In Russia, the management of the Federal Agency for Nuclear
Energy (Rosatom) esteems dumps of uranium hexafluoride exclusively
as valuable power-producing raw materials which are not subject to
burial. No common form of long-term storage of depleted uranium has
been chosen yet. On the one hand, nuclear industry representatives
state that uranium hexafluoride can be stored safely outdoors in
standard containers up to 100 years. This contradicts the attitude
of the Russian Federal Service for Ecological, Technical and Atomic
Supervision (Rostechnadzor), which asserts that "storage of tanks
with dump uranium hexafluoride at industrial sites does not meet
the current safety requirements"..
On the other hand, FGUP "PO "Elektrochemichesky zavod", one of
four Russian enterprises involved in uranium enrichment, purchased
a French technology of transferal uranium hexafluoride in the oxide
form.
Moreover, Rosatom, on the basis of the Angarsk Electrochemical
Plant, carries out research work on studying technologies for
transferral of DUF6 in the uranium tetrafluoride form (the
so-called "Kedr" technology). It is necessary to mention that in
France this storage form was not considered to be perspective.
In any case, safe long-term (within the first decades) storage
requires uranium hexafluoride defluorization and its storage which
Rosatom is concerned now about. S. Kiriyenko - a head of Rosatom,
when answering the question about the destiny of the uranium
hexafluoride dumps at the meeting with representatives of the
Tomskaya Region community held in the Seversk City on April 12,
2006, answered like that: now we examine three variants of handling
uranium hexafluoride waste, among which there are a "Cogema"
company technology and a Russian technology. If we will not be able
to solve the issue of utilization of depleted uranium hexafluoride
"tailings", then I am ready to make a decision on cessation of
importing foreign depleted uranium hexafluoride.
Possibility of depleted uranium usage in fast reactors
The issue of further usage of depleted uranium accumulated in
Russia is a matter of principal, since the choice between storage
and burial of depleted uranium depends on it. Among the methods of
commercial use of depleted uranium, use in fast reactors is
considered to be the most perspective one. Sometimes Rosatom
representatives consider DUF6 to be the source of fluor acquisition
for commercial use, which is not quite correct, since fluor is a
by-product of the defluorization technology, and this method of its
acquisition is more expensive, as compared with other methods of
fluor acquisition.
In terms of use of depleted uranium in fast reactors, the thesis
that all amount of defluorized depleted uranium received after
conversion from DUF6 can be used as a matrix in mixed
uranium-plutonium oxide fuel and in plutonium breeding blankets is
beneath all criticism.
First, the large-scale implementation of fast reactors in Russia
remains doubtful. The only operating industrial Russian power fast
reactor BN-600 was launched in 1980. A lot of money and about 30
years have been spent for designing and constructing the next
reactor BN-800. "The Strategy of Development of Nuclear Energy in
Russia in the First Half of the 21st Century" stipulates mass
construction of fast reactors only after 2030.
Besides cost and terms, there exists the unsolved problem of
choosing the right and necessary technology of fast reactors. Thus,
in Russia, an option of implementation of a standard reactor with
lead coolant of the BREST type is under consideration.
Thus, it is too early to speak about a specific program of
large-scale construction of fast reactors in Russia specifying
their number and type, as well as more precise terms of their
construction and placing into operation.
In France, similar construction programs for fast reactor
construction were stopped due to economic and technical
reasons.
Secondly, even assuming the plans for large-scale commissioning
of fast reactors after 2030 to be realistic, these reactors will
not be able to use promptly all DUF6 which is available and planned
to be accumulated which will require its further storing. In 2000,
the amount of accumulated DUF6 of Russian origin was estimated to
exceed 700 thou. tons. About 125 thou. tons more are a product of
processing uranium dumps imported from abroad upon contracts with
West-European companies.
The accumulation rates of new DUF6 dumps are more than 4 thou t
of DUF6/year which is due to accumulation of natural uranium
extracted in Russia (with perspective for growth of extraction and
enrichment). Moreover, there are possible further import of dumps
from Western Europe and accumulation of DUF6 from foreign natural
uranium (primarily, from Kazakhstan) within the framework of
international projects on the basis of the Angarsk EChP to the
extent of about 7,800 tons of DUF6 per year. New dumps will also
appear as a result of enrichment of the natural component returned
by USA upon the contract for sale of Russian weapon-grade
uranium.
Considering these factors, by 2030 in Russia there will be
additionally accumulated at least 200 thou. tons of DUF6. All
together, by 2030 DUF6 stocks will make up to 1 mln tons of uranium
hexafluoride containing more than 680 thou. tons of metallic
uranium.
The annual loading by depleted uranium as part of charging fuel
for BN-800 will be from 2.2 to 5.5 t U/year for annual loading by
plutonium 0.6-1.7 t/year.
Much greater amount of depleted uranium can be used in blankets
in the breeding zone. It has not been solved finally which amount
of depleted uranium will be exposed in the breeding zone of BN-800
or Brest. But it is assumed that it will be about 100 tons of
metallic equivalent of depleted uranium annually. It will take more
than 6,800 reactor-years to spend 680 thou.tons of depleted uranium
in this way. That means placing into operation of more than 220
reactors with useful life of 30 years, on the assumption of lack of
recycling of irradiated fuel which is planned by Rosatom
management. In case of a model for recycling of irradiated nuclear
fuel and fast reactor blankets, the amount of reactor-years
required for use of accumulated DUF6 will increase in accordance of
the number of cycles of reusing irradiated uranium. Obviously,
placing into operation of such amount of fast reactors is
unrealistic. The highest pronounced figure of fast reactor amount
planned to be placed into operation in Russia, was 60.
Duration of Utilization of 680 thou. tons of metallic uranium in BN-800 reactors
Number of BN-800 reactors60>220Duration of utilization
>110 лет30 yearsCapital investment in construction of reactors
(approximately), without construction of plants for SNF
conversion$120 bln without substitution of reactors being
withdrawn
$360 bln with substitution of reactors being withdrawn$440
bln.
Even ignoring environmental aspects, safety issues and
non-distribution of nuclear materials, and considering only time,
technical and economic conditions, such way of utilizing 680 thou.
tons of depleted uranium escaping after DUF6 conversion seem
unrealistic. Thus, the overwhelming part of DUF6 will most likely
need to be buried sooner or later.
The thesis that accumulated DUF6 is rather waste than raw
materials appears in statements of nuclear scientists. Thus,
G.Grigoryev, Deputy Director of the Institute for Molecular Physics
of the "Kurchatovsky Institute" Russian Scientific Center said that
the Angarsk EChP the profile of which is uranium enrichment "should
have no other waste besides that produced by enrichment which has
ever been there".
Special attention should be paid to the issue of reimbursement
of expenses for DUF6 utilization (at least for defluorization)
through possible commercial realization of depleted uranium for
fast reactors. The Rosatom practice clearly shows that the cost of
this uranium for fast neutron-based nuclear power will be zero or
almost zero. This could be concluded upon the basis of the existing
practice of storage of plutonium for fast reactors. Currently,
about 50 tons plutonium for fast reactors is stored at enterprises
of Rosatom, and Rosenergoatom Concern, the future user of this
plutonium bears no expenses for storage of this "most valuable"
energy resources, for instance funds for construction of the
central storage for this plutonium were allocated by the United
States.