The nuclear industry of Russia is waiting for “Breakthrough”

74
In Russia, work is underway to create a revolutionary nuclear reactor belonging to the fourth generation. We are talking about the BREST reactor, on which enterprises of Rosatom State Corporation are currently working. This promising reactor is being created as part of the Proryv project. “BREST” is a project of fast neutron reactors with lead coolant, dual circuit heat removal to the turbine, as well as supercritical steam parameters. The project has been developed in our country since the end of 1980's. The main developer of this reactor is NIKIET named after N. A. Dollezhal (Research and Development Institute of Power Engineering).

Today, nuclear power plants give Russia 18% of electricity generated. The nuclear power industry is very important in the European part of our country, especially in the north-west, where its share is 42% of electricity generation. Currently, 10 NPPs are operating in Russia, where the 34 power unit is operated. Most of them use low-enriched uranium with a content of uranium-235 isotope at the level of 2-5% as fuel. In this case, the fuel at the NPP is not fully consumed, which leads to the formation of radioactive waste.



In Russia, 18 has already accumulated thousands of tons of spent uranium, and every year this figure increases by 670 tons. And in total in the world there are 345 thousand tons of this waste, of which 110 thousand tons come from the United States. The problem with the processing of these wastes could be solved by a reactor of a new type, which would operate in a closed loop. The creation of such a reactor would help to cope with the leakage of military nuclear technologies. Such reactors could be safely supplied to any countries of the world, since it would in principle be impossible to obtain the raw materials necessary for the creation of a nuclear power plant. weapons. But their main advantage would be safety. Such reactors could be launched even on old, spent nuclear fuel. According to A. Kryukov, Dr. Sc. (Physics and Mathematics), even rather rough calculations tell us that the accumulated uranium reserves accumulated over the nuclear industry’s 60 years will last for several hundred years of energy generation.

The BREST reactors are a revolutionary project in this direction. This reactor fits well with the context of Vladimir Putin’s speech at the Millennium Summit in the UN in September 2000. As part of his report, the Russian president promised the world a new nuclear power industry: safe, clean, weapon-free use. Since that speech, the work on the implementation of the Breakthrough project and the creation of the BREST reactor have progressed substantially.

General view of the BREST-300 reactor


Initially, the installation “BREST” was designed, which would provide the power unit of 300 MW as part of the power unit, but later a project appeared with a capacity increased to 1200 MW. At the same time, at this point in time, the developers have focused all their efforts on the less powerful BREST-OD-300 reactor (experienced demonstration) in connection with the development of a large amount of new design solutions and plans to test them on a relatively small and cheap project. In addition, the selected power 300 MW (electric) and 700 MW (thermal) is the minimum power required to obtain a fuel reproduction ratio in the reactor core equal to one.

At present, the project “Breakthrough” is being implemented at the site of the enterprise of the state corporation “Rosatom” of the Siberian Chemical Combine (SCC) in the territory of the closed territorial entity (CATF) Seversk (Tomsk region). This project involves the development of nuclear fuel cycle closure technologies that will be in demand in the nuclear power industry of the future. The implementation of this project in practice provides for the creation of a pilot-demonstration energy complex consisting of: BREST-OD-300 - a fast neutron reactor with a lead liquid metal coolant with stationary nuclear fuel cycle and a special module for fabrication / refabrication of fuel for this reactor, as well as its spent processing module fuel. It is planned to launch the BREST-OD-300 reactor in 2020.

St. Petersburg VNIPIET acts as the general designer of the pilot-demonstration energy complex. The reactor is created by NIKIET (Moscow). Earlier it was reported that the development of the BREST reactor is estimated at 17,7 billion rubles, the construction of the module for reprocessing spent nuclear fuel - 19,6 billion rubles, the fabrication module and the start-up complex of fuel refabrimation - 26,6 billion rubles. The main task of the created energy complex should be the development of the technology of operating a new reactor, the production of new fuel and the technology of reprocessing spent nuclear fuel. For this reason, the decision to start the BREST-OD-300 reactor in the energy mode in order to generate electrical energy will be made only after the completion of all the research work on the project.



The construction site of the BREST-300 power complex is located in the area of ​​the radiochemical plant of the Siberian Chemical Combine. Work on this site began in August 2014. According to Sergey Tochilin, Director General of SCC, a vertical layout with a notch of one million cubic meters of soil has already been carried out, cables have been laid, technical water pipelines have been mounted, and other construction works have been completed. At present, the Java contract organization and the Seversky subcontractor Spetsteplokhimmontazh continue the complex of works related to the preparatory period. Today, 400 people are working on the construction site, with an increase in the rate of work at the facility, the number of builders will grow to 600-700 people. State investments in this project are estimated at 100 billion rubles, the press service of the Siberian Chemical Combine informs.

The pilot-demonstration energy complex in the largest closed regional ZATO in our country is being built in stages. The first to build a plant for the production of nitride fuel, its commissioning is scheduled for 2017-2018 year. In the future, the fuel produced at this plant will go to the BREST-300 pilot-demonstration reactor, the construction of which will begin in the 2016 year, and completed in the 2020 year, this will be the completion of the second phase of the project. The third phase of work involves the construction of another plant - for the reprocessing of spent fuel. The full “Breakthrough” project will have to earn by 2023 year. Thanks to the implementation of this ambitious project, in the city of Seversk should appear about 1,5 thousands of new jobs. Directly in the construction of the installation BREST-300 6-8 thousands of workers will participate.



As the head of the project for the creation of the BREST-300 reactor, Andrey Nikolaev, said, the BREST-OD-300 reactor installation with the on-site nuclear fuel cycle, as well as the complex for the production of atomic fuel of the future, will be part of the pilot-demonstration power complex in the city of Seversk. This is a nitride fuel for fast neutron reactors. It is assumed that it is on this type of fuel, starting from the 20-s of the XXI century, the entire nuclear power industry will function. It is planned that the experimental BREST-300 reactor will be the first fast neutron reactor on the planet with a heavy liquid metal coolant. According to the project, spent nuclear fuel in the BREST-300 reactor will be reprocessed and then reloaded into the reactor. A total reactor load will require a total of 28 tons of fuel for starting the reactor. At present, the analysis of spent nuclear fuel from storage facilities of the Siberian Chemical Combine is being carried out - it is possible that a certain amount of products with a plutonium element will be used in the production of fuel for an experimental BREST reactor.

The BREST-300 reactor will have a number of significant advantages in the field of work safety over any reactor operating these days. This reactor will be able to stop itself if any parameters are rejected. In addition, fuel with a lower reactivity margin is used in the fast neutron reactor, the acceleration on instant neutrons and the subsequent probability of an explosion are simply excluded. Lead, in contrast to sodium used today as a heat carrier, is passive, and in terms of chemical activity, lead is safer than sodium. Dense nitride fuel is easier to tolerate temperature regimes and mechanical defects, it is more reliable than oxide. Even the most extreme sabotage accidents with the destruction of external barriers (hull covers, reactor buildings, etc.) will not lead to radioactive releases that would require evacuation of the population and subsequent long-term alienation of the land, as happened during the Chernobyl accident in 1986.

The advantages of the BREST reactor include:

- natural radiation safety in all possible accidents for external and internal reasons, including sabotage, which does not require evacuation of the population;

- long-term (almost unlimited in time) fuel availability due to the efficient use of natural uranium;

- non-proliferation of nuclear weapons on the planet by eliminating the use of weapons-grade plutonium in the operation of plutonium and the implementation of the on-site technology for dry processing of fuel without separating plutonium and uranium

- environmental friendliness of energy production and subsequent disposal of waste due to the closed fuel cycle with transmutation of long-lived fission products, transmutation and burning of actinides in the reactor, purification of radioactive waste from actinides, aging and disposal of radioactive waste without disrupting the natural radiation balance;

- economic competitiveness, which is achieved due to the natural safety of nuclear power plants and the technology of the implemented fuel cycle, feeding the reactor only 238U, abandoning complex engineering safety systems, high lead parameters that ensure the achievement of supercritical parameters of the steam turbine circuit, reducing construction costs.

Project image of the BREST complex. 1 is a reactor, 2 is a turbine engine room, 3 is a SNF reprocessing module, 4 is a fresh fuel fabrication module.


The combination of mononitride fuel, the natural qualities of lead coolant, design solutions of the core and cooling circuits, the physical characteristics of the fast reactor takes the BREST reactor to a qualitatively new level of natural safety and ensures sustainability without triggering active means of emergency protection in very severe accidents that are insurmountable for any from existing and engineered reactors in the world:

- self-propelled all existing regulatory authorities;
- shutdown (jamming) of all pumps of the 1 th reactor circuit;
- shutdown (jamming) of all pumps of the 2 th reactor circuit;
- depressurization of the body of the rector;
- rupture of the tubes of the steam generator or the piping of the second circuit in any section;
- the imposition of a variety of accidents;
- unlimited cooldown at full power failure.

The “Breakthrough” project implemented by Rosatom is aimed at creating a new technological platform for the Russian nuclear industry with a closed fuel cycle and solving the problem of spent nuclear fuel and radioactive waste (RW). The result of the implementation of this ambitious project should be the creation of a competitive product that will ensure Russian technology leadership in the global nuclear power industry, and in general in the global energy system for the next 30-50 years.

Information sources:
http://www.rosatom.ru
http://atomsib.ru
http://publicatom.ru/blog/atomsib/5854.html
http://sdelano-u-nas.livejournal.com/360656.html
Materials from free sources
74 comments
Information
Dear reader, to leave comments on the publication, you must sign in.
  1. +12
    18 September 2015 06: 48
    I understood a little, but I read it. If it is written that this will be a breakthrough, then this is good! smile
    1. +25
      18 September 2015 07: 56
      Quote: Tartar 174
      I understood a little, but I read it. If it is written that this will be a breakthrough, then this is good! smile

      The meaning is simple, "Breakthrough" is a reactor, the raw material for which will be spent fuel from other nuclear power plants with a burnup somewhere of 90-95%.
      There is plenty of waste in the world, weapons-grade Uranus does not accumulate during operation, the percentage of newly generated waste is minimal.
      1. +7
        18 September 2015 09: 35
        The primary coolant is lead, which will be under powerful irradiation and for sure part will gradually turn into gold and platinum, it is a pity that it is radioactive. But it really will be a breakthrough for future generations.
        1. +7
          18 September 2015 10: 29
          The creation of such a reactor would help to cope with the leakage of military nuclear technology. Such reactors could be safely supplied to any country in the world, since it would in principle be impossible to obtain the raw materials needed to create nuclear weapons.


