Military Review

Stranzhenny atom

109
20 years ago with the safety of nuclear materials was complete darkness


Russia, as a country with the largest reserves of fissile materials and nuclear warheads in the world, attaches great importance to increasing their level of physical security (nuclear security) through the continuous improvement of accounting, control and physical protection systems (UKFZ).

Such efforts are aimed at ensuring the safety of nuclear materials at special facilities, and constitute the first line of defense against their illicit trafficking, fraught with terrorism. At the same time, the concept of a second line of defense was introduced as an additional element of a multi-level security strategy in order to strengthen the potential of Russian customs services in detecting and curbing the illicit trafficking of nuclear materials in the event of their leakage from controlled sites. In addition, measures were taken to reduce the excess amount of weapons-grade nuclear materials by converting them into forms suitable for peaceful use.

Over the past two decades, a great deal of work has been done in the country to improve the quality of the physical security of nuclear materials and the results achieved are evidence of this.

At present, there are no nuclear materials or facilities in Russia that could be of concern: all storage facilities and vehicles are protected at least at the level of IAEA recommendations. Competent supervisory authorities constantly check the effectiveness of UKFZ systems, and the relevant legislative base is regularly updated. In particular, in 2012, the federal regulatory document “Basic rules for accounting and control of nuclear materials” was approved.

It should be noted that the successful implementation of most of the above measures was facilitated by the large-scale cooperation with the United States on the Joint Threat Reduction program (also known as Nunn-Lugar) launched in 1993. It was of particular importance in the 90-e, which are difficult for us, but as the situation stabilized, the Russian contribution became more and more tangible and it was already fixed in the RF budget for 2015 that all such activities would henceforth be at public expense.

Stranzhenny atomIt is appropriate to note that the decision of the United States to invest several hundred million dollars in strengthening the Russian infrastructure of nuclear security was hardly motivated by considerations of charity, most likely was a purely pragmatic, preventive action - eliminating the consequences of a possible leakage of nuclear material (not to mention the potential loss of a nuclear warhead) It would have cost the American taxpayer much more. It is also worth noting that bilateral cooperation was also beneficial for the Russian side, as it allowed to increase the pace of modernization of UKFZ’s domestic systems.

Russia is a party to all international agreements in the field of nuclear safety, including the Convention on the Physical Protection of Nuclear Material and its amendment to the 2005 of the Year, as well as the Global Initiative to Combat Nuclear Terrorism. In September, the 2012 th in the Moscow region were held exercises "Guardian-2012" to combat nuclear terrorism, which was attended by experts from around 50 countries.

The Russian Federation supports the activities of the IAEA in the field of nuclear safety and makes voluntary contributions to the agency’s eponymous fund since 2010. Great importance is attached to cooperation in this field with third countries seeking to master nuclear energy. In practical terms, this means, in particular, the organization for students from these countries of appropriate long-term courses in Obninsk and Tomsk. Russian experts are actively participating in the development and improvement of IAEA advisory documents on nuclear safety and in conducting related seminars.

Keep by the rules

Based on a map prepared by American experts from the Livermore Laboratory based on years of experience working with Russian experts from four national nuclear laboratories (including Los Alamos, Oak Ridge and Sandia), one can assess the scale of bilateral cooperation in nuclear security - in aggregate for 20 years in the Russian Federation have been upgraded around 90 nuclear sites.

In accordance with the executive agreement between the Russian Ministry of Defense and the United States Department of Energy signed in 2001, UKFZ systems were upgraded at the Navy facilities in the Far East and the Kola Peninsula (11 storage facilities for new nuclear fuel and 39 storage facilities for YABZ) GU MO, responsible for the storage and operation of a nuclear arsenal (25 sites). In addition, two technical training centers have been established to service these facilities.

In accordance with the bilateral agreement between the Ministry of Atomic Energy of the Russian Federation and the US Department of Energy signed in 1999, the nuclear security systems containing highly enriched uranium or plutonium buildings in the Kurchatov National Research Center, Mayak Production Association, were upgraded in Sarov and Snezhinsk.

All of these facilities are equipped with modern accounting and control systems, electronic seals and warning devices for attempts of unauthorized access to nuclear materials, car monitoring devices and alarm systems.

Border wake


The Russian-American project “Second Line of Defense” received official status in 1998 after signing the relevant protocol between the State Customs Committee of the Russian Federation and the US Department of Energy. In subsequent consultations, it was agreed that the United States will provide financial assistance in equipping our border checkpoints with radiation monitoring equipment, which will be produced in the Russian Federation in accordance with the standards of both parties. It is important to note that by this time, successful joint tests of the Yantar stationary system for the detection of nuclear materials had already been carried out at the Los Alamos laboratory (developed and produced in the Moscow-based Dubna research and development center).

Thanks to the joint efforts, with an equal share of the financial burden between the partners in the project “Second Line of Protection”, the 200 of the Russian border checkpoints were equipped with radiation monitoring equipment. At the same time, the total number of used Yantar systems of various modifications exceeded six thousand. It should be emphasized that since the start of operation of the system, the number of annually recorded cases of illicit trafficking in nuclear and radioactive materials has increased by a factor of a hundred.

Monitoring tools similar to those used on Russian borders are actively being established in other countries, in particular in the post-Soviet states (Armenia, Kazakhstan, Uzbekistan, Ukraine). After successful testing of the Yantar system at the IAEA in 1997 – 2000, it began to be applied in the member countries of the agency.

Megatons to Megawatts


According to the bilateral agreement signed in 1993 on the disposal of weapons highly enriched uranium (HEU) Russia has pledged to dilute 500 for twenty years with tons of this material (sufficient to manufacture 20 thousands of nuclear warheads) to the quality of low-enriched uranium (LEU). The parties agreed that the resulting LEU will be used as nuclear fuel by American nuclear power plants, from which the informal name of the Megatons to Megawatts transaction originated.

The agreement helped to increase the level of physical safety of Russian nuclear material through a significant reduction in HEU stocks. At the same time, it was beneficial to both parties financially. For twenty years, 10 percent of the total US electricity produced has been generated by Russian uranium. Foreign exchange earnings from the transaction amounted to 17 billions of dollars for Russia, which were used among other things to finance programs to improve the safety of Russian nuclear power plants, rehabilitate radiation-contaminated areas, and convert “atomic cities”.

Return of uranium


In 2002, the Russian Federation, the United States and the IAEA launched a program to return to Russia from abroad, representing the potential threat of the uncontrolled spread of highly enriched uranium fuel from research reactors of Soviet design.

During a tripartite consultation in Vienna, more than 20 of such facilities were identified in 17 countries. The goal of the program was to provide financial, technical and organizational assistance to Russia in the repatriation of fresh and spent uranium fuel and the development of new ones for conversion of reactors to LEU.

Today, all HEU-based nuclear fuel has been exported from nine countries, partly out of five. Since the launch of the program, about 800 kilograms of fresh and about 1300 kilograms of irradiated uranium fuel have been returned to Russia. This material is placed on temporary storage in special warehouses in anticipation of processing. A preliminary assessment of the possibility of converting fuel from six Russian research reactors to LEU was confirmed. Currently, experts' efforts are focused on the development of high-density LEU - fuel for research reactors in the Kurchatov Center and Tomsk University.

Matthew Bann, a reputable international expert from Harvard University, states: “Over the past two decades, Russia has dramatically improved the quality of nuclear security. Figuratively speaking, the difference between today's and yesterday's level of its UKFZ systems is like the difference between day and night. ”

At the same time, such high marks do not mean that important work has been completed on the whole. Russian expert circles have a clear understanding of what remains to be done. In particular, special attention should be paid to maintaining the operational readiness (sustainability) of the recently upgraded UKFZ systems for the foreseeable future.
Author:
Originator:
http://vpk-news.ru/articles/28610
109 comments
Information
Dear reader, to leave comments on the publication, you must to register.

I have an account? Sign in

  1. ALEXX.
    ALEXX. 25 December 2015 20: 13
    0
    And what can you do without mattresses?
    1. Ami du peuple
      Ami du peuple 25 December 2015 20: 19
      30
      Quote: ALEXX.
      And what can you do without mattresses?

      No way. Under the Nunna-Lagar program, we sold them 500 tons of weapons-grade uranium-235, which we also processed into a low-enriched nuclear power plant for them. And they gave us 17 yards of green bills. Literally this year, this "profitable" contract was closed.
      And the fact that all the uranium accumulated over decades for the production of nuclear weapons was given to a potential enemy, so it's garbage. It's true? Russia is a generous soul. But our atom is "hobbled". Let's rejoice!
      1. Fafnir
        Fafnir 25 December 2015 20: 40
        18
        Ask how it ended up for the American enrichment industry. wassat
        1. tol100v
          tol100v 25 December 2015 20: 46
          +2
          Quote: Fafnir
          how it ended for the American enrichment industry.

          I really do not want to be interested in how this can end for us!
          1. Ami du peuple
            Ami du peuple 25 December 2015 20: 54
            +7
            Quote: Tol100v
            Quote: Fafnir
            how it ended for the American enrichment industry.

            I really do not want to be interested in how this can end for us!

