Register for free to join our community of investors and share your ideas. You will also get access to streaming quotes, interactive charts, trades, portfolio, live options flow and more tools.
Register for free to join our community of investors and share your ideas. You will also get access to streaming quotes, interactive charts, trades, portfolio, live options flow and more tools.
Russia Making Its Move In India
Russia: Another bear hug in the offing?
Natteri Adigal, 04 February 2008, Monday
Views:: 331 Comments: 0
Russia will sign a nuclear agreement with India without waiting for withdrawal of international restrictions on technology transfer to New Delhi. But its international commitments to the NSG have delayed the Koodankulam Project’s expansion.
Rate this article: Rating 3.0 out of 2 votes cast
merinews Web
Today's Best Stories
The fallout of Uranium mining
Treading the Capitalist path Leftist style
An open letter to Raj Thackeray
Hannah Montana fights with Rambo to score in Super Bowl
Most Popular Stories
Could Heath Ledger's death be prevented?
Is the software profession losing its charm?
Jodha - Akbar or Mariam Zamani - Akbar?
An open letter to Raj Thackeray
Be a Citizen Journalist Submit News / Articles
Rewards & Recognition C - Log: Citizens' Blog
Merinews Photos
Submit... Browse...
Mera mall
Bigger Than Big Sale by Rediff. Heavy discount till 28 jan
Olympus 7.1 Mp Digital Camera at Rs.4995
Sabse Sasta Din by futurebazaar (25-26-27) jan. Save up to 80%
42% discount on JVC video camera
34% discount on Oxford Dictionary
PRIME MINISTER Victor Zubkov of the Russian Federation will undertake an official visit to India on Feb 12. No doubt the visit comes at a time when the Indo-Russian military equipment related business relations are passing through a discernible chill. India had been a willing chump, gobbling up shoddy goods from USSR for several decades during the cold war era. But the situation changed drastically after the balkanisation of the powerful Soviet Union, which was a superpower then. With the advent of economic liberalisation and globalisation, India is no more the captive market it once used to be, particularly for sale of military equipment.
Top defence services officers frown at the dubious quality of Russian arms, ammunition, vessels and aircraft. They are increasingly raising their voice against violation of delivery commitments in respect of spares, resulting in the loss of billions of rupees. Routine crashes of MIG fighters arising from inordinate delays in supply of maintenance spares have displeased the Air Force while the Navy is seething with anger at the repeated let down in respect of the Admiral Gorshkov carrier deal as well as other orders addressing the Navy’s modernisation. The Army too is not very happy with the Russian supply of obsolete equipment and insists on modern gadgets to keep pace with the times. Yet, the Russian PM is quite optimistic about swinging mega deals with India.
The game plan attempted by the Russians for reversing the falling trend in military commerce is to give the emerging nuclear power sector, the same ‘bear hug’ they once gave India’s steel and military sectors. Russia has started leveraging its old ‘friends’ in the different ‘left’ parties of India. The comrades have always been loyal to the erstwhile superpower and share a fine equation with highly placed bureaucrats in Indian PSUs (Public Sector Units).
“Nothing prevents Russia and India from signing a four-reactor accord within the framework of their international obligations,” Russian foreign minister Sergei Lavrov said, while preparing the groundwork for his Prime Minister’s February visit to India. He was however noncommittal about Viktor Zubkov being able to sign it during the visit. Russia’s deputy Prime Minister Alexander Zhukov said in early 2007 that his country could build, apart from the Koodankulam project in the southern coast of Tamil Nadu, six more reactors at other sites. At Koodankulam, the original proposal was to set up two VVER type reactors of 1000 MW each, which was later to be hiked to six units. The deal for the additional four plants had reached the very top of the decision-making apparatus. However, Prime Minister Manmohan Singh’s visit to Moscow later in the year came a cropper and the signing of the deal was called off at the last minute. Russia is now anxious and willing to sign a nuclear agreement with India without waiting for the lifting of international restrictions on technology transfer to New Delhi.
At a New Year reception hosted by him to the foreign press, Lavrov declared, “We are ready to sign the nuclear agreement any time which suits India.” He underscored that Moscow is willing to “go as far as India was willing and ready for” in civilian nuclear cooperation. The Russian confidence stems from the high status still being enjoyed by powerful bureaucrats in the AEC (Atomic Energy Commission) and the monopoly enjoyed by the nuclear power utility, NPCIL (Nuclear Power Corporation of India Ltd) despite pathetic performance. The said bureaucrats, who shifted their loyalty from the Congress party to the BJP during the late 1990s, now have the comrades to back them up and protect them from competitive forces.