          The fact that it is impossible to obtain WEAPONS is a definite plus. But about deliveries to ANY countries, all the same it is necessary to speak with caution.

          You never know, sometime, someone, for example, like Ukraine, will "bang" in the head to create a "dirty bomb" ...

          Anyway, we need control over the proliferation of nuclear materials and technologies ...
        2. +1
          18 September 2015 20: 07
          Yah?! Merlin, he must have rolled over in his grave!
        3. +3
          18 September 2015 20: 57
          Quote: Vita VKO
          The primary coolant is lead, which will be under powerful irradiation, and most likely the part will gradually turn into gold and platinum,

          Have you read alchemy?
          Lead-bismuth-supported reactors have been used by the military for how many years already, not to mention civilian projects.
          Lead-Bismuth Fast Reactors for Small and Medium Power Nuclear Power Plants ATOMEXPO 2009 International Forum May 26-28, 2009, Moscow, Expocentre Fairgrounds Klimov N.N.
        4. 0
          19 September 2015 03: 50
          Quote: Vita VKO
          sorry that radioactive

          like it probably doesn’t care, it is radioactive in storage or not. and then I poorly imagine this process, of course, but the conversion of lead to gold does it need to add or reduce an electron, change the atomic weight, and where does the radiation? and what is it in this case, what is the half-life? lead is the half-life of uranium? but he doesn’t. can someone sort this out?
      2. +16
        18 September 2015 09: 40
        I've read about him before. There are really a lot of pluses, according to the Director of the Kurchatov Institute, Corresponding Member of the Russian Academy of Sciences, Professor M.V. Kovalchuk, this type of reactors will allow the following: to reduce the cost of building a nuclear power plant by half (you must agree that this is not a small amount), as a result, to reduce the cost of its disposal later on (the service life is increased by 4 times), to process spent nuclear fuel both its own and, in the future, imported a source of income, for the disposal of spent nuclear fuel all over the world they pay big money), reduce the amount of spent nuclear fuel several times (every year a nuclear power plant produces an average of 2500 tons of liquid spent nuclear fuel, a breakthrough reactor will reduce this amount to 200 kg of solid low-enriched spent nuclear fuel, storage of which does not require special structures, t since the traditional background will not exceed the natural one by more than 20%). Well, how is this reactor of the rank "Brest" worth, and the project "Breakthrough"?
        1. -5
          18 September 2015 10: 15
          Rosatom already needs to be involved in the development of thorium reactors, otherwise we are getting less and more uranium ores.
          1. +6
            18 September 2015 13: 21
            Quote: Vadim237
            development of thorium reactors

            1. Are you sure that the development is not underway?
            2. Thorium does not form significant deposits.
            3. The thorium cycle is very "dirty"
        2. 0
          18 September 2015 14: 58
          Maxom.

          That will be a hemorrhoid, to reduce nuclear waste from all graves. And there the condition of the container is in terrible shape. But they will send them picking themselves there. So to say save the planet.
          1. +6
            18 September 2015 15: 53
            Quote: gladcu2
            And there the condition of the container is in terrible shape.

            Why's that? Barrels are stored without air. Crushed radioactive material — in bonded form (bitumen or concrete). Installations for pulping radioactive materials and subsequent evaporation have existed for a long time, and even were mass-produced (he made them back in the 96th)
        3. +1
          19 September 2015 09: 29
          Maxom-do not sweeply copy texts from unverified sources (each year the NPP produces an average of 2500 tons of liquid SNF), (200 kg of solid low-enriched SNF)
          SNF spent nuclear fuel.
          SRW-solid radioactive waste. (200kg-solid low-level radioactive waste).
          LRW-liquid radioactive waste. (2500 tons of liquid SNF - here is generally nonsense)
          I’m thinking about the existence of such names as: Thermoxide A, Thermoxide35, you don’t even know. I’m talking about LRW processing, moreover, it’s very successful. Minus, for your ignorance of the topic.
      3. -2
        18 September 2015 10: 10
        This nuclear spent fuel must be used somewhere, for example, in medicine for the treatment of cancer in the form of granules.
        1. +1
          18 September 2015 15: 00
          Vadim237.

          For medicine, uranium is most likely not used with such a background.
          1. +2
            19 September 2015 07: 53
            That's great. Safe nuclear power will finally bury the whim in the face of all these windmills and solar panels.
            1. +2
              19 September 2015 12: 33
              Quote: Basarev
              windmills and solar panels.

              in the production of these "eco-friendly" panels, such a bouquet of highly toxic chemicals is used and discarded, which the "greens" prefer not even to know about))) I am more impressed by the German method for calculating environmental damage, when the entire cycle of a product is taken into account, from raw material extraction to disposal energy for all processes and transportation)
        2. gjv
          +3
          19 September 2015 17: 18
          Quote: Vadim237
          This nuclear spent fuel must be used somewhere, for example, in medicine for the treatment of cancer in the form of granules.

          Quote: gladcu2
          For medicine, uranium is most likely not used with such a background.

          Uranium-235 is used in ARGUS-type reactors for the production of medical isotopes of molybdenum Mo-99 and strontium Sr-89 using innovative solution technology.
          Radionuclide generators (proton alpha radiation, beta radiation) for medical and other equipment are made on the basis of isotopes: molybdenum-99 + technetium-99m, radium-226 + radon-222.
          Gamma radiation sources are made on the basis of radionuclides such as cobalt-57, cobalt-60 (more often than others), zinc-65, selenium-75, silver-110m, antimony-124, barium-133, cesium-134, cesium-137, cerium-144 + praseodymium-144, europium-152 + europium-154, thulium -170, iridium-192, americium-241, plutonium-238, plutonium-239.
          California 252Cf has recently been used in medicine as a point source of neutrons with a high flux density for local treatment of malignant tumors.
          Depleted uranium is used for the manufacture of radiation protection screens in medical radiation therapy and in industrial radiography equipment, as well as containers used to transport radioactive materials.
  2. 0
    18 September 2015 07: 21
    Interestingly, without basic knowledge a lot is not clear, but Google to help Comrades!
    1. +4
      18 September 2015 10: 32
      And what is incomprehensible. The bottom line is almost 100% reprocessing of nuclear fuel, the reactor can operate both on existing fuel, natural uranium and spent today. And as a result of work, a lot of garbage with an almost natural background. Dug a hole buried. In my opinion, wonderful technology, God forbid that everything works out.

      ps One was confused: If we set up such reactors, then everyone will try to fuse the radioactive waste with us (even for money). The trains running along the railway through cities, forests, past lakes are embarrassing ...
    2. +2
      18 September 2015 15: 02
      Make repp

      This is the eighth grade physics school curriculum.
  3. +10
    18 September 2015 07: 24
    Everything is fine, but they have been working on the project for a long time and apart from the words there will be a breakthrough, I have not seen anything ... It’s better to report the breakthroughs after the fact - it somehow sounds more correct ..)
    1. +6
      18 September 2015 08: 40
      Agree Yes + + + + +
      In all respects: pie in the sky is clearly a loser. And if you also consider that our sworn "partners" will try to strangle the tit in the cradle ... belay Yes figs with them, "partners", let's better talk about our "rams" lol :
      At the "VTTB-2004" exhibition in Omsk, a complex for the production of thermal and electric energy was demonstrated, which can work on anything - from old tires to spruce cones (oh! - the pun turned out wink ), in general - on any "garbage", both organic and inorganic. I remember some crazy efficiency, ease of assembly, transportation, maintenance and all sorts of "goodies" were declared, two basic assembly options - "mini" and "midi", so to speak (in terms of output power). A kind of modern thermal power plant. And everything would be fine. BUT! fellow WHERE IS THIS LIGHT FUTURE? No. Almost 12 years have passed. Is this the exception or the rule? And now, dear lovers of "developed Russian capitalism", you can enter into polemics. hi I will enjoy it laughing
      1. +5
        18 September 2015 11: 57
        Our oligarchs fuck! While oil and gas do not run out of them a little, that will interest! Every year we hear about breakthrough technologies. All work in the table or for sale to the adversary.
      2. +2
        18 September 2015 15: 25
        Quote: RU-Officer
        WHERE IS THIS LIGHT FUTURE? Almost 12 years have passed.

        Was it shown, as I understand it, a fluidized-bed stove? Read what burning in a fluidized bed is not a secret of tea. You can even collect such a stove yourself, and burn in it whatever you want, right down to the ground. Everything will burn, really.
        Only the future is not very bright, excuse me. A lot of dust in the flue gases, very fast wear of the heating surfaces, puffs of smoke and dust around the stocking spreaders ... It's dirty. The French have been actively using this (our, of course) rather old invention for about forty years.
        In general, the news is old, and not without problems ...
  4. +3
    18 September 2015 07: 46
    Lead as a coolant and supercritical steam parameters. Here the main problem is in heat-resistant steel, the same fuel assemblies, it still swallows the infection under the influence of temperature, even if the problem of cracking due to alloying additives was solved. Intermediate cooling assemblies with air? As in aircraft engines, but we are unlikely to tell about these secrets.
    1. -1
      18 September 2015 10: 42
      And there is no need to wait for someone to tell you something. In the direction of development of all these developments and in the way they are solved at different levels, it is clear that this is similar to a torn blanket. In short. The reactor can be combined with a turbine and a generator. Functionally, it is literally a single device, but the processes are organized in accordance with what happens in the reactor, in the turbine and in the current generator.
      1. 0
        18 September 2015 12: 23
        Quote: gridasov
        The reactor can be combined with a turbine and with a generator.

        Is it possible in more detail? Whereby? The pictures shown show the usual dual-circuit circuit. All communication (conversion of thermal energy into electrical energy) through steam generators and then to the turbine. And the GHG is in place.
        1. -1
          18 September 2015 14: 54
          The physical process in modern reactors is divided into components. Namely, the nuclear reactions themselves are a separate process in conjunction with the removal and supply of the coolant. Further, the separated coolant must transfer potential energy to the preparation and creation of a new energy carrier - PAIR. Which generates energy in a steam turbine to obtain an alternating magnetic field on the windings. I just described the process in a simplified way without taking into account the preparation of radioactive material and the disposal of always existing "waste". Therefore, in order to get rid of such differentiation and separation of processes into separate technological stages, it is possible and necessary to use nuclear reactors, let us call them a dynamic type, when nuclear reactions occur as a result of their transformation from the complex conditions in which they fall. That is, the energy source does not need to be influenced by anything. He needs to create conditions for his transformation, then the algorithms of the processes in their sequence are simply used for the necessary purposes. It remains only to divert those types of energy that are dominant at each stage. All the rationales for such processes can be found in any physics textbook. You just need to build the correct algorithms. And in the scientific definition, all answers are solved as problems of interdisciplinary knowledge.
          1. The comment was deleted.
          2. +1
            19 September 2015 03: 09
            He wrote, he wrote. erased. Do you know why?
            I will answer your words
            Quote: gridasov
            All the justifications for such processes can be read in any physics textbook. You only need to build

            it's time to shake VO.
            It's as serious as ..... Comedy (I mean your comment). But someone plyusanul))))
            1. 0
              21 September 2015 09: 23
              But the installation is created and preliminary stage effects are not only confirmed by practice, but also confirms the correctness of both the theory and the technological process. The problem is that everything is self-financing and this significantly distracts from the development of the reactor. Since there are no financial partners, the choice will remain with us in the future.
    2. The comment was deleted.
    3. 0
      18 September 2015 16: 07
      Quote: vrach
      Here the main problem in heat resistant steel

      Well as far as I know the experience of lead reactors was on a nuclear submarine
      1. 0
        21 September 2015 09: 29
        Our technology and the reactor itself make it possible, on the basis of the basic process, to create a whole complex of targeted application of the obtained "pulse" of energy. Since there is no problem in the input processes of providing the basic reaction with constantly supplied raw materials and there are no problems with the removal of products, the closed cycle of the installation is infinite in duration. In addition, there are no negative manifestations. Since the reactor is associated with the process of steam generation and simultaneously with the effects occurring in the turbine, it is funny to hear amateurs who put minuses.
    4. 0
      18 September 2015 16: 15
      vrach

      The first circuit, I will eat heat with steam. The pressure should be very high. Well and the temperature hz. which one. This technology has been tested at conventional stations. The second circuit is liquid lead. It takes heat from steam. 360 ° C melting point It is not heat tolerant of compounds. In the liquid state, the carrier should not have high pressure. Although, in order not to bring to a boiling point, it is also desirable to raise.

      In the end, the heating power of the reactor is controlled by graphite rods. And to the limit of destruction of materials, nobody will accelerate the reactor.
      1. -1
        21 September 2015 09: 34
        Not just pressure should be high. There must be a high density of potential energy energy. In this case, the water is in this state, not even superheated steam, but much higher and orders of magnitude. And this can not be achieved in a single way, except for our technology. In this case, without danger of destroying the reactor shell.
  5. +6
    18 September 2015 08: 00
    In addition to us, the French are also engaged in the same topic, the Yankees have gone further and are planning to implement a thermonuclear reactor project. Recently, I noticed that our Yankees have taken up the habit of doing a lot of PR with not always unambiguous results. For example, you don’t need to go far, scandal after scandal still shakes, Rusnano and Skolkovo are still black holes where more than one hundred billion rubles have flowed.
    1. 0
      18 September 2015 16: 21
      PR is a consequence of the fact that projects have complex problems in their development. Because realities do not correspond to the theoretical justification. I often recall that theoretical justification should be at the shortest level from practical implementation. But not many people perceive it
  6. +1
    18 September 2015 08: 33
    Good deed, well done !! I wonder how many young people are involved in the development and construction?
  7. +7
    18 September 2015 08: 40
    I read about this "breakthrough" back in Soviet times in the "Technology of Youth", something has not gone very far, this project, from that time ...
    1. +2
      18 September 2015 08: 46
      The theory then in the main areas as a whole has long been worked out, but the technical embodiment is always long, difficult and expensive. But there is a blessing in disguise - they were better calculated, found new solutions and materials.
      1. 0
        18 September 2015 12: 01
        The fact of the matter is that there is no theory. Therefore, when practical development begins, then there are a lot of problems that float on each solution. And time proves it. Moreover, none of these reactors built on these technologies allow them to be used in other fields, and especially in space industries. At the same time, reactors using advanced technologies allow not only scaling these devices in any vector, but the energy conversion technology itself expands the use of these devices as propulsion devices in the creation of new materials, autonomous closed-loop energy generators.
        1. +2
          18 September 2015 17: 55
          With all due respect, there is a theory, but a theory can never foresee everything and therefore is verified by practice))).
          Of course, such reactors are not applicable in space, because there the absence of gravity also has a strong external radiation effect. As far as I remember, for the flight to Mars, we had a RBMK project.
    2. +2
      18 September 2015 08: 59
      Quote: Monster_Fat
      I read about this "breakthrough" back in Soviet times in the "Technology of Youth", something has not gone very far, this project, from that time ...

      Project K-705 "Lira"
      1. +1
        18 September 2015 10: 33
        Quote: rosarioagro
        Project K-705 "Lira"


        The similarity is only in the form of a coolant ...
        1. 0
          18 September 2015 13: 14
          Quote: Tanais
          The similarity is only in the form of a coolant ...

          as well as a fast neutron reactor
    3. +4
      18 September 2015 13: 33
      Can you imagine the number of CDs for a nuclear power plant? If on paper, then you can hammer an average cottage under the roof. VVER-1200, for which, in fact, the "blow-up" of the VVER-1000, which has been used for decades, and the added safety system, is nevertheless being finalized and optimized even during the construction process. And then from scratch development. There is a long way from concept to product, and each change takes a couple of months to agree on.
      Or are you suggesting a blooper if only faster?
  8. +3
    18 September 2015 09: 13
    here even the fusion reactor is resting !!! (it just becomes unnecessary !!!) just how to convince the oil lobby ??? after all, with such cheapness and safety of energy, even natural gas does not make sense to extract it easier to decompose water and hydrogen aircraft, cars ...... most likely they will hold this idea !!! hi
    1. -1
      18 September 2015 09: 25
      Quote: Delorian
      it’s easier to decompose water and to refuel planes, cars, cars ...... most likely they will hold this idea !!!

      What-not to see the second stages of hydrogen rockets after Energia, although they operate over the hill
      1. +2
        18 September 2015 12: 26
        Quote: rosarioagro
        What-not to see the second stages of hydrogen rockets after Energia, although they operate over the hill

        Maybe they exploit, did not delve into ...

        I didn’t delve into it, probably because I didn’t hear about any special successes in the rocket and space field of the "foreign", in particular in engine building ...
        1. -1
          18 September 2015 13: 14
          Quote: Tanais
          Maybe exploit, did not delve ..

          Arian-5 among the French, Delta among the Americans, even the Indians from the filing of the Soviet Union muttered something like that at home

          Quote: Tanais
          I didn’t delve into it, probably because I didn’t hear about any special successes in the rocket and space field of the "foreign", in particular in engine building ...

          Because one private company buys engines from the Russian Federation? :-) They’re out of SLS, they make heavyweight, solid fuel boosters are tested, or already, the second hydrogen stage, as usual, has its own engines
          1. +1
            18 September 2015 15: 48
            Quote: rosarioagro
            Because one private company buys engines from the Russian Federation? :-)

            No, because according to INDICATORS, NOBODY has come nearer to the Soviet and Russian developments.
  9. +1
    18 September 2015 09: 25
    I don’t understand at all because I didn’t read, honestly fellow But I’ll say with confidence that any action for the benefit of Russia and its citizens is a big plus for us and our descendants.
  10. +2
    18 September 2015 09: 27
    But with the commissioning of such reactors, radioactive waste is automatically converted into fuel. And then you can take from other countries that do not have such technology their waste on completely different principles. For them, they remain a headache and a problem. But for Russia ...
    In addition, it dramatically increases the duration of a single charge. And this opens up many horizons for development. Not only on Earth. If such a reactor could be miniaturized before space application, then this is an additional impetus for long-term projects like large orbital stations, attempts to visit the moon and the Martian expedition, which has long beckoned to mankind. Indeed, all such projects have one of the stumbling blocks of long-term energy supply in isolation from Mother Earth.
    And these are our developments ...
    1. -1
      18 September 2015 09: 31
      Quote: abrakadabre
      And then you can take from other countries that do not have such technology their waste on completely different principles

      There was such a deal already ...
    2. -3
      18 September 2015 15: 08
      What are you gullible! The Japanese announced the allocation of more than 4 billion. money to those who develop technologies for the disposal of radioactive coolants, that is, infected, which work according to the German basic technology. There are several such developers, including from Russia. Do you think anyone knows about the technology of such disposal? There are none. Therefore, there are no wasteless reactors. Moreover, everything within the framework of the theoretical justification is not so difficult to solve. It’s just that the moment of transmutation of nuclear processes should not be extended in time, but short-term and with the unconditional fulfillment of the next stage, when the same ultra-high temperature will also be a method of depolarization of a radioactive substance.
  11. 0
    18 September 2015 10: 12
    Interestingly, BN 800, 1200 fast neutron reactors are no longer a breakthrough.
    1. +1
      18 September 2015 11: 22
      I think this stage precedes.
      BN-800 was launched at the end of summer at the Beloyarsk NPP. But there is sodium coolant.

      Kiriyenko added that work is currently underway in Russia in various technological areas related to the creation of "fast" reactors of various types, not just BN. First of all, the matter concerns the choice of a coolant for different fast reactors and the production of fuel for them, Kiriyenko noted.
      "Therefore, we are now moving in parallel. At this stage, BN-800 is quite enough for us to develop the technology and to answer the questions that are needed to determine the future," Kiriyenko said. He recalled that Russia is currently implementing the Breakthrough project, during which new technologies for closing the nuclear fuel cycle will be tested. The implementation of Breakthrough includes the creation of a pilot demonstration power complex as part of a lead-cooled fast neutron reactor BREST-OD-300 with a station nuclear fuel cycle and a module for the production of nitride fuel for this reactor. The BREST-OD-300 reactor is planned to be launched in 2020. "We will make a decision on BN-1200 later," Kiriyenko added.


      РИА Новости http://ria.ru/atomtec/20141016/1028566237.html#ixzz3m4nqD2cJ
  12. 0
    18 September 2015 10: 20
    Great news, if the liberals don’t squeeze the money, everything will be fine
  13. 0
    18 September 2015 11: 41
    Most of all, it is pleasing that BN reactors close NFCs, and energy can now be obtained from the most common isotope of uranium-238, rather than the 235th, which seems to be 0,3% in content by force)
  14. +1
    18 September 2015 13: 57
    If it works, fine. Nothing is impossible there, fast reactors exist and are in operation. Only the coolant there is not lead, but either mercury or alkali metals, and accordingly they are very dangerous. Any leaks in the circuits and ... The Japanese somehow dropped a steel structure into a molten sodium in a similar reactor, so they got it for almost two years.

    Lead is, of course, safer, but the plants working with it do not exist in nature. There are only projects. In general, if only they would not arrange another Chernobyl.
  15. 0
    18 September 2015 14: 05
    interesting project. the main thing to bring to mind and put into operation. and only then it will be possible to talk about BREAKTHROUGH this or another project under the cloth ...
  16. +1
    18 September 2015 18: 43
    Quote: Delorian
    here even the fusion reactor is resting !!! (it just becomes unnecessary !!!) just how to convince the oil lobby ??? after all, with such cheapness and safety of energy, even natural gas does not make sense to extract it easier to decompose water and hydrogen aircraft, cars ...... most likely they will hold this idea !!! hi

    And why convince? Oil is the lion's share of polymer products around you. And who told you that one or two such reactors would be built and the rest that would become unnecessary? When you buy a new (eco-friendly !!!) bike, you throw the car away? The current nuclear power plants will work for a long time and produce fuel for a promising reactor, and no one is giving up nuclear weapons to a landfill yet! the best sample is domestic TOKAMAK hi!
    1. -1
      18 September 2015 19: 35
      But the question is somewhat different. After all, no one refuses what is and is sufficiently brought to reasonable use. The question is that these technologies do not have a further development prospect. The energy density on old technologies remains uncontrollable and it is impossible to achieve its higher parameters. Does this mean that the future is illusory? But this does not happen. Therefore, someone likes it or not, but knowledge comes in accordance with a change in time
  17. +2
    18 September 2015 20: 08
    As always, when creating new technologies, different realizations arise - both for VVER and RBMK thermal reactors, and for fast neutron reactors there are different realizations that differ in fuel and coolant.

    Of course, lead instead of sodium looks safer, but there are probably problems because of which sodium was chosen for the BN-800.

    but in general it’s interesting how they will heat lead over the entire circuit after cooling the reactor — say, to reload the fuel. Indeed, on Soviet submarines with fast neutrons, this problem was not solved
  18. 0
    18 September 2015 20: 29
    Something I did not understand from this text. It is similar to the fact that the authors of these sources grouped here have confused the desired and the real. How do they avoid instantaneous neutron acceleration? How are they going to manage it at all? How will they not produce plutonium? How will they start a molten lead reactor or repair it? Extinguish in case of fire - pour in water? Oh well.
    1. +1
      18 September 2015 21: 02
      Hmm, you would have to understand the topic, the authors have written everything correctly. Moreover, theoretical achievements for such reactors have been around for a long time, BNs with liquid-sodium coolant have been working for a long time, this is just the next step. And the faster it is done - the better, the future belongs to such energy. At least until workers finally develop fusion rectors.
  19. LMaksim
    0
    18 September 2015 20: 59
    Erase the Americans! laughing The main thing is not to explode. Lead in itself is a good protection against radiation. And using it as a coolant is a very good idea. When shutting down the reactor, it simply freezes and additionally absorbs radiation from inside the reactor. As for double-circuit, now probably all reactors use just two circuits, since it is simply safer than a single-circuit reactor circuit. I recall that in a single-circuit circuit, the coolant from the reactor core transfers heat also to the turbine that rotates the generator. In a single-circuit coolant, from the reactor core transfers heat through another heat exchanger to another coolant (for example, water), which, when heated, rotates the turbine, which rotates the generator and generates current. The first reactors were single-loop.
    1. -1
      21 September 2015 11: 21
      The properties of the well-known coolant allow us to speak of contouring as a kind of relic of the past. Well, do not forget how much radioactively contaminated water has already been accumulated, and it is clear that this implies that you can already talk about it as a problem. Therefore, we can talk about future nuclear reactors on radioactive materials either in the context of the transformation of radial radiation into linear radiation and not go along the path of enrichment or other forms of product modification, but go along the path of forming the energy density in these materials by the method and method that we offer. And the second way, in general, to create such an energy density in non-radioactive substances and again by our method as technology
      1. 0
        22 September 2015 18: 26
        I agree, multi-circuit reduces overall efficiency and increases costs. Only ...
        Multi-circuit = protection against radiation contamination of equipment hi
        1. -1
          22 September 2015 19: 19
          Scientists do not pay attention to the fact that the aspect of transition to nanoscale changes the issues of organization of the transience of the process. Therefore, multi-circuit is equivalent to how long the phases of the processes are. This can and should be avoided by creating such conceptual approaches that we are talking about.
      2. The comment was deleted.
  20. 0
    18 September 2015 21: 38
    Dear readers of this topic. I am honored to offer you this: an interview with academician Ostretsov.
    I dare to assume that for many readers the vectors of the directions of development of both military and civil nuclear energy will become much clearer. Yes
    1. 0
      19 September 2015 01: 16
      Interesting movie. With pepper, in the sense - action-packed, with conspiracy theories. With many "I", in the sense that the comrade loves himself strongly, and with a period for everything in the world - two years. But
      https://ru.wikipedia.org/:
      Ostretsov:
      One of the authors of a hypothetical Nuclear Power Engineering (from Nuclear Relativistic Technologies, heavy nuclear relativistic energy). [5] Together with co-authors, he leads the public “Moscow Energy Club”.