            Yes, do not care how it ended for them - they will spend the next issue of the dollar themselves and cover all the losses. But we are trading, as it were, tactile raw materials. Which we get on worthless pieces of paper.
            1. Fafnir
              Fafnir 25 December 2015 21: 02
              14
              Do you know how long the enriched weapons-grade uranium is stored before it is "poisoned" with decay products and MANDATORY reprocessing? Moreover, this program has loaded OUR enrichment enterprises and has significantly increased the reserves of natural uranium. And for the collapse of the strategic industry in the United States, the price is very low, now they will have to restore enrichment virtually from scratch.
              1. aksakal
                aksakal 25 December 2015 21: 37
                13
                Quote: Fafnir
                Do you know how long the enriched weapons-grade uranium is stored before it is "poisoned" with decay products and MANDATORY reprocessing? Moreover, this program has loaded OUR enrichment enterprises and has significantly increased the reserves of natural uranium. And for the collapse of the strategic industry in the United States, the price is very low, now they will have to restore enrichment virtually from scratch.
                - don't you want to say that Russia with a 500-ton uranium injection "trashed" the American enrichment industry in the nuclear sphere? More precisely, not travanula, but what is this effect called? - when you drink, for example, what kind of hormone that you already produce in your body, then your body stops producing its own for lack of meaning. If so, I will support you and not support your frustrated opponents. Was it a special operation of the Russian services or it happened so simply and unexpectedly, it doesn't matter, the main thing is the result. And the result is simply brilliant - the inability of the American industry to enrich uranium. To be honest, the amers' enrichment technology worked out badly from the very beginning, there the Americans adopted some initially erroneous concept, I don't know the technological subtleties, I'm sorry, you need to read on this topic at your leisure. And they suffered with this enrichment until they received 500 tons from Russia. And since nothing foreshadowed the revival of the power of Russia, all the forecasts of experts agreed that Russia, at best, would remain a US colony, and at worst, continue to collapse altogether, then the Americans with a light heart threw away their "heavy suitcase" of the enrichment industry in the expectation that now Russia, similarly to China (China in terms of consumer goods production), will continue to produce these products for the Americans in the future. But then this damn Putin came, because of whom I also picked up cons in a dispute with Atalef yesterday (which puzzled me - here the forum users agree with the opinion of the Israelis that Putin is a bad president?), And ruined everything for the Americans in terms of uranium.
                1. Oleg14774
                  Oleg14774 26 December 2015 05: 04
                  +2
                  Quote: aksakal
                  Putin, because of which I also picked up minuses in a dispute with Atalef yesterday

                  Do not worry, I noticed that here on the site the opinion of the main ones changes like a weather vane in the wind. Putin took away pink drooling Crimea (my opinion GDP is NOT ONLY IN THIS YOUNG MAN), spoke with the prolongation of the return of Ukraine's debt, the snot is green, contagious and the GDP has already "merged" everyone. So don't mind! There are many opinions, the truth is one. And it lies in the fact that Russia of the 90s and the present are completely two different states.
                  One comrade complains that his wife often has a "head" hurts, and another complains that she never has a headache and he goes to work like a holiday! So this is how life is!
              2. family tree
                family tree 26 December 2015 00: 09
                0
                Quote: Fafnir
                Moreover, this program loaded OUR enrichment enterprises and allowed to significantly increase the reserves of natural uranium.

                Quote: Ami du peuple
                Yes, do not care how it ended for them - they will spend the next issue of the dollar themselves and cover all the losses.

                Here, just a "savage grin of capitalism" wassat ... They did not support them with any dollars, and colored paper will not replace developments and technologies. And I think that we have again "restricted to travel abroad", or will appear soon.
              3. alexander 2
                alexander 2 26 December 2015 05: 38
                +2
                And who said that their enrichment stopped? On the contrary, while US atoms are working on our uranium, you can throw all your efforts into obtaining weapons-grade plutonium for bombs. Of course, the level of safety is now higher than 20 years ago, that is, at 95, but much lower than at 85. In the USSR, the norms of exposure to people were much lower, and were observed more strictly. Who cares, can google. Fresh fuel is slightly radioactive, the main danger in development. Radiation increases tens of times. Incidentally, weapons-grade plutonium is obtained in the same reactors that generate electricity, so perhaps our uranium helped them create several nuclear bombs.
          2. Fafnir
            Fafnir 25 December 2015 20: 55
            +2
            Yes, it didn’t end with anything bad for us. Since a year ago there was a rather large article on this project, unfortunately I didn’t save the link, but I think you can find it if you wish.
            1. Inok10
              Inok10 25 December 2015 22: 38
              +7
              Quote: Fafnir
              Yes, it didn’t end with anything bad for us. Since a year ago there was a rather large article on this project, unfortunately I didn’t save the link, but I think you can find it if you wish.

              .. absolutely right .. hi .. and, here’s the enrichment industry of mattresses, has sunk into the summer .. if I’m not mistaken, there remains only one factory and that is not capable of producing weapons-grade plutonium .. voila
              The USSR and the USA have chosen different ways to enrich uranium and turn it into nuclear fuel or weapons-grade uranium. In the United States, the stake was placed on an expensive gas diffusion method, because the Pentagon was the main customer of enriched uranium, which did not care about the costs and expenses of the process itself.
              In the USSR, it turned out that there was not enough electricity required for uranium enrichment in the country, so I had to go a different way: enrich uranium in centrifuges. France and Great Britain decided to enrich uranium in a similar way.
              But in 1991, after the collapse of the USSR, nuclear scientists from the USA expected revelation and mathematical insight. In the United States, energy consumption for the enrichment of 1 kg of uranium to a state suitable for use as nuclear fuel ranges from 15 to 000 kW-hours.
              And the Union enrichment industry, having almost completely perfected the enrichment of uranium in centrifuges, spends from 1 to 300 kWh of electricity for enriching 450 kg of uranium.
              Moreover, by that time huge volumes of highly enriched uranium had been accumulated in the USSR. It was then that the HEU-LEU program was imposed on the Russian Federation, according to which the allied 500 tons of weapons-grade uranium were reduced. The resulting nuclear fuel provided 30% of the US demand.

              .. and another interesting point ..
              And during the HEU-LEU program, the US gas diffusion enrichment industry rapidly degraded and died, unable to withstand competition with the Russian enrichment industry.
              In 2013, the United States plans to close the Paduca gas diffusion plant. It will be replaced by a plant in Picton - it will become the first US company in the United States to use the Soviet centrifuge method for enriching uranium. In the meantime, work is being conducted there in an experimental-demo mode.
              As a result, having lost 500 tons of enriched uranium (the equivalent of 20 nuclear warheads), having received, in 000, only $ 2009 billion, the Russian Federation virtually destroyed the US enrichment industry, retaining its centrifuges and adopting the unique technology of “anti-enrichment” uranium.

              ..thus, we not only preserved this industry, but also received and tested a new technology .. hi
            2. Atrix
              Atrix 25 December 2015 22: 40
              +4
              Quote: Fafnir
              Yes, it didn’t end with anything bad for us.

              Of course, it didn’t end with anything bad. They simply gave up the weapons-grade uranium accumulated over 40 for 0.14% of its real value, hundreds of thousands of people mined it, and nothing bad happened for you.
              1. Inok10
                Inok10 25 December 2015 22: 52
                +4
                Quote: Atrix
                Quote: Fafnir
                Yes, it didn’t end with anything bad for us.

                Of course, it didn’t end with anything bad. They simply gave up the weapons-grade uranium accumulated over 40 for 0.14% of its real value, hundreds of thousands of people mined it, and nothing bad happened for you.

                .. everything is fine .. it happened .. the destroyed gas diffusion enrichment industry in the USA .. nothing can be better .. not everything in this world is measured by money, the deadlock technology and its loss, and as they say mattresses started from the stove .. laughing
                1. Atrix
                  Atrix 25 December 2015 23: 12
                  0
                  Quote: Inok10
                  everything is fine .. it happened .. the destroyed gas diffusion enrichment industry of the USA .. nothing can be better .. not everything in this world is measured in money

                  For people like you, there’s another super idea to give all the oil for a couple of billion dollars to America, let them ditch their oil production and use the Russian one.

                  Quote: Inok10
                  not everything in this world is measured by money

                  And how do you measure the labor of people who have enriched this uranium for 40 years, how do you evaluate the work of people who mined it in uranium mines, how do you evaluate the tens of thousands of people who died mining this uranium.
                  You are so stupid sir that I even worry that you would never decide anything vital.
                  1. Inok10
                    Inok10 25 December 2015 23: 16
                    +8
                    Quote: Atrix
                    And how do you measure the labor of people who enriched this uranium for 40 years, how do you evaluate the work of people who mined it in uranium mines

                    .. and, how much do you sir appreciate the 40 years of the dead-end technology of mattresses ?! .. human and material costs, that would come to 91 with a complete zero and start from the stove as they say in Russia from time immemorial! .. don’t even try to baiting on deaths and the rest of the lyrics .. once again try to be rude, rate ..
                    1. Atrix
                      Atrix 25 December 2015 23: 22
                      -1
                      Quote: Inok10
                      how much do you sir appreciate 40 years of dead-end mattress technology

                      Yes, I don’t care about deadlock technologies in the USA
                      Quote: Inok10
                      don’t even try to play pranks on deaths and the rest of the lyrics .. once again try to be rude, rate

                      I was not rude, I stated your level of development.
                      Waiting for an assessment.
                      1. Inok10
                        Inok10 25 December 2015 23: 28
                        +3
                        Quote: Atrix
                        I was not rude, I stated your level of development.
                        Waiting for an assessment.

                        .. your level of development has already been appreciated by everyone in the next branch, when you could not distinguish the airborne forces from the air defense of the Ground Forces .. so there is a well-deserved mark .. .. take an example before it’s too late with Barabanov’s Lapman .. laughing
                      2. The comment was deleted.
                2. family tree
                  family tree 26 December 2015 00: 39
                  +1
                  Quote: Atrix
                  For people like you, there’s another super idea to give all the oil for a couple of billion dollars to America, let them ditch their oil production and use the Russian one.

                  Hole drilling in the globe and nuclear physics, there are two big differences. They are in Alaska cursing and the technology is developed, skill and experience, you can’t even drink.
                  Quote: Atrix
                  And how do you measure the labor of people who have enriched this uranium for 40 years, how do you evaluate the work of people who mined it in uranium mines, how do you evaluate the tens of thousands of people who died mining this uranium.

                  In rubles, in lives, in the Kazakh steppes ...
                  Who will appreciate the life of the boys in Afghanistan, who were dying of decay and dehydration in the mountains, without a hint, even a bullet? Who will appreciate the life of the driver of the "Ural" who did not reach the place, somewhere in the north, which went under the ice? It was necessary to go, and to go, too, it was necessary. Ask nonesh economists, they will give you even the efficiency and prices for the actions of Alexander Matrosov, not to mention the rest, sinners. request
                  1. family tree
                    family tree 26 December 2015 03: 20
                    +1
                    Well, like this
                    V. Kovalev.



                    Under the ice, the car went off with a bang.

                    She would be hooked, but the water is cold ...

                    And the barefoot boy, as if from an ancient fresco,

                    He stepped into the wormwood, into blackness at the bottom.

                    Tell me, where is the beginning of the iron will?

                    Tell me where are the roots of male power?

                    It's simple, the origins in the female share,

                    In the hands of mothers that raised us.



                    “I’m holding it. I won’t give it up,” they shout at me from above.

                    Slippery hand slings burn.

                    One parachute for two - that's the measure,

                    Which male life is measured.

                    Tell me where are the roots of soldier courage?

                    Tell me where are the roots of soldier life?

                    They are villages, forests and ravines.

                    Native land, many-sided Fatherland.



                    "You can't take it alive," lips whispered,

                    The ring of the grenade is into the immortality of the door.

                    The explosion rang out like victory trumpets

                    Having struck the enemy with a broken heart.

                    Tell me where the roots of contempt for death

                    And where are the origins of high debt?

                    They are in the fathers who have stepped into immortality.

                    They are in the war where Moscow and the Volga.
            3. clidon
              clidon 26 December 2015 00: 40
              0
              It was sold at the market price of fuel.
        2. zulusuluz
          zulusuluz 26 December 2015 11: 18
          0
          Highly enriched uranium is stored for as long as the charge in a warhead. The half-life has not been canceled. And the fact that with this action Russia provided a bunch of people with work, and in the United States thereby destroyed the processing industry, is, in your opinion, so ... gulkin nose. This is how Russia bought rifles before the First World War with the number of rounds of 100 per rifle. For a couple of days of battle ...
      2. Mister22408
        Mister22408 25 December 2015 23: 32
        0
        This is known. Not with regards to the 4th generation.
    2. kil 31
      kil 31 25 December 2015 20: 42
      +2
      In 2002, the Russian Federation, the United States and the IAEA launched a program to return to Russia from abroad, representing the potential threat of the uncontrolled spread of highly enriched uranium fuel from research reactors of Soviet design.
      Correct me if I'm wrong. We must collect all the waste and its reactors for research in Eastern Europe. Why are you required to do this? Maybe they themselves will deal with their waste. They wanted this progress. Let them bury themselves now. Who will pay us for processing. It turns out we are to blame for everything. They got cheap energy, it's our fault. I do not care about the duties that they want to attribute to us. Interestingly, the United States has no responsibilities to Fokusima. Their company, too, must clean up everything and take out all the waste. Something I have not heard that the United States owes something.
      1. Fafnir
        Fafnir 25 December 2015 20: 57
        +6
        The fact that we take away the waste is due to the fact that new fuel can be made from this waste. Well, and not only with this, there are more than enough reasons.
        1. GSH-18
          GSH-18 25 December 2015 23: 31
          +1
          Quote: Fafnir
          The fact that we take away the waste is due to the fact that new fuel can be made from this waste. Well, and not only with this, there are more than enough reasons.

          Not all waste, unfortunately. Therefore, in the USSR and as a result, we have accumulated a huge amount of radioactive non-recyclable waste. And what no one really knows about doing with them now. These are the things, my friend.
          1. Mister22408
            Mister22408 25 December 2015 23: 57
            -4
            One-sided truth. They say the Germans recently launched fusion (without a chub and a file ...) ...
            1. Fafnir
              Fafnir 26 December 2015 00: 17
              +1
              Germans ... Fusion ... Alone ... Yeah, and there was also a "cold fusion" to generate energy. Doesn't the name "ITERA" mean anything to you?
              1. Mister22408
                Mister22408 27 December 2015 22: 44
                0
                That was a long time ago...
            2. family tree
              family tree 26 December 2015 03: 16
              +5
              Quote: Mister22408
              Germans say fusion recently launched

              Doctor, I can’t
              Batenka, so 60 years is not a joke
              I’m a neighbor of 70, and still says that a little wife also pleases a couple of lovers!
              The Lord is with you, dear, who is stopping you from speaking, do you have tea not a tongue? Not?
              1. Mister22408
                Mister22408 27 December 2015 22: 31
                +1
                Do we know each other, anyway? You have an amazing ability to create what you understand yourself. And that’s it. Dead end. Press release of Max-Plank, do not deign to look from the height of your mighty anti-intellect (strain a powerful and sober carcass)? As for the language, I hope you joked. If not, then your voice is incomprehensible to me, and language, too. You confuse the clatter of claudia. You look at those who wished this, about the language, we normally turn over Alaverdi. Do not be surprised. With the lowest respect, with pain in the Soul we are doing indecency, but not for profit, but for justice ... But winter is what ... And the sky is blue winkedYes, my grandfather drove up to eighty aunts. Train.
                1. family tree
                  family tree 29 December 2015 00: 59
                  0
                  Quote: Mister22408
                  Yes, my grandfather drove up to eighty aunts. Train.

                  My grandfather died at 79. Company chief, mortar, two heavy and shell-shocked, from Norway, demobilized by injury. Finnish and Patriotic in Murmansk. And so, I train, 53 years old, young isho. And the walking course strengthens the genitals, especially along the haul, with a chainsaw, manholes, PZ, montersky belt, well, a "brake" in a backpack, km 14, okay? The chief, also a humorist "you, there, if you go out, so replace the support, in the village" laughing
          2. Fafnir
            Fafnir 26 December 2015 00: 39
            +2
            Well, the main mass is planned to be burned up in BN reactors and in specialized thermonuclear ones. The latter should be "underreactors", that is, the energy yield is about zero, but the radiation is already sufficient for afterburning. They plan to start development after ITERA.
        2. clidon
          clidon 26 December 2015 00: 37
          +1
          We take it first of all because we are paid for it.
      2. novobranets
        novobranets 25 December 2015 22: 15
        +2
        Quote: keel 31
        Interestingly, the United States has no responsibilities to Fokusima.

    3. oleg-gr
      oleg-gr 25 December 2015 22: 30
      +5
      the article is not entirely clear. Since 1987, I have been working in an enterprise using nuclear materials. the guard on it was never weakened. on the contrary, in the 90s, several criminal cases were instituted.
      1. Fafnir
        Fafnir 25 December 2015 23: 19
        +5
        Yeah. The author of this opus must be sent to dig out the lost American atomic bombs from the marshes.
    4. Atrix
      Atrix 25 December 2015 22: 34
      -3
      Quote: Ami du peuple
      500 tons of weapons-grade uranium-235

      It is also necessary to clarify that this is news of weapons-grade uranium that has been in Russia for all the time since the beginning of enrichment.
      To produce such a volume of weapons-grade uranium, several hundred thousand people worked in the mining and defense industries of the country for approximately 40 years

      According to estimates made by specialists at the end of the last century, the real cost of 500 tons of weapons-grade plutonium at that time was at least 8 trillions of dollars. For comparison, we note that the average annual value of Russia's annual GDP, according to Rosstat, in the last decade of the last century was in the 400 region of billions of dollars. It turns out that the actual price of the uranium transaction amounted to only 0,15% in relation to the minimum real value of the goods. The real value of uranium turned out to be equivalent to 20 (twenty) annual GDP of the country!

      Many of our other politicians also tried to understand the deal, and even sought denunciation of the agreement on the supply of uranium to the United States. Among them, for example, the legendary General L. Rokhlin, Prosecutor General Yu. Skuratov, State Duma deputy V. Ilyukhin. Many associate Rokhlin’s death and Skuratov’s resignation precisely with the fact that they showed excessive activity in the investigation of the “uranium deal”.
    5. clidon
      clidon 26 December 2015 00: 36
      +2
      And the fact that all uranium accumulated over decades, for the production of nuclear ammunition, was given to a potential enemy, it’s garbage.

      And you know that not "all" but less than half? )
    6. goblin xnumx
      goblin xnumx 26 December 2015 01: 28
      +2
      A nuclear arms race is like two men standing waist-deep in gasoline. One has three matches, the other five ...
      © Karl Sagan
    7. Oleg14774
      Oleg14774 26 December 2015 04: 58
      +1
      Quote: Ami du peuple
      And the fact that all uranium accumulated over decades, for the production of nuclear ammunition, was given to a potential enemy, it’s garbage.

      This was done under Yeltsin Pid. That spent fuel, with modern technology can be processed and run on new reactors. New generation fast neutron reactors. So from this point, we are provided with electric energy for many years to come. Essentially this is a non-waste production. Not so bad!
    8. Homo
      Homo 26 December 2015 05: 53
      -2
      Quote: Ami du peuple
      And the fact that all the uranium accumulated over decades for the production of nuclear weapons was given to a potential enemy, so it's garbage. It's true? Russia is a generous soul. But our atom is "hobbled". Let's rejoice!

      Is it good to wave your fists after a fight? Where were you so good at EBN, when all this was signed? Were you silent in a rag or repeated the mantra "nothing depends on us"? And now the heroes, roll a barrel to the current power, and flirt with the achievements! am
      1. Ami du peuple
        Ami du peuple 26 December 2015 08: 35
        0
        Quote: Homo
        Is it good to wave your fists after a fight? Where were you so good at EBN, when all this was signed? Were you silent in a rag or repeated the mantra "nothing depends on us"? And now the heroes, roll a barrel to the current power, and flirt with the achievements!

        Oh, you .. I hope this tirade was sarcastically pronounced? And then your ultra-patriotism directly scares bully
        1. Homo
          Homo 27 December 2015 04: 32
          0
          Quote: Ami du peuple
          Oh, you .. I hope this tirade was sarcastically pronounced? And then your ultra-patriotism directly scares

          Yes, it’s better to cheer patriotism than pan-pro-socialism or indifference. wink
          1. Mister22408
            Mister22408 27 December 2015 22: 38
            0
            Take a trip to the nearest healthy local food factory - the village ... Are there many young people?
  2. svp67
    svp67 25 December 2015 20: 25
    0
    Quote: ALEXX.
    And what can you do without mattresses?

    Well, in this situation, only by breaking previously concluded contracts and contracts. But now much has changed, the Nanna-Lugar program has ended and its continuation in the form that was previously in great doubt
    1. Haettenschweiler
      Haettenschweiler 25 December 2015 22: 13
      +1
      Quote: aksakal
      and spoiled everything for the Americans in terms of uranium.


      - This is how your words look from the point of view of a complete layman from nuclear energy (your humble servant): the Americans suffered, they suffered with uranium enrichment, they did not succeed, everything was bad ... until they got a beautiful, pure, high-quality uranium from Russia! And this is in complete contradiction with the following facts: 1) The Americans were the first to develop the topic of atomic energy in principle and the atomic bomb in particular; 2) Despite all the "torment", the Americans set up nuclear missiles no less than Russia has (which is already going against the "... tormented"; 3) In America, despite all the "torment", a little more than a dofig Nuclear power plants that operate and generate electricity. The only difference from our nuclear power plants is the fuel assemblies, which we have with them are different in completeness and, possibly, to some extent - in composition.

      PS - and yes, not all Russians support Putin's personality cult, and the Israelis have nothing to do with it, I don't understand what you dragged them into. It is enough to look not outside, as is customary in our country, but inside the country, and the authority of the "great" immediately begins to fade before our eyes. Greetings from Serdyukov and Vasilyeva, by the way.

      PPS - here, by the way, is a picture where all the nuclear power plants in the world are marked. Pay attention to how many of them are in Russia, and how many in the "suffering" USA.

      1. Fafnir
        Fafnir 25 December 2015 22: 28
        +3
        In order not to be a layman (I apologize in advance if I offended) take an interest in the methods of enrichment of uranium in the USSR / RF and in the USA. Compare energy efficiency. And by the way, in the United States, so many power plants are not from a good life. bully
        1. Haettenschweiler
          Haettenschweiler 25 December 2015 22: 52
          -3
          Quote: Fafnir
          Compare energy efficiency.


          - We return to Soviet propaganda: yes, in percentage terms, the USSR / Russian methods look better. And - yes, in absolute terms we are frankly far behind. I don’t understand about "not from a good life" ... could you expand your thought?
          1. Fafnir
            Fafnir 26 December 2015 00: 26
            +1
            I am developing ... Do you know what the "Unified Energy System" is? Apparently not. Well, this power system allows, firstly, to spread the generating capacities and main consumers geographically, and secondly, to effectively maneuver the capacities. In the United States, due to the fragmentation of the energy system, there are no such opportunities. As a result, we can get by with fewer power plants. As for the percentage, as I understand it, the basic methods of enrichment are not familiar to you even by hearsay, in this case the explanation of the huge difference in efficiency will take an article no less than the one under discussion, which is clearly beyond the scope of the forum. hi And could you voice the "absolute values"? laughing
            1. Haettenschweiler
              Haettenschweiler 26 December 2015 01: 31
              -2
              Quote: Fafnir
              Well, this power system allows, firstly, to spread the generating capacities and the main consumers geographically, and secondly, to effectively maneuver the capacities.


              - It is known, of course. This is the fundamental principle in the USSR - centralized supply. The doctrine concerned both electricity and heat and water supply. The fundamental principle inherent in urban communications. As practice has shown, this is indeed monstrously effective - the cost of heating houses, for example, is negligible in comparison with European countries, where each house is heated by its own boiler. Apparently it's the same with electricity. True, about "maneuvering capacities" I'm not entirely sure - after all, the power lines are designed for a certain power, and you won't let it go through them more than was planned - most likely, they won't stand it. In any case, your thought about the "bad life" has become clearer, thanks for the clarification.
              - "Absolute values" are numbers. For example, how did the economy of the USSR overtake the US economy in percentage every year, but remained in second place? It is very simple, if we take, for example, cows, and we have a hundred of them, but we added fifty (it became one hundred and fifty), then our economy grew by 50% as a percentage! Doesn't it inspire respect? And the Americans had a thousand cows, and only one hundred and fifty were added - that is, 15%. An insignificant indicator in comparison with ours. That's how they let the dust in their eyes, and they still let it in. But if before there was even an Idea - to catch up and overtake! - then today there is only one "idea" left: to drive everything to the West, oil, timber, gas, to start a couple of villas in Spain, Miami and the devil knows where else to spit from heaven on the hunched backs of the people.
              1. Fafnir
                Fafnir 26 December 2015 09: 00
                +1
                Clear. You just do not understand what is at stake. bully
                1. The comment was deleted.
              2. The comment was deleted.
              3. Fafnir
                Fafnir 26 December 2015 09: 52
                0
                As practice has shown, while the USSR was building central heating, coal was heated in London, and there were no compact gas boilers even in the project, just like you judging by your education.
      2. Inok10
        Inok10 25 December 2015 23: 11
        +7
        Quote: Haettenschweiler
        1) The Americans were the first to develop the theme of atomic energy in principle and atomic bomb in particular;

        .. bullshit .. if anyone was so close .. so it was the Germans .. and about the First NPP ..
        The world's first experimental industrial nuclear power plant (NPP) with a capacity of 5 MW was launched in the USSR on June 27, 1954, in the city of Obninsk, Kaluga Region.
        In the second half of the 40s, Soviet scientists began to develop the first projects for the peaceful use of atomic energy, the main direction of which immediately became the electric power industry.
        In 1948, at the proposal of I.V. Kurchatov and in accordance with the assignment of the party and the government, the first work began on the practical use of atomic energy for generating electricity.
        In February 1950, in the First Main Directorate, headed by B.L, Vannikov and A.P. Zavenyagin, the proposals of scientists were discussed in detail, and on July 29 of the same year, Stalin signed a Resolution of the USSR Council of Ministers on the development and construction of an NPP with a reactor in the city of Obninsk, received the code name "AM." The reactor was designed by N. A. Dollezhal and his team. At the same time, the design of station equipment was carried out by other organizations, as well as the building of the nuclear power plant.
        .. and the first satellite was also a mattress? .. and maybe the mattresses in front of Gagarin were also? .. don’t make people laugh ..
        photo, The world's first nuclear power plant ..
        1. GSH-18
          GSH-18 26 December 2015 00: 04
          +2
          Quote: Inok10
          .. bullshit .. if anyone was so close .. so it was the Germans .. and about the First NPP ..

          You correctly noticed it. Only now, before our Americans, the Americans recognized the significance of this discovery, and lured leading German scientists to themselves. For example, the well-known Emil Julius Klaus Fuchs, known as Klaus Fuchs, who leaked our special services full technical information on the first American atomic bomb. If it weren’t for his act, we wouldn’t communicate with you here now.
          Quote: Inok10
          and the first satellite was also a mattress? .. and maybe the mattresses in front of Gagarin were also?

          What do you think? lol Any American will answer you in the affirmative! And they came up with a radio with television! wassat And the periodic table ... But don’t try to ask the same questions to skaklam, God forbid you from such a risky step! laughing
          1. Inok10
            Inok10 26 December 2015 00: 27
            +5
            Quote: GSH-18
            What do you think? Any American will answer you in the affirmative! And they came up with a radio with television! And the periodic table ... But don’t try to ask the same questions to skaklam, God forbid you from such a risky step!

            ... yes, tea has seen a lot on the resource .. here I think, and if you ask the mattress friends and their licking problems ... what was the periodic table or Armstrong on the moon? ..that is where the fun will be .. laughing laughing laughing .. like the elections aren’t coming soon, but how to get out .. like worms after a 10 kV short circuit to the ground .. laughing
            1. GSH-18
              GSH-18 26 December 2015 00: 32
              +1
              Quote: Inok10
              Quote: GSH-18
              What do you think? Any American will answer you in the affirmative! And they came up with a radio with television! And the periodic table ... But don’t try to ask the same questions to skaklam, God forbid you from such a risky step!

              ... yes, tea has seen a lot on the resource .. here I think, and if you ask the mattress friends and their licking problems ... what was the periodic table or Armstrong on the moon? ..that is where the fun will be .. laughing laughing laughing .. like the elections aren’t coming soon, but how to get out .. like worms after a 10 kV short circuit to the ground .. laughing

              lol I think the answer will be as always alternative! Something like: And we dug up the Black Sea! wassat
              1. Inok10
                Inok10 26 December 2015 00: 46
                +5
                Quote: GSH-18
                I think the answer will be as always alternative! Something like: And we dug up the Black Sea!

                ... everyone killed .. Friday was a success .. laughing laughing laughing
                1. GSH-18
                  GSH-18 26 December 2015 01: 00
                  +1
                  Amerikozy have played too long. There was such a case during the rapid development of oil production in the United States, and, accordingly, its processing into light petroleum products.
                  There is such a process in the petrochemical industry called CRACKING. And so, two American "inventors" agreed to death in an American court for the right to a patent! lol
                  As a result, it turned out that the cracking of petroleum products was discovered in 1890 by V. G. Shukhov and S. G. Gavrilov in Tsarist Russia! good And such bloopers are replete with ALL of America's vaunted "history" yes
                  1. Inok10
                    Inok10 26 December 2015 01: 03
                    +4
                    Quote: GSH-18
                    There is such a process in the petrochemical industry called CRACKING. And so, two American "inventors" agreed to death in an American court for the right to a patent!
                    As a result, it turned out that the cracking of petroleum products was discovered in 1890 by V.G.Shukhov and S.G. Gavrilov in Tsarist Russia! And such bloopers are replete with ALL of America's vaunted "history"

                    .. + .. hi
            2. Mordvin 3
              Mordvin 3 26 December 2015 01: 44
              +2
              10 kW? You are a sadist, damn it. And if in a reservoir, then I will bang you with an oar. am
              1. Fafnir
                Fafnir 26 December 2015 09: 57
                +1
                Not 10 kW, but 10 kV. When a high-voltage line breaks. When I saw it for the first time, I saw how many worms popped up. The sight is quite impressive.
          2. Mister22408
            Mister22408 27 December 2015 22: 41
            0
            I'm embarrassed to ask, and Archimedes? laughing
    2. Inok10
      Inok10 25 December 2015 22: 59
      +3
      Quote: svp67
      It is also necessary to clarify that this is news of weapons-grade uranium that has been in Russia for all the time since the beginning of enrichment.

      ... I'm sure we still arrived .. you need to look deeper at the essence and wider on the subject .. laughing
      But in 1991, after the collapse of the USSR, nuclear scientists from the USA expected revelation and mathematical insight. In the United States, energy consumption for the enrichment of 1 kg of uranium to a state suitable for use as nuclear fuel ranges from 15 to 000 kW-hours.
      And the Union enrichment industry, having almost completely perfected the enrichment of uranium in centrifuges, spends from 1 to 300 kWh of electricity for enriching 450 kg of uranium.
      ... the difference as they say on the face .. hi
      1. Haettenschweiler
        Haettenschweiler 25 December 2015 23: 27
        0
        Quote: Inok10
        bullshit .. if anyone was so close .. so it was the Germans .. and about the First NPP ..


        - The Germans built a heavy water reactor, it's true. But on this and stalled. And they no longer had a chance for basic research - Hitler was at war, he needed soldiers, cars, "everything for the front" - research that did not guarantee an immediate military result was vetoed. And the Americans, separated from Germany by a mass of water, could afford to conduct any research calmly and without fuss. The German fleet was extremely weak, in addition, fettered by the actions of England, the threat of landing did not exist. And, comrade, did I say that the first nuclear power plant was built by the Americans? No. But they later managed to build dofiga nuclear power plants, supplying cheap electricity to their skyscraper megalopolises. And, no matter how offensive it may be for you personally (and I don't see anything offensive here), the Americans were the first to develop the topic of atomic energy. What does it change? Nothing. Just like the first research in the field of rocketry belonged to Hitler's Nazis, but the first artificial satellite was assembled and launched in the USSR. If you hurt your patriotic feelings - I'm sorry.
        1. Mister22408
          Mister22408 25 December 2015 23: 48
          +1
          Tsiolkovsky was an American or a German? The atomic movement - the Germans, again stole the idea from them - the American Jews (this is for a "peaceful" atom, and what they have not stolen yet ... :-)), not counting the "captured" specialists ... In the same year, the Indians the unit of time was a multiple of 10 by minus 32 (they say 16) ... :-)
        2. Inok10
          Inok10 25 December 2015 23: 50
          +3
          Quote: Haettenschweiler
          And, comrade, did I say that the first nuclear power plant was built by the Americans? Not. But they managed to build subsequently dofiga nuclear power plants, supplying cheap electricity to their megalopolises, skyscrapers. And, no matter how offensive it is for you personally (and I don’t see anything offensive here), the Americans were the first to develop the topic of atomic energy. What does it change? Nothing.

          ... changes everything that the first nuclear power plant in the United States was built .. 1958 .. and that with regards to "a great number of nuclear power plants in the United States and cheap electricity" .. and, do you know that all that is produced by the nuclear power plant must be consumed? .. that is, ABSOLUTELY EVERYTHING .. and God forbid, there will be an extra kilowatt, it’s not a hydroelectric power station, it’s not possible to screw it up instantly through the discharge of water .. it was written correctly above, not from a good life in the usa so many nuclear power plants .. to ensure and regulate consumption .. frequency plays a major role in energy 50 Hz .. and you do not have the right to more or less than 1,5% .. the us power system is vulnerable to its sluggishness .. a sharp increase in consumption - collapse, a sharp decrease in consumption - collapse. ... hi
          1. GSH-18
            GSH-18 26 December 2015 00: 29
            0
            Quote: Inok10
            and, you are aware that everything that is generated nuclear power should be consumed? .. that is, ABSOLUTELY EVERYTHING .. and don’t bring the Lord there will be an extra kilowatt, it’s not a hydroelectric power station it’s not possible to fasten it

            This is not true. When have you ever heard the expression "absorbing rods"? The generated power in any modern reactor is regulated much faster than at a hydroelectric power station, otherwise it would not be a reactor but a stationary atomic bomb.
            1. Inok10
              Inok10 26 December 2015 01: 06
              +3
              Quote: GSH-18
              This is not true. When have you ever heard the expression "absorbing rods"? The generated power in any modern reactor is regulated much faster than at a hydroelectric power station, otherwise it would not be a reactor but a stationary atomic bomb.

              .. ah, here I do not agree .. it really .. stationary atomic bomb .. hi .. read about regulating the power system .. and what are the key points .. hi
              1. GSH-18
                GSH-18 26 December 2015 04: 15
                0
                Quote: Inok10
                well, I don’t agree here .. it's really .. a stationary atomic bomb .. hi .. read about regulating the power system .. and what are the key points .. hi

                Suppose .. But if the reactor is not regulated in your way, then how is it stopped for maintenance, which by the way is carried out regularly and in a planned mode? How is it put into operation, which implies its testing at DIFFERENT power modes (adjustment)? And then, not a single normal person will begin to build an uncontrolled nuclear power plant of enormous power on its territory voluntarily. In addition, please think about how the reactors on the nuclear submarines work in the campaign and at the pier. I think there are enough examples for reflection.
          2. Fafnir
            Fafnir 26 December 2015 00: 31
            +1
            Slowness, and most importantly in fragmentation, which actually ensures its outstanding slowness. By the way, they have a lot of nuclear power plants, therefore, you need to be closer to consumers, but there is no other source of energy (well, a river, for example, or cheap gas).
          3. Haettenschweiler
            Haettenschweiler 26 December 2015 01: 41
            +1
            Quote: Inok10
            ... changes everything that the first nuclear power plant in the USA was built .. 1958 ..


            - Once again I say, as a complete ignoramus in nuclear energy and in history: it makes no difference who first built the first nuclear power plant. This does not change anything in today's situation. Absolutely. The time difference in construction of nuclear power plants in Russia (USSR) and the USA, in principle, cannot be very large.

            Quote: Inok10
            and that with regards to "a great number of nuclear power plants in the United States and cheap electricity" .. and, do you know that all that is generated by the nuclear power plant must be consumed? .. that is, ABSOLUTELY EVERYTHING .. and God forbid, there will be an extra kilowatt


            - And again I will seem to you a "mattress friend", but something I have never heard about the problems of Americans with an excess of energy. That’s about the lack of it in Russia, I heard more than once, and I came across it several times. You justify this by the "fierce, frantic danger of nuclear power plants" in the event that something is not consumed ... and for some reason I am absolutely sure that both we and all countries that own nuclear power plants have invented what security measures. And no "fierce, frantic danger", I can not even justify for myself the fact that instead of building new nuclear power plants, the Russian government - Dima-iPhone - proposes to turn off the fuck people after 22:00 ... or have you forgotten about this initiative? This is how the government is fighting energy shortages. Effectively, and for your pocket ... sorry, the country's budget ... not expensive.

            Quote: Inok10
            the usa power system is vulnerable to its slowness .. a sharp increase in consumption - collapse, a sharp decrease in consumption - collapse ..


            - If everything was so just, I think, Soviet saboteurs would instantly "put out" one or two nuclear power plants, after which the USSR for a long time, if not forever, forgets about the Western "partner" immersed in the darkness of the Middle Ages.
            1. Fafnir
              Fafnir 26 December 2015 09: 08
              0
              Have you heard about "big blackouts"? No? Strange, because these events were even mentioned in feature films! wassat And do not tell me where in Russia there is a shortage of electricity? Specific regions. And learn at least the basics of electrical engineering, otherwise reading your comments is VERY funny and sad at the same time.
              1. Haettenschweiler
                Haettenschweiler 26 December 2015 09: 38
                0
                Quote: Fafnir
                Have you heard about "big blackouts"? No? Strange, because these events were even mentioned in feature films!


