
    I am a complete layman in the atomic topic, but it seems to me that thermionic atomic power sources cannot be called a reactor, they are closer to atomic batteries. After all, they mean RITEG (radioisotope thermoelectric generator)? The same simple, compact (comparatively), reliable and low-power. They have been used for a long time, for example, for uninhabited radio beacons in the far north. It’s easy to take such a thing away by car, but even this car won’t have enough power to move it. Is that mine version an attempt to make a giant atomic battery with increased power and a meager resource?
  16. 0
    13 February 2023 10: 54
    Thanks to the author for an interesting article. Slightly ironic about the use of small reactors for civilian purposes, I can say that everything is going well until the Russian uncle Vanya or that same Italian housewife from Voghera decides to fix it with electrical tape, wire iron or a clamp. laughing
  17. 0
    17 February 2023 18: 21
    there are a lot of places where such reactors are needed, and I hope ours will cope.
  18. 0
    23 March 2023 08: 57
    Thanks to the author for the article. Informative, professional and without hysterical sobs, which are the rule of good form on this site.