      Representatives of the RRC KI and VNIIAM noted the unscience of the concept of nuclear energy and its inconsistency with the main claimed characteristics [6] [7]. Calculations show that in NRS installations the effect of beam energy multiplication due to nuclear energy is either insufficient (for thorium and uranium-238) or completely absent (lead) [8].
    2. 0
      21 September 2015 10: 45
      About how many epithets I have addressed to me for such phrases as "vector of directed development", and now it has already become normal and is perceived without excitement.
  21. Tomich2
    0
    18 September 2015 21: 46
    you would have taken your breakthrough in the suburbs. in Tomsk and so oncology is several times higher in the country
  22. 0
    18 September 2015 23: 21
    I would like this news not to remain in the form of big words
  23. 0
    19 September 2015 03: 39
    I will express my opinion. The topic is complex and closed. Closed, both specially and specially educational. However, this applies only to nuclear physicists. Touches the "ignorance" of the behavior of the fuel: everything has long been calculated. Reinsurance is natural. It seems like our general level of being "in the subject" is not great. "Gridasov" is on fire today. But he writes beautifully))) I would not be surprised if he is "in the subject", which rather speaks for this or for his related education. And now the question: why are our stations modernizing our nuclear power plants to exclude the repetition of Fukushima. This is very .. LOTS of money. And time. I agree - the old nuclear power plants should be completed, but what are the extension of the operating life? Reserve? Likely. And what can the use of antediluvian safety valves at one (?) Of our NPP speak about. She works? More than. And what will they do ??? We must strive and do.
  24. +1
    20 September 2015 20: 34
    This is a real alternative to the still mythical thermonuclear fusion. And much cheaper. Lead-bismuth submarine reactors - these were experimental, not yet reliable reactors that could not be shut down (the coolant would freeze). In the parking lots, heating of the first circuit by heating elements was required, while electricity was eaten - oh oh. Special berths with substations had to be equipped. Alas. Well and the most important thing. The reactors were thermal, not fast neutrons - and this is a big difference in the neutron capture cross section. And, accordingly, isotopes are formed in a completely different way. And there was no task on the submarine to make closed fuel cycles.
    This topic has long been studied in nuclear physics. And I'm glad that Russian scientists will be the first to master these reactors. Big deal.
  25. -1
    22 September 2015 10: 11
    The subject under discussion is very closely related to the theme of the expansion of the use of PATES (floating nuclear power plants). Therefore, the use of installations on the principles of combining several functions, namely, such as the reactor itself, the turbine, and the alternating magnetic field generator, will radically change the level of progress in this field of knowledge. And if modern approaches to the implementation, namely of physical processes, rely on methodologies that are not associated with an increase in energy density and controlled transience of organized processes, then in our opinion this is the dominant factor. The particular relevance of our project can be noted in light of the fact that economists are discussing the swaying of the oil price scale, and most importantly, the deviation in the direction of lowering its price. Therefore, there is no alternative to such technologies.
  26. 0
    22 September 2015 18: 44
    fuel from existing nuclear power plants is unloaded not because it has completely burned out, but because it creates a lower heat flux (warms worse).

    here it’s interesting to understand - how is spent fuel in which the energy source (U235) has become much less efficient than the existing one? It looks like the main secret in the composition of the fuel for this reactor and, for sure, there are some "additives".

    And most likely it will be necessary to build a "special plant" for the production of such a new special fuel based on low-enriched nuclear fuel.
    1. 0
      22 September 2015 19: 16
      Not logical approaches. Modern technology prepares fuel conditions. We say that there is a real possibility not to "pay attention" to this. It does not matter at what level of enrichment or depletion the fuel is. This is regulated by a completely simple process, and there is absolutely no cost to increase the cost of energy output.
    2. 0
      23 September 2015 01: 41
      smile Simple,
      Uranium-235 and Plutonium-239 are burned out and supported by a chain reaction. Under the influence of neutrons, uranium-238 is converted to Plutonium-239, but the chain reaction is not supported in this process. In addition, harmful fragments of fission remain from all these processes. So there are no special secrets and additives there. But if you understand in detail, then everything is very complicated and subtle.