                - Artistic, my friend, artistic, not documentary. Perhaps it will be an unpleasant discovery for you, but the aliens did not blow up the White House in Washington either. For now, anyway.

                Quote: Fafnir
                And do not tell me where in Russia there is a shortage of electricity? Specific regions.


                - I’ll tell you. It is unlikely that this will remove pink glasses from your eyes, but ... there are chances.

                Quote: Fafnir
                And learn at least the basics of electrical engineering, otherwise reading your comments is VERY funny and sad at the same time.


                “Not in the eyebrow, but in the eye.” But if you ask to deploy - where it is funny, and where it is sad - I am sure there will be ... winds in a puddle.
                1. Fafnir
                  Fafnir 27 December 2015 08: 48
                  0
                  Hmm ... Cool answer. No specifics. Well, where are the names of specific regions? Wind in a puddle so far only from you. laughing
              2. Haettenschweiler
                Haettenschweiler 26 December 2015 09: 39
                0
                Russia is the fourth largest electricity producer in the world after the USA, China and Japan. And in fourth place is Russia in terms of generating capacity. At the same time, Russian industry and the country's population are experiencing a shortage of electricity. Thus, restrictions in the supply of electricity were recorded in the winter of 2006 in almost all of the country's energy systems.

                Electricity shortages are characterized by the following factors: lack of generating capacity during peak loads and refusals to connect new consumers.

                In order for generating capacities to ensure the development of the electric power industry in Russia and cope with the maximum load during the peak period, the rate of capacity growth is not less than the increase in energy consumption in the country. The research carried out by the INFOline agency showed that the increase in capacity in the USSR in the 80s averaged 10-12 GW per year, and in the 90s - slightly more than 1 GW per year. Since 1999, there has been an outstripping growth in energy consumption compared to the increase in capacity.

                At the same time, the level of maximum load in a number of regions in the winter of 2006 exceeded the level of 1991 (the year with the maximum level of consumption). For comparison: the peak load of the Moscow energy system was 13069 MW, and in 2006 it was already 16200. Moreover, the situation with the Moscow energy system is no exception. A similar excess is observed in the Tyumen, Leningrad, Vologda, Belgorod, Khakass, Dagestan and other systems. As a result, the power plants with great difficulty withstood the maximum loads in the winter of 2006. A vivid example of this is the shutdown in Moscow in an orderly manner of various objects: from light signs and casinos to industrial facilities.


                Another important indicator of the deficit is regular failures in technical connection to networks. So, in 2004 only 32% of the total number of applications was accepted, in 2005 - 21%, and in 2006, according to the Ministry of Industry and Energy, only 16%. Therefore, today's electricity industry not only does not contribute to GDP growth, but is also one of the main limiting factors.


                The roots of the resource crisis are in the insufficient investment for the commissioning of new generating capacities and the reconstruction of existing ones. And as a result - an increase in the level of equipment wear, in 1999 - 50,5% and already in 2005 - 56,4%. According to INFOline experts, in Russia up to 56% of equipment that was launched before the 80s, 25% in the 90s, and only 9% in the 2000s are in operation.


                The situation is aggravated by insufficient effective investment in the development of the electric power industry. The most striking and illustrative example is the construction of RAO UES Russia at the Sochinskaya TPP, which cost $ 2300 / kW, which is several times more expensive than the world average of $ 1-700 / kW.
                1. Fafnir
                  Fafnir 27 December 2015 08: 51
                  0
                  Where is the link to the RELIABLE source? I can also write something like this: "Due to the chronic shortage of electricity in the United Kingdom, about 100000 households have been disconnected. Official authorities are trying to hide the deficit by provoking various natural disasters, such as floods." And try to refute. am
                2. The comment was deleted.
  3. Mister22408
    Mister22408 25 December 2015 23: 31
    0
    No - no way, they are tying the money of our ancestors on the HEU program ...
  4. Uran
    Uran 25 December 2015 23: 54
    +2
    that’s a very big danger is the Ukrainian nuclear power plant. no matter how they did the second Chernobl
    1. GSH-18
      GSH-18 26 December 2015 00: 12
      0
      Quote: Uranus
      that’s a very big danger is the Ukrainian nuclear power plant. no matter how they did the second Chernobl

      That's for sure. Matches for children is not a toy! And Svidomo, even more so. And then it turns out a monkey with a grenade at our side. And if they do anything, again we will find ourselves guilty of everything.
  5. Civil
    Civil 26 December 2015 00: 04
    0
    There are currently no nuclear materials or facilities in Russia that could be of concern: all storage facilities


    Do not!
  6. The comment was deleted.
  • Boos
    Boos 25 December 2015 20: 16
    +4
    Do not exaggerate the role of the United States in ensuring the safety of Russian projects; Fukushima refutes you. Tell us better about weapons-grade plutonium exported to America under a citizen who could not drink.
    1. cniza
      cniza 25 December 2015 20: 30
      +3
      Do you know how much is behind the scenes? How we were humiliated, how we groaned ... now now we will win back everything.
    2. The comment was deleted.
    3. clidon
      clidon 26 December 2015 00: 39
      -2
      You first learn not to confuse uranium and plutonium.
      And the role in security is quite large - the Americans gave considerable money for physical protection.
  • GSH-18
    GSH-18 25 December 2015 20: 21
    +3
    The protection of fissile materials and products containing them is certainly an extremely important thing. I am glad that the Russian Federation is now doing without outside help. So it should be in the future.
    1. Ami du peuple
      Ami du peuple 25 December 2015 20: 44
      +6
      Quote: GSH-18
      I am glad that the Russian Federation is now doing without outside help. So it should be in the future.

      “I’ll tell you one smart thing, just don’t be offended” (c) The Soviet Union used to do without foreign help in processing and storing nuclear waste - even from Western Europe, they took such shnyaga to their disposal. For SLE, I will note. The Americans divorced us like suckers, and we, now, have presented this wiring as the greatest achievement in the field of nuclear safety.
      1. GSH-18
        GSH-18 25 December 2015 21: 07
        -3
        Quote: Ami du peuple
        I'll tell you one smart thing, just don't be offended "(c) The Soviet Union used to do without foreign help

        I will also tell you one smart thing, do not be offended, such a country of the USSR has not existed in nature for 24 years. It's time to "start" to get used to it. What does the USSR have to do with it if the conversation is in an article about the Russian Federation?
        Quote: Ami du peuple
        even from Western Europe such a shnyag was taken to their disposal

        But this is very not good. I will explain. Processing foreign radioactive waste further pollutes our territory, turning it into a kind of nuclear repository. I will not go into the details of the processes, but this is so, just take note.

        Quote: Ami du peuple
        The Americans divorced us as suckers, and today we have exposed this wiring as the greatest achievement in the field of nuclear safety.

        And in what did they divorce us? The money was given for security and disposal, and they gave a couple of special railway platforms for safe transportation and a lot more. And this is in the critical period of lack of money in the dashing 90s. I don't praise the mattress. You just don’t have to behave like crazy Americans at the word "Russian threat"
        1. Ami du peuple
          Ami du peuple 25 December 2015 21: 15
          +3
          Quote: GSH-18
          And in what they divorced us?

          See my post above.
          Quote: GSH-18
          Processing foreign radioactive waste further pollutes our territory, turning it into a kind of nuclear repository.

          All sorts of ecologists played on this during perestroika. Until then, we have played out. that promising and necessary projects and nuclear power facilities were closed under the influence of "public opinion". Now we are trying to restore something.
          Quote: GSH-18
          such a country of the USSR has not existed in nature for 24 years. It's time to "start" to get used to it.

          So you get used to it. And I was born in it and proud of it. Next, leave without comment.
          1. GSH-18
            GSH-18 25 December 2015 21: 33
            -5
            Quote: Ami du peuple
            So you get used to it. And I was born in it and, I hope, in the revived Union, I will die.

            I was also born in the USSR and lived enough. But I will honestly tell you, living in RUSSIA is much better.
            Quote: Ami du peuple
            All sorts of ecologists played on this during perestroika.

            Are you one of those "well-wishers" who are ready to turn my country into a life-threatening place for money? Look at the cancer statistics for those times and multiply it by 10 to represent the real scale. My relatives died from this infection, and you tell me about some "achievements" and "money". Go tell them to the cemetery. And how we dealt with security at such facilities, ask the residents of the surrounding villages of the Techa River. And I can give you a bunch of such examples here. So there is no need to agitate me here with loud slogans. And yet, this is of course your own business, what to believe in, we have freedom of religion lol but the USSR and TsKKPSS unfortunately will not be request It is a fact. And the facts, as you know, is a stubborn thing yes Do not be offended, I just called a spade a spade.
        2. Camel
          Camel 25 December 2015 22: 07
          +1

          GSH-18 (5)
          Processing foreign radioactive waste further pollutes our territory, turning it into a kind of nuclear repository. I will not go into the details of the processes, but this is so, just take note.

          Colleague, have you heard about the fast neutron reactor? True, it was launched not so long ago, but the spent nuclear fuel "SNF" (used in this reactor) will last for many years. And for the environment there are zero problems, in addition, after its reprocessing in such a reactor, spent nuclear fuel becomes quite enriched with uranium, suitable for further use - even in fuel rods, even for weapons purposes. "Closed loop" is called.
          So, Russia will not only earn money on the disposal of foreign spent nuclear fuel, but will also replenish the supply of strategic raw materials - and uranium is very rare earth.
          And yes, the HEU-LEU program did kill the US uranium-enrichment industry. There are now no specialists, no equipment, factories, like there were three of them, were closed.
          The dry residue is that Russian enrichment plants are working, the nuclear industry has been feeding the most ferocious "Arctic fox" for 20 years, American factories have lost (and did not develop, unlike ours) enrichment technologies, uranium (and even more weapons-grade) is really aging VERY quickly. At this rate, after another 20 years, the United States will have no more charges. lol And we will have tongue
          1. clidon
            clidon 26 December 2015 00: 42
            0
            At this pace, after another 20 years, the United States will not have any charges left.

            Actually, plutonium is aging, and they are "rejuvenated" and reactors are not needed for this.
          2. clidon
            clidon 27 December 2015 17: 00
            0
            You have a fabulous "breeder". )
        3. KaPToC
          KaPToC 25 December 2015 22: 31
          -2
          Nurses come and go, but the Russian people remain.
        4. Atrix
          Atrix 25 December 2015 22: 45
          -1
          Quote: GSH-18
          And in what they divorced us?

          To produce such a volume of weapons-grade uranium, several hundred thousand people worked in the mining and defense industries of the country for approximately 40 years
          According to estimates made by specialists at the end of the last century, the real cost of 500 tons of weapons-grade plutonium at that time was at least 8 trillions of dollars. For comparison, we note that the average annual value of Russia's annual GDP, according to Rosstat, in the last decade of the last century was in the 400 region of billions of dollars. It turns out that the actual price of the uranium transaction amounted to only 0,15% in relation to the minimum real value of the goods. The real value of uranium turned out to be equivalent to 20 (twenty) annual GDP of the country!

          Tell me where is the benefit of Russia? And where is the US loss ???
          1. GSH-18
            GSH-18 25 December 2015 22: 56
            -3
            Quote: Atrix
            Tell me where is the benefit of Russia? And where is the US loss ???

            The benefit is that we received real money (yes, not as much as we would like, but we didn’t order music then) during a critical period for us, and not in the form of a loan. Do you understand what I am explaining to you?
            1. Atrix
              Atrix 25 December 2015 23: 07
              +4
              Quote: GSH-18
              The benefit is that we got real money

              Do you even think what you're saying ??? How can one justify the sale of what people have been building for 40 years, hundreds of thousands of people have ditched their health by mining and enriching it? I’m not talking about the military security of the country, they also sold it for 0.15% of its real value. You don’t understand that Russia is paid repatriation as a losing country in the Cold War, and here it is presented as a blessing.
              1. GSH-18
                GSH-18 25 December 2015 23: 20
                0
                Quote: Atrix
                Do you even think what you're saying ???

                I am. And here you are, apparently not. In those years, people were dying of hunger, because the state had nothing to pay people salaries. A dead person doesn’t care how much a heap of uranium costs, which, if not sold, should be protected and stored accordingly. That is, to spend money on it, which is already absent. But for that, there are more than enough debts. My friends went to collect metal in a metal station, because there was no work, but everyone wanted to eat every day. But I see, you don’t know this, and therefore write all nonsense. Tagchen and his henchmen from the Central Committee of Communist Party are to blame for all this bacchanalia. And it’s not like those who sold this uranium, so that people would eat a thread and not freeze in winter.
              2. clidon
                clidon 26 December 2015 13: 34
                0
                And where did you need to do what people gained 40 years and ruined their health? For example?
                The sale took place at the market price. And on very favorable terms.
  • Silkway0026
    Silkway0026 25 December 2015 20: 21
    +5
    From the article and brings humiliation to Pindostanom ...
    1. Boos
      Boos 25 December 2015 20: 30
      +2
      Pay attention to how the disposal of nuclear waste on our land is served. Benefactors b ..
    2. GSH-18
      GSH-18 25 December 2015 23: 00
      0
      Quote: Silkway0026
      From the article and brings humiliation to Pindostanom ...

      And you want to say that the destruction of the USSR with a gang from the Communist Party of the Soviet Union, led by Mecheny, was a feat that elevates us?
      All that was happening at that time is the HUMILIATION of our people by the Pindostan and their lured henchmen in the Central Committee of Communist Party of the Socialist Republic.
  • vic58
    vic58 25 December 2015 20: 24
    0
    Poor westinghouse beats in a kondrashka! Focused on the fuel rod ... and then a bummer)))
    1. demon1978
      demon1978 25 December 2015 20: 51
      +4
      Quote: vic58
      Poor westinghouse beats in a kondrashka! Focused on the fuel rod ... and then a bummer)))


      Doubtful reason for pride .... request The fact that we can is undoubtedly a huge plus yes
      But the fact that practically everything extracted from Mother Earth (oil, uranium, ore), we try as quickly as possible, in the best case in the form of "semi-finished products", sell over the hill, in exchange for green waste paper-It is very annoying !!!! ! fool
  • Mountain shooter
    Mountain shooter 25 December 2015 20: 31
    +6
    I must say, Russians do everything on a grand scale. In particular, how powerfully has the production and PROCESSING of fissile materials developed. These achievements are recognized all over the world! And Russia's achievements in the development and production of reactors at BN are just a breakthrough in the technology of nuclear waste disposal. In such reactors, you can "burn" most of the highly active isotopes to a much less active state. Not to mention the production of nuclear fuel for conventional thermal neutron reactors (with a positive yield - more fuel is obtained than is "burned"). Nobody has such reactors!
    The French tried, tried - it didn’t work, they closed the topic.
    1. GSH-18
      GSH-18 25 December 2015 20: 49
      +1
      And Russia's achievements in the design and production of BN reactors are simply a breakthrough in nuclear waste disposal technology.

      "BN-600 is a sodium-cooled fast neutron power reactor, put into operation in April 1980 in the 3rd power unit at the Beloyarsk NPP in the Sverdlovsk region near the town of Zarechny"
      Now our focus on the idea of ​​creating TOKAMAK.
      If it works out, it will be a REAL breakthrough and a clear slap in the face to the Americans, who did not succeed and they declared the idea impossible.
      1. Fafnir
        Fafnir 25 December 2015 21: 10
        +1
        Actually, our physicists are now more interested in "stellators" and not in TOKAMAK. In contrast to the TOKAMAK, continuous plasma combustion is possible in a stellator, of course in theory.
        1. GSH-18
          GSH-18 25 December 2015 22: 49
          0
          Quote: Fafnir
          Actually, our physicists are now more interested in "stellators" and not in TOKAMAK. In contrast to the TOKAMAK, continuous plasma combustion is possible in a stellator, of course in theory.

          Sorry, but for the average person these are the same eggs, only the view from the side. Technical variety of TOKAMAK.
          "The STELLARATOR, like the TOKAMAK, is a magnetic trap with closed magnetic surfaces, but, unlike the TOKAMAK, the poloidal magnetic field that forms the magnetic surfaces is created in the STELLARATOR with the help of external loops, and not by the current flowing through the plasma."
          1. Fafnir
            Fafnir 26 December 2015 00: 36
            +1
            For the layman maybe. But not for physicists and power engineers. The differences are still too great. It’s approximately the same as between the PM and the 406-mm ship’s gun, although it seems to be both a firearm. And out of sheer curiosity, the question is - do ordinary people distinguish between TOKAMAK and laser ignition installations? hi
            1. GSH-18
              GSH-18 26 December 2015 00: 45
              0
              Quote: Fafnir
              The differences are still too great. About how between PM and 406-mm ship gun

              So far, neither one nor the other really works. And the "power" of paper mathematical calculations cannot be connected to the mains request Therefore, it is not entirely clear where you got such an analogy: PM and ship’s gun? Both that and that plasma still not working reactor projects. Although promising ..
              Quote: Fafnir
              and ordinary people distinguish between TOKAMAK and laser ignition installations? hi

              Ask the townsfolk hi
              1. Fafnir
                Fafnir 26 December 2015 09: 20
                0
                I wonder why you put the cons? Oh well, explain the analogy. TOKAMAK and the stellator have only one thing in common - they are both thermonuclear reactors, therefore the analogy with the PM and the ship’s gun - they have only one principle in common. It would seem that such a trifle as a way to create a magnetic field affects the design VERY strongly, they even differ greatly in appearance, look at the photo. Plus, TOKAMAK was convenient for studying the process in the initial stages, because allowed at that time to achieve much better retention parameters. But for an energy reactor it is of little use. The most interesting thing is that the Americans started with the stellators and switched to the TOKAMAKs, and ours vice versa. hi And these "paper capacities" are connected to the network, only they "eat" from there laughing
  • izya top
    izya top 25 December 2015 20: 33
    +5
    and the Yankees no longer receive our plutonium for space wink for the first time in 30 years, they began to get involved bully but since the production has long been poher, the release began in the laboratory request in the lab, carl ...
    For the first time in thirty years, the United States has resumed independent production of the plutonium-238 element, critical for NASA space programs. Oakridge National Laboratory took up import substitution. “The sample of plutonium oxide-238 is made in the form of a powder and can already be used as a heat source for NASA space programs. Thus, the Oakridge National Laboratory has demonstrated its ability to provide the United States with an expensive radioactive isotope, ”Lenta.ru reports citing a press release from the laboratory. One gram of pure plutonium-238 generates approximately 0,567 watts of power. The price of one kilogram of this item is approximately 1 million US dollars.
    1. GSH-18
      GSH-18 25 December 2015 23: 44
      0
      Quote: izya top
      and the Yankees no longer receive our plutonium wink for space for the first time in 30 years, they began to preoccupy themselves with bully, but since the production has long been poached, production began in the request laboratory in the laboratory, Carl ...

