V. Kuznetsov Consultant, Austria

17.1 Introduction

The category of small modular reactors (SMRs), includes those with an equivalent electric output less than ~300 MW(e), having a high degree of factory fabrication allowing for transportation of factory-assembled reactor modules or even the whole plant by barge, rail or truck, and with an option to build power stations of flexible capacity through a multi-module approach. Such designs are being developed in the Russian Federation with the view of providing a secure energy supply to small regional energy systems located in remote and hard to access areas of the country where the climate is characterized by extremes and the transportation routes providing connections to the rest of the country are unreliable and available only over a short season during the year. The overall Russian strategy is to have reactors of different capacities from large and very large (1200-1500 MW(e)) to small and very small (10-150 MW(e)), including medium-sized (300-600 MW(e)), to cater for a variety of centralized and regional energy needs stemming from the geographical and climatic conditions of the country (Velikhov, 2008).

Some 60-70% of Russian territory is affected by permafrost which complicates large-scale construction and makes it very expensive to develop and maintain reliable transportation routes. These are the large territories in the north and east of the country, which are characterized by sparse population concentrated mostly around mining and raw-material reprocessing enterprises and military bases. The temperatures in winter may be extremely low and heat for residential needs is, therefore, in demand as well as electricity. Connections to the more populated areas of the country are seasonal (not available in winter) and unreliable (may be not available in some years due to the damage caused by the permafrost melting). In such an environment basic requirements to an energy source are the ability to operate over long periods without the need of fuel delivery and the ability to operate in a co-generation mode, producing heat as well as electricity.

The territories in the Russian north are rich in oil, gas, alumina, nickel, diamonds and other valuable natural resources, the development of which is crucial for the still largely resource export-oriented Russian economy. One of the factors associated with mining is the lifespan of a mine which is often limited to just a few decades (IAEA, 2007). In view of this, relocatable energy sources may have an advantage.

In its north and east, Russia has a long coastal line, with the seaside being covered with ice over a long winter. Small and sparse settlements located along or nearby this

Handbook of Small Modular Nuclear Reactors. http://dx. doi. Org/10.1533/9780857098535.4.423

Copyright © 2015 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

coastal line (typically, they are settlements around local small enterprises or military bases) also need energy and heat and may benefit from autonomous reliable energy sources matching their small or not present electricity grids. Here, transportable barge-mounted nuclear co-generation plants with the on-board fresh fuel reserves and spent fuel storage could be considered as candidates (IAEA, 2009).

Finally, the Russian Federation is considering a project to develop gas and oil production from the shelf of the Barents Sea, located in the country’s north. Nuclear reactors may be employed for such a production, including those located ashore, or on the sea bottom to power the underwater mining plant, or for propulsion purposes on submarines delivering gas to the on-shore terminal (Velikhov, 2008).

Based on data from Russian Federal Tariff Service (2013), the maximum electricity tariff observed in some areas in Russia’s north and east is 20 times higher compared to the minimum one (97 USD cents per kW h versus 5.0 USD cents per kW h). High tariffs mean lack of the centralized grids, difficult conditions for fuel delivery, limited demand or other specific siting conditions making it impractical or impossible to build an economy of scale large power plant. Such areas are, therefore, potential markets for SMRs.

Design development activities for civil SMRs started in Russia in the 1980s and borrowed extensively from the experience in design and operation of the marine propulsion reactors for the navy and the nuclear ice-breaker fleet. This positive experience includes several different designs of pressurized water reactors (PWRs) and one reactor cooled by lead-bismuth eutectics; it amounts to not less than 6500 reactor-years overall with over 260 reactor-years for the reactors of nuclear ice­breakers alone (Sozonyuk, 2011). For comparison, experience in the design and operation of conventional land-based PWRs — the reactors most commonly deployed worldwide, including those of the Russian VVER type — constitutes 8000 reactor — years (Sozonyuk, 2011).

As it will be shown in the following sections, the Russian SMR designs based on PWR technology incorporate both, proven features of the previous-generation marine propulsion reactors and the state-of-the-art features of contemporary VVER-type reactors. The SMR design employing lead-bismuth eutectics technology borrows both, from submarine reactors of the 1980s and from the experience of the Russian sodium-cooled fast reactors.

Comparing the development of SMRs in Russia with that in the USA, the following can be noted:

• The term ‘small modular reactors’, introduced in the US programes on small reactor development in the mid-2000s, is not in common use in Russia, although many of the Russian designs share common design approaches with the SMRs being currently developed in the USA. In this, Russian activities for such SMRs were started earlier, in mid-1980s.

• Unlike US designs, multi-module plants of flexible capacity and underground location of the reactor modules are not commonly considered in Russia. However, twin units are commonly considered and several of the Russian SMRs are designed to be located on non-self-propelled barges, while at least one design concept is being considered for seabed location.

• Russian designers commonly accept SMRs to be more expensive sources of electricity compared to the state-of-the-art large nuclear power plants (NPPs) and do not believe they may directly compete with larger plants, say, through shorter construction periods or multi-module plant configurations. Instead, they target particular niche markets where electricity costs are high, where co-generation, long refueling interval or plant relocatability are assets, where transportation routes are seasonal, where the demand is limited and siting conditions are specific (i. e., no water in winter due to deep freezing of rivers or other water reservoirs). According to Russian Federal Tariff Service (2013), there are many such niche markets in Russia and, based on data from p. 113 of ‘ Current status, technical feasibility and economics of small nuclear reactors’ (NEA-OECD, 2011), similar conditions are also being observed in several other countries. The above-mentioned unique standpoint is because Russian policy is to have large, medium and small reactors on a complementary, not a competitive, basis. Complementarity is pursued in view of different niches for reactors of different capacity available domestically and, potentially, worldwide.

• As in the US case, Russian SMRs are being designed and licensed to operate first in their country of origin. Should the experience of their operation be positive, they could later be offered on world markets with some features tailored for the needs of such markets, e. g., co-generation option with heat production changed to co-generation option with seawater desalination.

The objective of this chapter is to present the design and safety features, including defense-in-depth, probabilistic safety goals and, specifically, design features for protection against external event impacts, the design and operating characteristics and the anticipated applications for a variety of SMRs being developed or deployed in the Russian Federation.

In line with this objective, Sections 17.2-17.4 present SMR designs being developed or already developed by the Russian design organizations/companies OKBM Afrikantov (2013), AKME Engineering (2013) and NIKIET (2013), respectively. These sections also highlight the on-going R&D for the corresponding SMR projects.

Another objective of this chapter is to present the deployment status and prospects for the Russian SMRs, which is accomplished in Section 17.5. In this section the design and licensing status of SMRs is highlighted. Section 17.5 also provides the available economic data and presents the prospects for SMR deployment in the indigenous and foreign markets.

Section 17.6 presents the future trends for the barge-mounted, nuclear ice-breaker and land-based SMRs developed in the Russian Federation. A conclusion is drawn in Section 17.7 and, finally, section 17.8 provides a short description of sources of further information and advice, including a brief commentary on key publications and databases of International Organizations and national trade/professional bodies, research and interest groups and web sites. The chapter is concluded by a comprehensive list of references.

The data of Russian Federal Tariff Service (2013) indicates that the spread of electricity costs in the Russian Federation is quite even, leaving a potential market space not only for large and small but also for medium-sized reactors. Design concepts of such reactors are also being developed in the Russian Federation and, although they are beyond the scope of this book, Section 17.8 lists such design concepts and points to the best available sources of further information.