It is of note that telecommunication is the only field in India where corporate houses with global connections like Reliance, Tata and Airtel have ushered in a paradigm shift in customer orientation, ending the monopoly of PSUs. In fields like aviation, the public sector babus of Air India and Indian (Airlines) are even now able to manipulate their erstwhile friends in AAI (Airports Authority of India), which abuses its monopoly position to deny a level playing field to private airlines. The Railways too have made a start with privatisation. The wily officers of the atomic energy department, on the other hand, have been able to completely shut out any semblance of accountability. Any public scrutiny of their affairs is scuttled by the brilliant officers through ingenious ‘management’ of the politicos and the media.
In an obvious attempt to create an atmosphere conducive for signing big deals with the Russians, Anil Kakodkar, chairman of India’s AEC has announced ahead of Victor Zubkov’s visit that the first 1000 MW unit of the Koodankulam nuclear power project would begin power generation in March 2008. If one is to share his optimism and that of SK Jain, chairman and managing director of NPCIL, the Russian company ASE (AtomStroyExport) will complete the second unit too by the end of 2008. Going by records, these claims have to be taken with tonnes of salt, not just a pinch of it! AEC is not known to be in the habit of keeping its promises!
Normally, AEC bosses make forecasts that extend into some obscure future, by which time the boss making the forecast will have comfortably retired. Only last month, NPCIL said at a function that the first unit was expected to reach ‘advanced stages of completion’ by December end. It has just erected the reactor pressure vessel of unit 2, which is expected to become operational only in late 2009. It is of note that the two light water reactors coming up in partnership with the Russian Federation use a technology entirely different from the PHWR (Pressurised Heavy Water Reactors) technology so far employed by NPCIL to build reactors. In contrast with natural uranium employed in PHWRs, the LWRs are supposed to run on enriched uranium supplied by the Russians during their lifetime.
The Russian company has recently signed a $ 5.8 billion contract with NEK (Nationalna Elektricheska Kompania) of Bulgaria to build two VVER reactors for the first time in Europe. The plant will be built at the existing but vacant site at Belene in northern Bulgaria. According to World Nuclear News (WNN), the Belene reactors will be AES-92 model VVER-1000 reactors boasting of a “unique combination of active and passive safety systems.” They will be operated using control and automation systems from an Areva/Siemens consortium called Carsib.
The Koodankulam project in India is the first project of ASE to feature the AES-92 model VVERs. Its previous model AES-91 VVER reactors began operations at Tianwan in China in 2007; it is close to finishing the Bushehr nuclear power plant in Iran. The reactors supplied for the Koodankulam project, however, cannot have Carsib control and automation systems, because NSG (Nuclear Suppliers Group) has not given its approval to export the equipment to India. Moreover, the fuel supply will come under the IAEA safeguards (International Atomic Energy Agency), which will insist on full safety. In the absence of control and automation systems, it is anyone’s guess if these reactors costing over $ 4 billion will ever go on-line. “Russia’s international commitments to the Nuclear Suppliers Group have delayed the Koodankulam Nuclear Power Project’s expansion plans,” Kakodkar conceded after his recent visit to the plant. Meanwhile, the land acquisition process is nearing completion at Jaitapur in Ratnagiri district of Maharashtra. The complex will house up to 10,000 MW nuclear power plants after the Indo-US deal comes through. NPCIL is going ahead with the pre-project work. But it is unlikely to make any meaningful contribution to the projects given its limited expertise.
More Demand For NPPs
Poyry in consortium to study environmental impact of new Lithuania nuclear plant
02.04.08, 7:06 AM ET
Popular Videos
Katherine Heigl Keeps Busy
NauticaÂ’s Extreme Look
Fashion Week Kicks-Off
Coca-Cola's Booming Business
The Future Of Financials
Most Popular Stories
Top Catch-Them-Before- They're-Gone Stores
How Teens View Fame
Your Strange Medical Symptoms Solved
The Decade's Biggest Wealth Winners
Greatest Athletic Achievements
HELSINKI (Thomson Financial) - Lithuania's energy company Lietuvos Energija said it has awarded a consortium formed by Finland's Poyry Energy and local scientists a 1.3 mln eur contract for an evaluation study of the environmental impact of a new nuclear power plant.
The state-owned company is planning to replace the country's Soviet-era nuclear power plant Ignalina, which operates Chernobyl-type reactors, with a new plant.
The Ignalina plant, an 1980s facility, supplies electricity to Lithuania, Latvia, Estonia, plus their neighbour Poland.
Lithuania pledged to close the facility by 2010 during its membership talks with the European Union, which all four countries joined in 2004.
The new plant is meant to come on stream by 2015, while the initial environmental study by August 2008, with the final document due to be ready in February 2009, Lietuvos Energija said.
You have to admit the stock price is holding strong at these levels. Although it isn't going up, yet, at least it isn't going down anymore. I still thinnk it's the calm before the ATOLL numbers and uplifting.
LOL, I agree with both points.
Why do you say they would suck?
So why isn't the stock price going up then?
Today many states have begun to realize the importance of nuclear energy
In 1994 Russia and the United States signed HEU-LEU or “Megatons to Megawatts” Agreement envisaging processing of highly enriched uranium extracted from Russian nuclear weapons into low enriched uranium for further supply to the United States. The agreement was not very profitable for Russia. Later, our country faced even more serious antidumping restrictions.
The signing of an amendment to the Agreement Suspending the Antidumping Investigation on Uranium from the Russian Federation by the head of Rosatom Sergey Kiriyenko and US Secretary of Commerce Carlos Gutierrez is a constructive step. It allows us to revise our price policy and to get one more niche on the market.
Since the conclusion of the HEU-LEU agreement, the uranium price has grown by 5–7 times. So, we will certainly get profit from the signed amendment.
Now that the world is getting increasingly short of gas and oil, the United States is beginning to realize that it is necessary to actively develop nuclear power engineering. In their turn, the US nuclear operators are interested in making new contracts and getting low-enriched uranium at market prices.
Today, many states have begun to realize the importance of nuclear energy. Even the countries of the Persian Gulf are going to start developing nuclear power production. All those countries wish to enter the market. Here we have a number of advantages and this amendment will certainly enhance them.
News out of Egypt:
Egypt revisits nuclear option
by ArabianBusiness.com staff writer on Monday, 04 February 2008
Egypt dropped its nuclear programme following the Chernobyl disaster in 1986.The Egyptian government is pressing ahead with plans to revive its nuclear energy programme.
The Egypt State Information Service quoted the country's minister for electricity and power as saying that further studies were being conducted for a potential nuclear facility to be built in El-Dabaa, some 100 km west of Alexandria, on the country's Mediterranean coast.
El-Dabaa was originally chosen as the site for Egypt's first nuclear power station back in 1980. But the government later abandoned its nuclear programme, following the disaster at the Chernobyl power plant in Ukraine in 1986.
Story continues below ↓
advertisement
Egypt hopes to build a 1 000 MW nuclear power plant at an estimated cost of US $1.5 billion, according to local media reports from 2006.
Speaking during a recent tour of projects in Aswan, the minister, Hassan Younes, also said that the authority was assessing uranium reserves in nine locations across the country to determine the economic feasibility of setting up nuclear programme. The study is being carried out in conjunction with the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA).
Younes commented that his ministry had worked out a draft nuclear bill, outlining future cooperation with the IAEA. "The bill, which will be presented to the government for approval in March, sets a legal framework for co-operation with the IAEA until 2030," he said. "The Egyptian programme is transparent and certified by the international community and the IAEA."
Proof of Growth in the NPP Industry
RIGA, Feb 1 (Reuters) - Economy ministers from the Baltic states and Poland are to meet next week to talk on delayed plans for a new nuclear power plant aimed at replacing one Lithuania has to shut down at the end of 2009.
Talks on the new plant have become bogged down due to Polish demands for a third of the power, though four partners are involved. Poland has linked its demand to agreeing to build a power link between its grid and that of Lithuania.
The Latvian Economy Ministry said in a statement that the economy ministers of the four countries would have a working meeting and get an update on the nuclear plant plans as well as the project for the power bridge to Poland and one to Sweden.
A spokesman for the Lithuanian Economy Ministry said the ministers were expected to sign a document confirming their interest in the new nuclear plant, though no other breakthrough was expected. The meeting is to take place on Feb. 4.
The countries want to build a nuclear power plant with a capacity of between 3,200 and 3,400 megawatts at a cost of about $9 billion.
It would replace the Ignalina plant, which Lithuania is to close as part of its agreement to enter the European Union in 2004. The EU wants to close the plant as it has the same reactors as the one which blew up at Chernobyl in 1986.
The countries hope the new plant will lessen long-term dependence on Russian gas, the main fuel for their conventional power plants. Poland relies on coal, but also wants to diversify its energy sources.
The signing of a concrete agreement on the new plant between the four countries has been delayed several times, leading to fears the 2015 start date will be delayed.
Lithuania is forming a merged national power company to give it the capacity to raise finance for its share of the new nuclear power plant. A vote on the merger is due on Friday.
Sweden's economy minister, Maud Olofsson, will also be in Vilnius next week, on Feb 5-6. Diversifying power sources also involves Lithuania building power links to Sweden and Poland. (Reporting by Patrick Lannin; editing by James Jukwey)
Starting to move up again :)
What do you guys think of this company? NNRI aquisition?
Thorium Power, Ltd.
8300 Greensboro Drive
Suite 800
McLean, VA 22102
United States - Map
Phone: 703-918-4904
Fax: 703-935-1490
Web Site: http://www.thoriumpower.com
I think it will stay in the .80 range until news comes out. Seems like everyone is just waiting for it and not committing.
Gibber, I bet you wished you had bought at .75.
We have movement upwards. I'm trying not to get too excited.
Along with the other news, and according to the PR, we should be hearing about the contract with the German Medical Facility soon.
Sorry, I am from the USA.
– This is a big achievement of Russia on the market of nuclear technologies
The signing of the contract between Atomstroyexport and the National Electric Company of Bulgaria for the construction of Belene NPP is a positive event. It is one more step in our policy to promote our nuclear technologies in the world.
I agree with our President that Russia and Bulgaria have old and strong historical, political and cultural ties. We had quite serious economic relations. In the 1990s they declined but today they are reviving. I think that we have very good prospects in the energy sector.
Europe is facing energy crisis and many EU countries, particularly, the United Kingdom wish to build nuclear power plants. Those who will succeed in developing nuclear technologies will be able to develop their economies. The choice of partners is a serious problem. We have proved that we are reliable partners and I think that Bulgaria has made a right choice.
Where's the cheese!
Dido
Gibber, It reached .75, ready to buy?
Wednesday, January 30, 2008
PCCI foundation prefers nuclear power
By Gil Severino
SOMETIME in April of 1986, the reactor accident at Chernobyl in Ukraine gave 'radioactive' energy source a very bad name.
Same here in the Philippines, when former President Ferdinand Marcos' Bataan nuclear power reactor was overflowing with corruption entanglements, the 1987 Cory Constitution enshrined its entombment.
Sun.Star Network Online's coverage of the Sinulog 2008 Festival
Not the Philippine Chamber of Commerce and Industry Foundation, Inc. under the presidency of the Bacolod-born, Hiligaynon speaking, Melito Sison-Salazar, Jr.
In their round table discussion, PCCI Foundation is pushing militantly for the establishment of the nuclear energy to power the Philippine industry on a massive scale.
Salazar said nuclear power is not expensive because one nuclear power reactor can energize the whole of Luzon and even the major cities of the Visayas all at the same time.
"Had Marcos perfected the Bataan nuclear project with nary a single corruption, the system could have been perfected and by now, the Filipinos can say goodbye to all those cost of electric bill to its entombment," Salazar idealized.
Here in Bacolod, bio-environmentalist Nathan Luther studied the American experience where for the past 55 years, no leaks or fission occurred and the Americans are still enjoying "the great way," - cheap electric bills.
But the discharges and waste? There are 'fast' reactors that can burn them now. All around the Philippines, countries have nuclear reactor plants. None of them are worrying about nuclear wastes.
Are they dumping them somewhere? No they are burned.
"The Economist" magazine called it the nuclear power's new age. The Philippines can buy it wholesale.
I wonder if NNRI or ATOLL has any involvement with Iran's NPP. Iran wants to build more NPP.