      I wouldn’t be so worried about amerikosis. They without problems at one time blinded the first nuclear bomb in the Los Alamos LAB.
  • raid14
    raid14 25 December 2015 20: 35
    12
    An article with a "smell", why not "read out the entire list, please"! As under EBN, we disarmed "completely voluntarily" with US money.
    As of October 2012, according to information from the website of Richard Lugar, 7610 nuclear warheads were deactivated during the program’s duration (plan for 2017 - 9265). Destroyed:
    902 intercontinental ballistic missiles,
    498 silo launchers,
    191 mobile launcher,
    33 nuclear submarines,
    684 ballistic missile submarines,
    906 air-to-ground missiles with nuclear warheads,
    155 bombers,
    194 nuclear test tunnels.
    590 nuclear weapons were also transported by rail, security was improved at 24 nuclear weapons storage facilities, and 39 biological threat monitoring stations were built and equipped. Ukraine, Kazakhstan and Belarus became non-nuclear weapon countries.
    At the same time, Russian experts noted that a significant part of the ICBMs and SLBMs were eliminated at the expense of Russia.
    u.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nanna_—_Lugar_Program
    1. Gormenghast
      Gormenghast 25 December 2015 22: 06
      +4
      I think the Americans generally laughed wildly when the forcibly democratized Russia voluntarily disarmed. There is no other precedent for such stupidity. Germany was disarmed as a result of the world wars. And Russia, it seems, was not the losing side; slipped her a bunch of malicious traitors and they, "in an influx of happiness half-open mouth"(Sasha Cherny) signed a bunch of rotten treaties and agreements.
  • Gormenghast
    Gormenghast 25 December 2015 21: 05
    10
    "Megatons to Megawatts"- yes, great! Why is the monetary side of this epic story shyly silent?

    Ameroids calculated that a ton of weapons-grade uranium, by the cost of its production (domestic price), is more than a billion dollars per ton. And Spiegel, according to the BND, wrote that a ton on the black market is $ 60 billion.

    How many are there "redid"in megawatts? 500 tons? How much did the Americans pay for them? 12 or 16 billion, I don't remember; they referred to the fact that this was the cost"back diluted"to the fuel level.

    These are different things. Where is 500 billion dollars at the internal price of the USA? Where is 8 trillion dollars, according to the calculations of the State Duma of the Russian Federation, reflected in the resolution of the Duma?

    Presented to these thieves; no mutual economic benefit, as indicated in the article, Russia had.

    8 trillion! These are four annual budgets of Russia! This is the modernization of industry, it is worthy pensions for the elderly; it's millions of square meters of affordable housing! Thieves, these Americans are thieves, GUARD.

    And this "Nanna Lugara"? Why, until very recently, the entire North of Russia was strewn with cores from RTGs? Putin organized work to clean up. Because the amers were not interested in any security of the Russian population; they were interested in stealing Russian weapons-grade uranium! And let the population be irradiated; they are happy to push their radioactive waste into storage in native countries, such as Russia or Ukraine itself.
    1. Vadim237
      Vadim237 25 December 2015 22: 45
      -1
      The cost of 1 billion dollars per ton of weapons-grade uranium is more plausible.
      1. Gormenghast
        Gormenghast 25 December 2015 23: 28
        0
        No matter how I feel about the State Duma of Russia, it officially calculated the amount of damage caused to Russia at 8 trillion. dollars, as indicated in her statement.

        But even for a billion it is 500 billion, not 17; as Marx said in his time, "Provide 10% (arrived), and capital agrees to any use, at 20% it becomes lively, at 50% it is positively ready to break its head, at 100% it violates all human laws, at 300% there is no crime that he would not risk, at least under pain gallows".

        And here 3000% of the profit, that is, 30 times.
  • podgornovea
    podgornovea 25 December 2015 22: 02
    +4
    No need to multiply entities!

    Revenues / expenses are considered very simple.
    Quote:
    "At the same time, it was beneficial to both parties financially. For twenty years, 10 percent of the total electricity produced in the United States was generated from Russian uranium. Foreign exchange earnings from the transaction amounted to 17 billion dollars for Russia."

    That is, we divide $ 17 billion by 20 years and get $ 850 million a year. This is for "10 percent of the total electricity produced in the US (also per year)" right? Then, on average, for a year at these prices, the annual volume of the US electric power industry = 8,5 billion dollars. With a GDP equal to at least 8,5 trillion dollars, it turns out 0,1 percent!

    Quote (US Energy Wiki):
    "Prices for energy from thermal power plants can reach 4 cents per kW * h, while at nuclear power plants - 10 cents per kW * h and more."

    Electricity production in the USA for 2012 year Total Annual production - 4095 billion kW * h, 10% is 409 billion kW * h
    We consider at the lowest price 4 cents per kilowatt it turns out 16,36 billion dollars a year! (by the way, according to this minimum estimate, the US electricity market is not 8,5, but 163 billion dollars)

    20 years 16,36 billion dollars a year received by the United States, gave Russia 17 billion dollars for 20 years.

    "At the same time, it was beneficial to both parties financially."

    This is just a song!
    1. Gormenghast
      Gormenghast 25 December 2015 22: 26
      0
      Yes, no matter how you count (whatever methodology you use), except Amer robbery (stolen right in front of your eyes!), Nothing else will be revealed.

      And the calculation, as an illustration, is credited.
  • cerbuk6155
    cerbuk6155 25 December 2015 22: 54
    +1
    The total cost of 500 tons of this uranium is $ 20 trillion, and it was given away for 16 billion. Well done nothing to say. To understand this, let everyone who does not understand sell their apartment for 16 rubles, although he will also have to. soldier am am am Only in this way and in no other way. soldier
  • tsvetkov1274
    tsvetkov1274 25 December 2015 22: 55
    0
    Krasnoyarsk 26-hello !!!
  • user3970
    user3970 25 December 2015 23: 05
    +3
    Explicitly custom article. The fact that the GDP, the servant and servant of Chubais, completed the deal, Gor - Chernomyrdin (I don’t want to write the name of this scumbag with a capital letter, which, like .. the Chechens raped all the holes, which by word formation = Klitschko, who shaved and drank Ukraine as an ambassador, bastard!). As a result of this state. Russia lost trillions of dollars in crimes, and the Americans got fuel for their nuclear power plants and missiles for 100 years. As a result, Russia today has no sources for uranium mining. In Kazakhstan, the Americans took control of the uranium mines, buying not the mines themselves but the power plants that supply them. GDP is a criminal who has passed an anti-people law allowing the import into Russia of products of spent nuclear fuel and its further warehousing and storage. The so-called BN reactors, this is what my grandmother said in two.
    1. Gormenghast
      Gormenghast 25 December 2015 23: 42
      0
      There is an opinion that Russia will never be able to enrich 500 tons of uranium (this is 20000 warheads) to the weapons level.

      For example, I am not a supporter of the import of spent nuclear fuel into Russia for the purpose of its storage; but here during processing - here you need to look at how safe and cost-effective it is; I can’t evaluate this action without numbers - neither positively nor negatively.

      Well, the BN series is, after all, the future of nuclear energy. When will there be a fusion on an industrial scale? - Well, if by 2050, and even then it will occupy only a certain percentage.
      What, oil and gas will continue to burn? Or do we wind up half of the globe with windmills, and cover the second half with solar panels, and we will pray that cloudy and windless days do not coincide? laughing
      The resource of uranium-235 is exhaustible, in contrast to the reserve of uranium-130 exceeding it by 238 times. We want to have energy - we have to burn plutonium in reactors such as BN.

      1. Vadim237
        Vadim237 26 December 2015 01: 20
        0
        Better to create thorium reactors.
  • cte-power
    cte-power 26 December 2015 03: 42
    0
    for idiots article?

    one of the goals of Nana Lugar is to ensure the process of demilitarization of defense industries and the conversion of military capabilities and technologies;
  • dchegrinec
    dchegrinec 26 December 2015 05: 04
    +1
    It would also be great if it were not necessary to deal with the burial of nuclear waste, but to come up with a circular cycle of use.
    1. Gormenghast
      Gormenghast 26 December 2015 11: 31
      0
      Spent nuclear fuel contains shrapnel ruthenium, rhodium and palladium.

      In reactors using thermal neutrons, after 10 years of exposure per ton of spent fuel elements, 2106 g are formed. ruthenium, 414 grams of rhodium and 1258 grams of palladium. In BN reactors - an order of magnitude more.

      Where are the alchemists? laughing

      Here are the Russian patents for the extraction of platinum metals from SNF:
      http://www.findpatent.ru/patent/223/2239898.html
      http://www.ntpo.com/patents_extraction/extraction_1/extraction_463.shtml

      And spent nuclear fuel is vitrified, together with the platinum metals contained in them.

      According to IAEA estimates, in 2000 the accumulation of platinum metals in spent nuclear fuel amounted to: Ruthenium - 364-381 tons; Rhodium - 71-75 tons; Palladium - 218-228 tons.

      According to their forecast, by 2030, the total accumulation is practically compared with the world reserves of these metals:

      Ruthenium - 1423-1752 tons (world reserves - 2870 tons);
      Rhodium - 280-344 tons (world reserves - 370 tons);
      Palladium - 850-1047 tons (world reserves - 4100 tons).

      These will all be Russian stocks if they are brought into the Russian Federation as part of SNF; so the question is - are there any benefits for Russia from the delivery of spent nuclear fuel?
      1. Vadim237
        Vadim237 27 December 2015 00: 50
        0
        The only problem is that all these metals obtained in the reactor from Uranus will be very loud and it will be impossible to use them anywhere.