By IPS Correspondents
MOSCOW, May 11 1996 (IPS)

Russia plans to continue pursuing its nuclear power programme despite the severe economic problems facing the country, according to a senior official.

Deputy Atomic Energy Minister Lev Ryabev told IPS in an interview here this week new plants would be built and existing ones — including the Chernobyl-type RBMK reactors — will be operated until the end of their design life.

He acknowledged the difficulties, noting, “We are facing a recession with GDP down 50 per cent including energy production”. In addtion, most nuclear plants were still owed large amounts by customers and were in debt to suppliers. Many plant workers had not been paid for several months.

However ways were being found to minimise the problem. “This year plants are being allowed to include investment requirements in the price of electricity and we hope to raise (money) for construction in this way.”

“We are being paid in cash and barter and also allow debts to be offset against each other. Some customers, for instance, will pay us by providing the materials we need for construction. It is not the best solution, but at least it helps to solve some of the financial difficulties.”

Last year the operators received two thirds of the amount due to them, only one third of which was in cash.

“But this problem will not continue for ever, and the Ministry is preparing for the future. Plans up to 2000 include continued upgrading of existing plants, completing half-built ones and completing in-house safety checks. The next phase includes decommissioning first generation plants and building new design reactors to replace them.”

But the priority is to support operating reactors and improve their safety. First generation plants nearing the end of their operating life include the four oldest RMBK units (two each at Kursk and Leningrad), the four EPG-6 units at Bilibino in the Arctic and four first generation VVER-440s (two each at Novovoronezhin the Volga region and Kola in the Arctic).

Safety levels of RBMKs and old VVER-440s has caused some concern in the West.

“But we cannot afford to decommission these prematurely,” he explains.

While revamping them would cost R3 billion (63 million US dlrs), premature decommissioning would cost R13 billion 270 mF0071 5 ck 0 CHECKMSG CHECK

= 05111208 DAP0032

Excerpt:

By IPS Correspondents
MOSCOW, May 9 1996 (IPS)

Russia plans to continue pursuing its nuclear power programme despite the severe economic problems facing the country, according to a senior official.

Deputy Atomic Energy Minister Lev Ryabev told IPS in an interview here this week new plants would be built and existing ones — including the Chernobyl-type RBMK reactors — will be operated until the end of their design life.

He acknowledged the difficulties, noting, “We are facing a recession with GDP down 50 per cent including energy production”. In addtion, most nuclear plants were still owed large amounts by customers and were in debt to suppliers. Many plant workers had not been paid for several months.

However ways were being found to minimise the problem. “This year plants are being allowed to include investment requirements in the price of electricity and we hope to raise (money) for construction in this way.”

“We are being paid in cash and barter and also allow debts to be offset against each other. Some customers, for instance, will pay us by providing the materials we need for construction. It is not the best solution, but at least it helps to solve some of the financial difficulties.”

Last year the operators received two thirds of the amount due to them, only one third of which was in cash.

“But this problem will not continue for ever, and the Ministry is preparing for the future. Plans up to 2000 include continued upgrading of existing plants, completing half-built ones and completing in-house safety checks. The next phase includes decommissioning first generation plants and building new design reactors to replace them.”

But the priority is to support operating reactors and improve their safety. First generation plants nearing the end of their operating life include the four oldest RMBK units (two each at Kursk and Leningrad), the four EPG-6 units at Bilibino in the Arctic and four first generation VVER-440s (two each at Novovoronezhin the Volga region and Kola in the Arctic).

Safety levels of RBMKs and old VVER-440s has caused some concern in the West.

“But we cannot afford to decommission these prematurely,” he explains.

While revamping them would cost R3 billion (63 million US dlrs), premature decommissioning would cost R13 billion 270 million US dlrs). Nevertheless, over 5,000MW will be decommissioned by 2010. Ryabev explains that for Russia decommissioning just means shutting down the reactor and making it safe, but not dismantling it.

“No dismantling will be done until radioactivity has decayed significantly. The first stage is a very long one,” he said. “We have some experience in dismantling small units but we need to prepare properly and build up our technological base.”

The immediate task is to continue to operate these units, “but not at the expense of safety”, says Ryabev. “They will be operated in a special mode with annual safety analyses and annual reports to the nuclear regulator, Gosatomnadzor. They will be open to analysis and technical review by any other organisation.”

Extensive upgrading is already taking place at Kursk and Leningrad including improvement of the control and protection systems. “The main change is in attitude and organisational methods. We have also conducted a comprehensive analysis of errors — especially human and design-basis accidents — and this has enabled us to achieve a good level of safety.”

Ryabev said the number of incidents were decreasing steadily — from 156 in 1992 to 99 in 1995.

Plants that will be completed by 2000 include Kalinin 3 (VVER 1000), Kursk 5 (third generation 1000 MW RBMK) and Rostov 1 (VVER 1000). A start will be made on construction of new units at Sosnovy Bor near St Petersburg, at Kola and at Novovoronezh.

Ryabev confirmed that four new designs have been accepted for development: a new generation VVER-1000, the VVER-640 (to replace the VVER-440), the MKER-800 (to replace the RBMK units) and the BN- 800 fast breeder reactor (FBR).

He dismissed Western scepticism about the MKER-800 and insisted it would be built. It was a redesigned RBMK with passive safety, airtight containment and natural circulation. There were plans to build the first two at Leningrad to replace the RBMKs which were soon to be decommissioned. It would need three years to finalise the design and will cost 70m US dlrs to build, he said.

“But it is a real project and all the necessary tests are being conducted.”

He admitted that the BN-800 was also controversial in the West but insisted plans would eventually go ahead to build three units at Mayak in the Urals where Russia had its main reprocessing plant.

“American and Western specialists are very negative about FBRs and the US is against using plutonium in fuel,” said Ryabev.

But Russia had a long experience in running these reactors. “We find them both technically and economically efficient,” said the official. “The aim is to use them to help to clean up areas of contamination at Mayak and to burn as fuel some of the plutonium and high level wastes accumulating there.”

Ryabev confirmed that plutonium production at Tomsk-7 (Seversk) and Krasnoyarsk-26 (Zheleznogorsk) — two formerly closed cities in Siberia — would end by 2000. Two production reactors were continuing to operate at Tomsk and one at Krasnoyarsk because they also provided energy for local communities.

Instead of closing them, said Ryabev, the reactor cores were to be rebuilt so that they could operate up to at least 2005 without producing plutonium. After that they will be replaced at Tomsk by new nuclear plants.

Despite the difficulties facing Russia’s nuclear industry, said Ryabev, the sector would weather the storm. Nuclear power was the energy of the future. “For Russia nuclear power means energy efficiency,” he says. “Even if we take into account investment costs, nuclear power is still economic.”

Excerpt: