Closing the Nuclear Cycle: Russian Generation IV Reactor BREST-OD-300

33
Closing the Nuclear Cycle: Russian Generation IV Reactor BREST-OD-300
Reactor BREST-OD-300. Source: youtube.com


Reactor with "depleted uranium"


The ever-growing volumes of spent nuclear fuel are forcing huge territories to be alienated for its disposal. At least 350 thousand tons of radioactive materials have accumulated on Earth at the moment. Powers that have nuclear power plants are trying to find at least some use for dangerous substances. Recently, there has been talk of munitions stuffed with depleted uranium produced from spent fuel. The shells are nice, but they are rarely used for their intended purpose. Therefore, they are not suitable as the main utilizer of nuclear fuel.



Why do we need a fast neutron reactor at all? What is wrong with the traditional method based on artificially moderated neutrons?

First of all, it's about fuel. A classic nuclear power plant, such as Turkey's Akkuyu, which Russia is currently building for Turkey, consumes the uranium-235 isotope as fuel. There is not much of it in uranium ore, it is expensive, and the reserves should run out in a hundred years.

Fast neutron reactors "feed" on uranium-238 isotopes. It would seem that the difference is only three units, but there is a real abyss between these isotopes. 99 percent of all uranium in the ore is the same 238th isotope. That is, there is a lot of it, and it is relatively cheap. And it is suitable only for nuclear power plants on fast neutrons.

The main bonus of all stories – uranium-238 is generated as spent fuel in classical slow neutron reactors.


Site in Seversk, where BREST-OD-300 is being built. Source: youtube.com

Let's return to the Turkish Akkuyu, which has not yet been completed, but has already received the first batch of uranium pellets from Novosibirsk.

As soon as the nuclear power plant is launched, and in a couple of years spent fuel appears, it will be taken away by Russian nuclear scientists to be used in fast neutron reactors. Such is the cycle of uranium in nature.

But that's not all.

As soon as uranium-238 is launched into a fast neutron reactor, it not only releases heat during a nuclear reaction, but also generates a new isotope - plutonium-239. It turns out already a new mixed and universal fuel, called "MOX fuel". This is a good product - the Japanese and Europeans buy it for their nuclear power plants on slow or thermal neutrons.

To summarize the introduction, classical nuclear power plants produce a lot of waste with a high proportion of uranium-235, which is used in fast breeder reactors. "Fast" reactors, in turn, leave practically ready "MOX fuel" after operation. These wastes can be sent back to conventional nuclear power plants. The cycle closes and the need for “greening” the global energy industry automatically disappears.

Learn to use the peaceful atom correctly, and you will not need capricious windmills, solar panels, or other frills. In the hands of civilization is now an endless fuel base, which will last for several millennia. In this scenario, even semi-mythical thermonuclear fusion seems superfluous.

Everything is fine in this story, but only Russia has priority technologies in the field of waste-free nuclear energy. And our former partners in the West do not like this very much.

At one time, they were actively engaged in "fast neutron" technologies abroad, but due to the high cost and apparent unprofitability, all projects were closed. In the US, the EBR-II reactor stopped in 1994, in the UK the DFR was stopped back in 1977, and the French Superphenix was shut down in 1998.

Russia continued to work with fast neutron reactors, the only one in the world. This should be remembered by everyone who keeps talking about the oil and gas needle, which our country supposedly finally and irrevocably sat down on.

Project "Breakthrough"


Theoretically, it is not difficult to turn an ordinary slow-neutron reactor into a "fast" one - for this it is enough to replace the water in the core with another substance. The fact is that water, water vapor, some organic substances and carbon dioxide well trap and slow down neutrons, thereby stopping the development of a nuclear reaction.

If the customer wants a device based on fast neutrons, then low-melting metals, such as sodium, will have to be loaded into the hot zone of the reactor as a coolant. It is the molten sodium that transfers heat from the uranium rods to the steam generator in the Russian BN-800 fast neutron reactor. It was launched in 2015 at the Beloyarsk NPP, and now it is the only unit of its kind in the world - classic slow-neutron reactors rule the world.

Perhaps the main disadvantage of the BN-800 is a controversial coolant. Anyone who is familiar with a school chemistry course probably knows that sodium is very active and ready to flare up in air, not to mention contact with water. There are enough complications with the sodium thermal jacket. For example, it is necessary to reload fuel from a reactor in vacuum chambers.

Nevertheless, the problems are solvable, otherwise Rosatom would not have built a second, even more powerful fast reactor BN-1200. Its launch is planned for the 2030s with an estimated service life of up to 2090.

But the BN series no longer belongs to the Russian technological mainstream - the technology of heat transfer using liquid lead is now in the foreground. It is around this that the Proryv project revolves, the key element of which is the experimental reactor BREST-OD-300 (Natural Safety Lead-Cooled Fast Reactor).

The idea of ​​building a fast neutron reactor with lead in the primary circuit was born in the early 80s, but it only reached practical implementation in 2021. BREST is being built in the city of Seversk in the Tomsk region and they promise to put it into trial operation by the end of the decade.

It is not so easy to come and see the construction of a unique reactor: Seversk is a closed city, entirely occupied with nuclear production and research. The site was chosen by the Siberian Chemical Combine, one of the key fuel producers for Rosatom.


Lead has never been used as a coolant in nuclear reactors. Source: youtube.com

Lead for nuclear scientists is a unique coolant. In air and on contact with water, it does not ignite, but only solidifies. Weakly absorbs and does not slow down neutrons, and ionizing radiation, on the contrary, delays very well. As a result, BREST and others like it will emit radiation hardly more than a domestic refrigerator.

A natural question is why BREST-OD-300 is classified as a generation IV reactor? Other than lead, is it essentially no different from the previous generation of fast neutron reactors?

IV generation of nuclear reactors implies a whole range of parameters, among which safety, environmental friendliness and the cost of electricity at the output are in the foreground.


BREST-OD-300. Source: ippe.ru

BREST is famous for a number of non-trivial solutions.

First of all, it is expensive and difficult to manufacture nuclear fuel. Its official name is mixed nitride uranium-plutonium fuel or MNUP-fuel, manufactured near the standing reactor in the shops of the Siberian Chemical Combine. One fact speaks eloquently about the complexity of the new product - it is made in an inert gas atmosphere.

SNP-fuel is very safe due to minimal reactivity. If it is quite simple, then it is impossible to disperse it to catastrophic limits, as happened in Chernobyl. According to Rosatom, the Breakthrough project in Seversk should become

“a cluster of nuclear technologies of the future, including three interconnected facilities that have no analogues in the world: a module for the production (fabrication / refabrication) of uranium-plutonium nuclear fuel; power unit BREST-OD-300; as well as a module for reprocessing irradiated fuel.”

In theory, BREST will provide itself with plutonium-239 as the main fuel component, simply by burning out the "mining" from other reactors, consisting of uranium-238.








Elements of the project "Breakthrough". Source: youtube.com

Now the prospects for the Proryv project in general and the BREST reactor in particular are limited by a large number of “buts”.

First of all, until this expensive and complex complex is put into operation, it will be impossible to speak of a global renaissance of Russian nuclear energy.

Now everyone is frightened by the possibility of a repeat of Fukushima and Chernobyl, which forces us to work with classic pressurized water reactors on slow neutrons. Which, by the way, are best built by the Russians. But this leads to an inexorable increase in nuclear waste and a gradual depletion of uranium ores.

It will take 10–15 years, or even several decades, before BREST-OD-300 class equipment takes its place on the world energy Olympus. Nothing can be done - such are the terms of technological revolutions in the civilian atom.
33 comments
Information
Dear reader, to leave comments on the publication, you must sign in.
  1. +12
    24 May 2023 04: 42
    It is clear that the author is not an expert, but some things, if you are already taking on the topic, then at least a little you should study it.
    It is problematic to use pure liquid lead in reactors. Most often, lighter alloys are used. Reactors with a coolant based on an alloy of lead and bismuth were created in the USSR half a century ago and were used on some nuclear submarines.
    1. +2
      24 May 2023 04: 57
      Yes, and the author's awesomeness about "obtaining fuel in an inert gas atmosphere" is not particularly clear to me. There are nitrides, that is, in an atmosphere of nitrogen, it is just inert at n.o., and it costs a penny, but technologically ... The atmosphere in the "hot shop" is always closed, its release is an emergency in production. more than one hell of a thing to seal - air with 70% nitrogen or pure nitrogen?
      1. fiv
        0
        17 August 2023 02: 54
        The atmosphere in the "hot" shop is not closed, there is both supply and exhaust. Only on the hood, the finest aerosols are caught by filters. And the exhaust pipes are made high.
    2. +3
      24 May 2023 15: 59
      Quote: Tucan
      It is problematic to use pure liquid lead in reactors. Most often, lighter alloys are used. Reactors with a coolant based on an alloy of lead and bismuth were created in the USSR half a century ago and were used on some nuclear submarines.

      Reactors with a coolant in the form of a melt of lead with bismuth were used in boats pr.705, unique in their characteristics. But the problem is that if it is necessary to shut down the reactor, the melt solidifies and irreversibly disables it. Before starting the reactor, it is necessary to pour molten metal into the primary circuit, which is difficult and not safe.
      1. +2
        25 May 2023 14: 14
        Or constantly heat it with heat from the coastal infrastructure. Project 705k boats were killed due to the impossibility of supplying heat from the shore. Once muffled and everything - you can not start.
      2. -1
        13 June 2023 23: 41
        But the problem is that if it is necessary to shut down the reactor, the melt solidifies and irreversibly disables it.
        It was necessary to do it on mercury (just kidding, uranium flashes in it and it is terribly poisonous)
    3. 0
      7 December 2023 12: 10
      Moreover, the operating experience there was rather negative because... plugs occurred in the cooling channels, their rupture and depressurization of the tubes with the release of radioactive materials outside. As a result, project 705 was completely closed.
  2. -11
    24 May 2023 05: 44
    everyone is scared of the possibility of a repeat of Fukushima and Chernobyl

    And why did the author not mention the accident at the American nuclear power plant Three Mile Island? Probably because the Americans did not "tear their shirt on their chest and sprinkle ashes on their heads," but kept everything classified. As a result, their bankrupt nuclear power plant is "white and fluffy", while all the rest are dirty and dangerous.
    ps I don't know about Fukushima and Three Mile Island, but the Chernobyl nuclear power plant exploded from the absolutely incompetent actions of the operating personnel and the illiterate and irresponsible actions of firefighters who flooded the roof of the power unit with water. It was this water that hit the red-hot reactor, instantly boiled up and caused a steam explosion with the ejection of fuel rods.
    pps It was these firefighters from the city fire station in Pripyat who completely died from radiation because they "did not know what they were doing." The kingdom of heaven to them and God be their judge.
    1. +12
      24 May 2023 06: 42
      Do not read the yellow press at night, by the time the firefighters arrived, the roof of the reactor hall was practically gone. They flooded the roof of the machine shop and the roofs of neighboring blocks with water.
      1. -11
        24 May 2023 09: 17
        They flooded the roof of the machine shop and the roofs of neighboring blocks with water.

        Then where did they get not just a lethal dose, but a super-lethal one.
        ps Please never make remarks to others if you do not have first-hand information.
    2. +7
      24 May 2023 13: 51
      Quote: Amateur
      irresponsible actions of firefighters who flooded the roof of the power unit with water. It was this water that hit the red-hot reactor, instantly boiled up and caused a steam explosion with the ejection of fuel rods.

      Oh my God... Water from the roof, "falling on a red-hot reactor"!! No words, just no words. I beg you, do not tear the veils of terrible secrets anymore. And then more or less literate people can hug kondraty ....
    3. 0
      2 June 2023 13: 17
      The Americans didn't keep anything secret. In Medvedev's Chernobyl notebook, the accident at Three Mile Island is described in detail. The reason is the irresponsibility of the operators. Of the 4 coolant transfer pumps, 3 were under repair, there was no reserve, and when the 4th pump died, the reactor was left without cooling.
      They correctly write to you that when the firefighters arrived, the reactor had already exploded and the roof and one wall were gone. Perhaps in the first place they tried to pour water into the reactor, which could only harm themselves. But they were quickly explained that it was not the reactor that needed to be extinguished, but what was burning around it. The roof of the turbine hall, for example, where the bitumen burned.
    4. fiv
      0
      17 August 2023 03: 01
      In order for water to get through the roof to the "hot reactor", it is necessary that there is no roof and the upper cover of the reactor (in RBMK). And they were not there precisely because the heat release parameters in the reactor increased sharply, the water became steam, thereby dispersing the reactor and a steam explosion occurred. Firefighters with water were already far away after that.
  3. KCA
    +4
    24 May 2023 06: 17
    For some reason, the author wrote off the working BN-600, and the BN-1200 is by no means the second, but the fifth of the industrial RBN, and there were and are research ones, I can see the IBR-2 ventilation pipe from the window
  4. +6
    24 May 2023 06: 19
    an infinite fuel base that will last for several millennia.
    - the author, yes, you should trade in used cars, there are all the makings for advertising substandard goods laughing
  5. +2
    24 May 2023 07: 11
    Russia continues to work with fast neutron reactors, the only one in the world

    Yes, everyone continued.
    The CFR-600 Fast Breeder Demonstration Reactor (CDFR) is the next step in the China Institute of Atomic Energy (CIAE) program. The Xiapu-1 reactor is expected to be connected to the grid in 2023. The reactors will have 1500 MW thermal and 600 MW electrical power, with a thermal efficiency of 41%, using MOX fuel with a burnup of 100 GWd/t and with two sodium coolant loops producing steam at a temperature of 480°C. In the future, the fuel will be metallic with a burnup of 100–120 GW day/ton. The reproduction ratio is about 1,1, the estimated life of 40 years. The design of fast reactors provides for systems of active and passive shutdown and passive removal of residual heat [1].
  6. +7
    24 May 2023 09: 20
    It’s good that we don’t put everything in one basket (sodium BNs), but also develop related areas (lead eutetics), which, moreover, promise even greater safety, up to a completely passive system that excludes any beyond design basis accident. And how much it requires exploratory materials science research, which lays the foundation for technological superiority. Rosatom does not intend to lose the status of "the first in the world" and only moves further and further away from its competitors.

    PS: Article of course of the level "Pop Mechanics" laughing
  7. -1
    24 May 2023 10: 48
    The matter is certainly necessary, but it will require accompanying activities, large-scale and dirty. The separation of radioactive elements and active isotopes by chemical means is not much more environmentally friendly than burial grounds, given the necessary scale of production for the more or less mass implementation of these plans. The activated technology that interacts with all this will also need to be disposed of somehow, that is, it will still have to be buried.

    Alas, there are probably no alternatives.
    1. +3
      24 May 2023 22: 07
      Quote: Knell Wardenheart
      Separation of radioactive elements and active isotopes by chemical means - not much more environmentally friendly than burial grounds

      What?
      I got a little fucked up and I have no other words ... I was just involved in refining this case, so I’m aware of the details ... Justify the statement
  8. +12
    24 May 2023 11: 40
    The author is not a nuclear scientist. Lots of fundamental mistakes.

    munitions filled with depleted uranium produced from spent fuel
    Depleted uranium is not SNF! It is a waste of the enrichment process, which is still to loading fuel into the reactor. SNF is more radioactive, while depleted uranium is less radioactive than nuclear fuel.

    Fast neutron reactors “feed” on uranium-238 isotopes
    Uranium-238 is the isotope. And he just not suitable as nuclear fuel. Fast neutron reactors "feed" on the same uranium-235 isotope as traditional thermal reactors. The uranium-238 isotope is present in any case as ballast (the difference between 100% and the percentage of uranium enrichment; the latter is equal to the fraction of the 235th isotope). The difference between fast neutron reactors is that fast neutrons contribute to the transformation (transmutation) of uranium-238 into plutonium-239, which slow (thermal) neutrons are not capable of. But plutonium-239 can already be used as fuel. Both in traditional thermal reactors and in fast ones. Ideally, even in the same reactor in which it was created, and, moreover, within the same fuel campaign (i.e., without fuel refueling). Such a concept is called a "travelling wave reactor", but it still remains only an attractive concept ...

    uranium-238 is generated as spent fuel in classic reactors
    The composition of spent nuclear fuel from traditional reactors is a fierce mixture of unburnt uranium-235, decay products (short-living, therefore strongly emitting radiation), products of side reactions ... Although uranium-238 does make up the bulk of spent nuclear fuel, it is in reactors not generated. He was there initially, like ballast.

    uranium-238 is launched into a fast neutron reactor, it not only releases heat during a nuclear reaction, but also generates a new isotope - plutonium-239
    Uranium-238 does not generate heat. The transmutation of uranium-238 into plutonium-239 goes with takeover energy (as well as any fusion reactions with elements heavier than iron).

    "Fast" reactors, in turn, leave almost ready-made "MOX fuel" after operation.
    Not ready. The production of MOX fuel is a very complex technological process for the processing of spent nuclear fuel (by the way, along with zirconium shells of rods). It has only recently been mastered in such a way that it can be economically justified on an industrial scale.

    it is not difficult to turn an ordinary slow-neutron reactor into a “fast” one - for this it is enough to replace the water in the core with another substance
    Each reactor is designed for its own type of coolant. Alteration of one into another is impossible even in theory.
    1. -3
      24 May 2023 12: 57
      this is how one stupid journalist revealed more carriers of nuclear secrets and even hidden spies than a qualified FSB officer lol
      1. +6
        24 May 2023 15: 13
        And one fool who has spies overlaid everywhere and scurry around 24/7 in search of secrets))
        If it wasn't irony of course
      2. fiv
        0
        17 August 2023 03: 12
        Go to the library!
        The text of your comment is too short and in the opinion of the site administration does not carry useful information.
    2. The comment was deleted.
  9. +2
    24 May 2023 13: 21
    Beautiful picture, but there are nuances.
    A fast neutron reactor running on plutonium without uranium 235 will not work - it will explode.
    As the uranium 235 in the fuel burns up and plutonium builds up, control becomes more difficult and the risk of an explosion increases.
    The preparation of MNUP fuel requires a lot of uranium 235, the resources of which are limited. Snoop fuel is a half-measure that does not provide a closed nuclear cycle, but only reduces the consumption of uranium-235 by about a third.
    .
    In general, the design and operation principles of the BN reactor are copied from the classic slow neutron reactor. Whereas the features of the reaction require a fundamentally different design.
    1. 0
      7 December 2023 12: 21
      Something is unclear how SNUP fuel, requiring more 235m than VVER, reduces the need for this very 235m. Can you explain?
  10. +2
    24 May 2023 13: 24
    Quote: Amateur
    I don’t know about Fukushima and Three Mile Island, but the Chernobyl nuclear power plant exploded from the absolutely incompetent actions of the operating personnel and the illiterate and irresponsible actions of firefighters who flooded the roof of the power unit with water. It was this water that hit the red-hot reactor, instantly boiled up and caused a steam explosion with the ejection of fuel rods.


    The operating personnel actually carried out an experiment on the operation of the reactor under supercritical conditions. People followed the direct instructions of the authorities (who really were not entirely competent). Well, what choice did they have?

    Didn't the firemen come after the explosion, after the accident? Then why were they called? What was the reason? What happened before they were called, in your opinion?
    I always believed that at first there was an explosion (really steam), and only then they began to call firefighters and other rescuers. And the explosion itself was caused by a break in the cooling circuit. Heated water under pressure hit the overheated reactor, which caused the explosion.
  11. +1
    24 May 2023 13: 32
    Quote: Amateur
    And why did the author not mention the accident at the American nuclear power plant Three Mile Island? Probably because the Americans did not "tear their shirt on their chest and sprinkle ashes on their heads," but kept everything classified.


    So secret that this catastrophe near the town of Harrisburg (shared the fate of Pripyat) was even bowed down in songs.
    Well, like Kraftwerk in "Radioactivity"

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0EBTn_3DBYo

    This is impossible to hide.
    1. +3
      24 May 2023 14: 20
      Fukushima has been added to the latest Kraftwerk releases (in HiRes sound) laughing
  12. 0
    25 May 2023 08: 22
    Quote: vadimtt
    Fukushima has been added to the latest Kraftwerk releases (in HiRes sound)


    Are they still alive and singing? E-my, I listened to them in school days. under Leonid Ilyich.
    Well, the song certainly hasn't lost its relevance. Maybe some other town will be added. Where is there still a nuclear power plant in Ukraine?
  13. 0
    26 May 2023 20: 06
    Rarely illiterate article ...
  14. 0
    6 July 2023 17: 52
    Even if the author made a mistake somewhere, this is not the main thing.
    The main thing is that if our modern officials and "creative managers" got down to business, then something is being prepared that Chernobyl is resting .......

    I don't believe them for a minute! It would be better if they just plundered everything ... Everyone should do what he knows how to do. And so do they.

    For example, after the words of the Supreme on February 24, 2022: "there will be a rout and terrible consequences" - - I had not good premonitions right away ...
    So I guess that here, too, something "will be".
  15. _6
    0
    8 August 2023 17: 24
    Sounds like a beautiful fairy tale. In addition to many inconsistencies, it immediately caught my eye that at the beginning of the article the fuel for this reactor was cheap, junk, almost waste. And at the end of the article - it is already insanely expensive and exclusive. Look for the truth too lazy, it's easier to forget what you read. I used to read many interesting articles here with interest. And now in my head there is a constant thought that the Military Review is not responsible for the veracity of what is written. Sometimes there is much more information in the comments and it is much more accurate.
  16. -1
    15 August 2023 13: 43
    This is a good product - the Japanese and Europeans buy it for their nuclear power plants on slow or thermal neutrons.

    or maybe you need to think - is it worth feeding any sanctionists? let the sun sculpt mox fuel for their nuclear power plants from the wind