Evgeny Pavlovich Velikhov

Fusion–fission hybrids

The long term supplies of U-235 are inadequate, so the Pu-239 (from U-238) and U-233 (from Th-232) fuel cycles are needed. Fast breeder reactors have low breeding ratios and long fuel doubling times, so alternative technologies are desirable. A fusion reactor could provide copious neutrons to breed Pu-239 and U-233 in its blanket, supporting several (up to 15) fission reactors for increased energy production. In a liquid fuel molten salt reactor, the chemical processing equipment can remove fission products, separate bred fissile fuel, and adjust the reactivity continuously. The U-233 fuel cycle generates fewer fission products in the blanket and consumes less energy per bred fissile nucleus than the Pu-239 fuel cycle. High fuel burnup fractions (>90%) could be attained, and actinides could be recycled in the core and incinerated, instead of being considered waste requiring long term disposal. Russia is developing the Molten Salt Hybrid Tokamak (MSHT) to eliminate five vital risks: severe accidents, theft of fissile materials, actinide waste disposal, financial investment loss, and exhaustion of fuel resources.

Nuclear Power System on a Base of Transportable Nuclear Power Plants

This paper presents the initial provisions, materials, results, current status and next tasks of the study dedicated to the issues of legal and institutional support of transportable nuclear power plants. This study is performed in the framework of the IAEA International Project on Innovative Nuclear Reactors and Fuel Cycles INPRO.Transportable nuclear power plants (TNPPs) are either small nuclear power plants (SNPPs) with their lifecycle implemented on a single transportable platform, or SNPPs assembled of transportable factory-made modules.Advantages of SNPPs and TNPPs are:• Enhanced safety and reliability;• Design simplicity,• Shorter construction period;• Industrial serial production;• Smaller capital costs and shorter investment cycle compared with large NPP;• Possibility of autonomous operation;• Suitability for non-electric application and others.There is an objective evidence of growing interest in developing a nuclear energy system (NES) based on SNPPs including TNPPs.Underlying assumptions of the Russian study:• The User of TNPP services is interested in receiving energy only, does not claim ownership of nuclear technologies, materials and TNPP itself, and this incurs minimal liability for nuclear energy use; INPRO defines this TNPP lifecycle option as “Maximum outsourcing”;• All operations involving nuclear fuel are performed either at the TNPP manufacturer plant, or at a regional TNPP service center within the Holder’s liability zone;• TNPP sitting requires no onsite operations except assembling.Expert reviews have been performed to confirm TNPP lifecycle compliance with the nuclear legislation in fields such as: safety; non-proliferation; nuclear materials’ monitoring, accounting and control; physical protection; and civil liability for nuclear damage; transport operations.It was confirmed that:• In traditional approaches, the existing legal and institutional framework is sufficient for implementing TNPP lifecycle; to achieve the highest efficiency and safety of TNPPs it is necessary to develop TNPPs’ designs, their legal and institutional support;• The following issues are of immediate interest for further studies: combination of inherent safety features and passive safety systems in TNPPs; TNPP lifecycle economy; lifecycle concept without onsite refueling; new approaches to indemnification for nuclear damage; new approaches to physical protection; nuclear liability of TNPP User; remote nuclear materials monitoring, and control and TNPP’ operating; serial industrial fabrication; licensing and certification; public-private partnership; international personnel training system; international cooperation in TNPP fabrication and servicing; role of the IAEA in developing TNPP-based NES.• TNPP/SNPP-based nuclear energy system including all kinds of respective legal, institutional and infrastructural support should become the subject of further studies.Copyright

Multiple Inversion Scenarios For Enhanced Interpretation of Marine CSEM Data Using Iterative Migration: A Case Study For the Shtokman Gas Field, Barents Sea

Summary The integration of shared earth modeling and robust 3D CSEM modeling and inversion is the key to deriving a reliable quantitative interpretation from marine controlledsource electromagnetic (CSEM) data. Workflows should make use of all available subsurface data and enable the interpreter to select the most geologically relevant resistivity model from the multitude of models that satisfy the same CSEM data. To this end, we present our implementation of an iterative migration method for CSEM data, equivalent to rigorous inversion. Our iterative migration method is based on the 3D integral equation method with inhomogeneous background conductivity and focusing regularization with a priori terms. Here, we will show that focusing stabilizers recover more geologically realistic models with sharper geoelectric contrasts and boundaries than traditional smooth stabilizers. Additionally, we will show that focusing stabilizers have better convergence properties than smooth stabilizers. Our method is implemented in a fully parallelized code, which makes it practical to run large-scale 3D iterative migration on multi-component, multi-frequency and multi-line CSEM surveys for models with millions of cells. We present a suite of interpretations obtained from different migration scenarios for a 3D CSEM feasibility study computed from a detailed model of the Shtokman gas field in the Russian sector of the Barents Sea.

INPRO Results and Future Tasks: A Look From Russia

Russia is supporting the INPRO Innovative Project, being fulfilled by the IAEA in the field of innovative nuclear energy. The participation of Russia in the INPRO is a part of realization process of Russia’s President Vladimir Putin Initiative, presented at the UN Millennium Summit in September 2000, on creation of new generation nuclear energy, meeting the requirements of sustainable development and excluding using the nuclear weapons technologies and materials. In 2003 the draft INPRO Methodology for assessment of the innovative nuclear energy systems correspondence to the requirements of sustainable development has been developed. At present time the Methodology’s approbation on the examples of national nuclear power technologies is being completed. It is supposed that the Methodology will be used as a navigator for the world nuclear energy development process. The INPRO stresses the timeliness of nuclear energy development problems. The International Organization on nuclear fuel cycle is the key decision of non-proliferation problem. Important are the questions of interaction and particularities of the INPRO and Generation IV programs. State support and international cooperation are conditions for effective development of nuclear energy.© 2004 ASME