Good post. I understand your points. I post here because I like to talk about the stock and hear peoples opinions on a daily basis. If this were a well established company like GE then I probably wouldn't be here (I own GE and never look at it until I buy more). It's my personal preference, you might see different and that's your preference. I would like to see you post more because it seems you are knowledgable about NNRI. I also understand that it takes a long time to get a contract in this industry. But if I see that, based on PR's, NNRI has a goal set by January 2008, then I expect to see it accomplished near that date. That's what I am waiting for now.
My prediction/opinion:
The stock seems to have bottomed to me as it has been trading from .78 to .83 range for about 6 days now. I believe that it is waiting for some news which should come out soon. Hopefully it will be good news and the stock will begin to rise. What do you guys think?
Yes, big time.
Ancient Chinese Secret
Not Pollution Research & Control. Pricester.com (PRCC)
Anybody have any comments about this Co.? Revenues are up huge and a new aquisition.
It's pending the audit.
It's been holding at the .80 level for about 5 days. Let's hope it stays that way until news comes out. I think it will.
They haven't bought the Water Co. yet. Nice try. Read the first line.
The Company is expected to complete the audit and evaluation of the IC-based smart card water-meter company within this month. The acquired company has the annual production capacity of 300,000 units of such high-technology water-meters.
A draft law regulating the utilisation of nuclear energy has been worked out in Belarus, Deputy Energy Minister Mikhail Mikhadyuk said during consultations with a delegation of the European Commission in Minsk on January 29.
He remarked, the bill had been put together taking into account laws of countries with developed nuclear power engineering, with consultations with the IAEA held. “Soon the final edition of the law will be forwarded for expert evaluation to the IAEA,” said the official. After the document is brought in to the Belarusian parliament, the document will be also presented for consideration of the European Commission.
According to Mikhail Mikhadyuk, other legal instruments are being worked out in Belarus to regulate the creation and exploitation of the atomic power station in the country. Their development also undergoes international expert evaluation.
“We cooperate very tightly with the IAEA in order to make the implementation of the project for building a nuclear power plant in Belarus open, transparent and qualified. We understand the responsibility we will bear before the international community for at least 100 years,” stressed the Deputy Energy Minister. In view of this the most reliable and safest project will be chosen to build the Belarusian nuclear power plant.
At present several potential locations are being surveyed to choose the optimal construction site. “We also analyse intermediate results concerning the location choice with IAEA inspectors,” said Mikhail Mikhadyuk. Preparations are underway in Belarus to hold an international tender for the nuclear power plant construction. Three main groups of companies are considered as potential suppliers: an American-Japanese group, a French-German group, and Russian company Atomstroyexport.
At this point, only time will tell.
My take is that something good better happen soon or this stock will be at .50 again before we know it. I hope management doesn't let us down.
2 days left in January, will we see news? Or will we be let down again?
I agree
We've dipped below .80, great. It's looking like .75 might be right.
FYI
I Know it's old info. thought I'd post it anyway.
TRUMEM
http://www.wmsym.org/abstracts/2003/pdfs/258.pdf
APPLICATION OF MEMBRANE SORPTION REACTOR TECHNOLOGY FOR LRW MANAGEMENT
Yuri Glagolenko, Evgeny Dzekun
FSUE "Mayak", Russia
Boris Myasoedov
Institute of Geochemistry and Analytical Chemistry of the Russian Academy of Sciences
Vladimir Gelis, Evgeny Kozlitin and Vitaly Milyutin
Institute of Physical Chemistry of the Russian Academy of Sciences
Lev Trusov
Association "Aspect", Russia
Vadim Tarassov
"Aspect USA", USA
Mike Rengel, Stewart M. Mackay and Michael E. Johnson
CH2M HILL, USA
ABSTRACT
A new membrane-sorption technology has been recently developed and industrially implemented in Russia for the
treatment of the Liquid (Low-Level) Radioactive Waste (LRW).
The first step of the technology is a precipitation of the radionuclides and/or their adsorption
onto sorbents of small particle size. The second step is filtration of the precipitate/sorbent
through the metal-ceramic membrane, Trumem. The unique feature of the technology is a
Membrane-Sorption Reactor (MSR), in which the precipitation / sorption and the filtration of the
radionuclides occur simultaneously, in one stage. This results in high efficiency, high
productivity and compactness of the equipment, which are the obvious advantages of the
developed technology. Two types of MSR based on Flat Membranes device and Centrifugal
Membrane device were developed. The advantages and disadvantages of application of each type
of the reactors are discussed.
The MSR technology has been extensively tested and efficiently implemented at "Mayak " nuclear facility near
Chelyabinsk, Russia as well as at other Russian sites. The results of this and other applications of the MSR
technology at the different Russian nuclear facilities are discussed. The results of the first industrial applications of
the MSR technology for radioactive waste treatment in Russia and analysis of the available information about LRW
accumulated in other countries imply that this technology can be successfully used for the Low Level Radioactive
Waste treatment in the USA and in other nuclear countries.
INTRODUCTION
Modern technologies for the reprocessing of spent nuclear fuel from power nuclear reactors generate substantial
quantities of the liquid radioactive waste (LRW) of different radioactivity level and complex chemical composition.
Taking into account the LRW accumulated up to date as a result of defense programs, the gross radionuclide
WM’03 Conference, February 23-27, 2003, Tucson, AZ
Page - 2 -
quantity currently in storage at Russian nuclear complexes and abroad is about 109 Curies. The most toxic
radionuclides contained in the waste are the long-lived 137Cs, 90Sr, 235U, 239Pu, and 241,243Am, with up to 80% of the
radioactivity being accounted for by the 137Cs radionuclide.
Several approaches used for the LRW treatment and conditioning are as follows:
• tank storage;
• deep injection;
• LRW treatment aimed at the separation of the long-lived radionuclides followed by conversion of the
separated fractions into low soluble compounds.
Tank storage is the simplest way, however, is has the significant drawbacks associated with deterioration of the tank
over time and possible release of radionuclides into the environment. In the case of deep injection of radioactive
waste into the geological collector layers, the monitoring of the injected waste behavior is very complicated.
Long-lived radionuclide separation technology currently employs the following techniques and combinations
thereof:
• extraction processes;
• sorption processes;
• precipitation processes.
An extraction technique using the chlorinated cobalt dicarbollide (CCD) followed by precipitation of rare earths and
transuranic elements (TRU) elements as oxalates from the process raffinate is widely used in Russia for separation
of 137Cs, 90Sr, and TRU elements from the high-level radioactive waste (HLRW) solutions. Full-scale
implementation of this technology in Russia has allowed us to separate and convert into glass matrices over 50
million Curies of the long-lived radionuclides (1, 2). The principal flowsheet for this technology is shown in Fig. 1.
An inorganic, potassium-copper ferrocyanide (FS-10 type sorbent) sorption technology was used for separation of
137Cs from the acidic HLRW solutions (3). To date, this technology has been used to remove over 50 million Curies
of 137Cs from HLRW and either convert the 137Cs into a glass form or sell the 137Cs as a radiation source. The total
quantity of the long-lived radionuclides vitrified to date at the Production Association Mayak exceeds 300, 000, 000
Curie.
Organic ion exchange resins, inorganic natural and synthetic sorbents are widely used for the low-level radioactive
waste (LLRW) treatment. Those processes were extensively studied and reported. As an example, over 150000 m3
of various LLRW were decontaminated at the Production Association “Mayak”, Oziorsk, Russia using the inorganic
ferrocyanide containing sorbent.
Precipitation techniques were extensively used at the earlier stages of the radiochemical technology (4). However,
the complex problem of the liquid-solid phase separation was not solved until recently, and precipitation processes,
although simple and straightforward, were losing their significance. Clarification of solutions by means of
conventional batch filtration generated more secondary waste on account of the need for regenerating the filtering
element. Organic polymer membranes widely used in water conditioning systems appeared to be not suitable for the
purpose in most cases due to their low radiation stability.
WM’03 Conference, February 23-27, 2003, Tucson, AZ
Page - 3 -
The primary goal of our work was to develop a high performance LRW decontamination
technology using the combination of the old-fashioned precipitation processes with the state-ofthe-
art metal-ceramic “TruMem” membranes. These membranes were installed in centrifugal
filtering units operating in the continuous mode in the Membrane Sorption Reactor (MSR)
facility.
Feed solution from SNF and defense
plutonium reprocessing
Extraction
with CCD OP–10
Cs + Sr
fraction
Evaporation
Vitrification
Precipitation of oxalates
REE, Am, Cm
fraction
Evaporation
Vitrification
ILW
tank
storage
Fig. 1 Principal Flowsheet of the Separation Technology for LRW Separation
Digestion in HNO3
WM’03 Conference, February 23-27, 2003, Tucson, AZ
Page - 4 -
MEMBRANE SORPTION REACTOR DESIGN
The “TruMem” membrane is the main element of the MSR. It consists of three layers:
• support layer 200 micron thick, made of stainless steel;
• intermediate diffusion layer;
• separation layer made of the porous titanium or aluminum oxide-based ceramics (TiO2 or Al2O3) with
available pore size of 0.03 to 0.4 micron.
Separation characteristics of the “TruMem” membranes are given in the Table 1 using the LRW decontamination as
an example.
Table 1. Separation Characteristics of the “TruMem” Membranes
Membrane porosity
Radionuclide Feed Solution, Bq 0.05 micron 0.1 micron 0.4 micron
Gross β-activity 19150 13180 13420 13140
144Ce 550 < 2.3 < 2.3 < 2.3
154Eu 7030 < 2.0 < 2.0 < 2.0
241Am 1620 < 0.79 < 0.79 < 0.79
243Am 30 < 0.36 < 0.36 < 0.36
137Cs 1840 1670 1850 1870
The data in Table 1 demonstrates the ability of the TruMem membranes to retain the readily hydrolyzed
radionuclide species. Obviously, the membranes would effectively retain any fine dispersed particles as well. High
hardness of the ceramics provides for low abrasive wear.
Different layouts of the continuously operated filtration process are shown in Fig. 2. As shown in Fig. 2 the
concentration polarization, i.e. the deposit formed on the membrane surface could be removed either by high tangent
flow velocity (flat membrane unit) or by the impact of the centrifugal force and high shear stress (centrifugal
membrane unit).
Fig. 2. Different process layout with the membrane filtering elements
WM’03 Conference, February 23-27, 2003, Tucson, AZ
Page - 5 -
In our work, the simultaneous processes of the radionuclide concentrating by means of sorption on a fine dispersed
selective sorbent or co-precipitation with a special reagent additives and the continuous filtration to achieve the
liquid - solid phase separation were combined in the Membrane Sorption Reactor unit (see Fig. 3).
1 Housing 9 Separator element (or vice versa)
2 Lid 10 Peripheral collector for the 1st product
3 Inlet nipple – feed solution 11 Outlet nipple – 1st product
4 Shaft seal 12 Outlet nipple – 2nd product
5 Central shaft 13 Reaction chamber
6 Wall perforation of the shaft internal cavity 14 Inlet nipple – modifying additives – chemical
reagents and nano-sorbents
7 Membrane and separator elements – complete
set
15 Mixer shaft
8 Membrane element
Fig. 3. Schematic Drawing of the Membrane Sorption Reactor
WM’03 Conference, February 23-27, 2003, Tucson, AZ
Page - 6 -
Our MSR design provides the possibility for the sorption or co-precipitation processes to occur directly in the
reactor chamber, thus allowing for efficient reagent utilization, prompt removal of the radionuclide concentrate from
the system, and high precipitate concentrating factors.
Basic parameters of the MSR unit were determined using the results of from processing alkaline LRW to remove
137Cs by precipitation with sodium tetraphenylborate (Na-TPB) additive. The data from processing the LRW to
remove 137Cs are given in Tables 2 – 5.
Table 2. Precipitation of Cesium with NaTPB from High-Level Radioactive Waste
Solutions with Different Na Concentration
[137Cs feed] = 3.7 g/L. Precipitating agent additive in excess of Cs/NaTPB < 1/20
[Na], mole/L Precipitation factor, %
1 1.10—9 > 99.9
2 0.2 > 99.9
3 0.5 > 99.9
4 1.0 > 99.9
5 1.5 > 99.9
6 20. > 99.9
Table 3. Precipitation of Cesium with Na TPB from High-Level Radioactive Waste
Solutions with Different Na Concentration
[137Cs feed] = 30 mg/L. Precipitating agent additive in excess of Cs/NaTPB = 1/5
[Na], mole/L Precipitation factor, %
1 0.5 99.2
2 2.0 97.9
3 4.0 94.8
4 6.0 92.0
Table 4. Effect of Added TPB Quantity on the Precipitation Factor of Cesium
[Na]=2
mole/L
Cs/Na TPB ratio,
mole/mole
Cs precipitation factor,
%
1 1/5 99.94
2 1/4 99.94
3 1/3 99.95
4 1/2 99.9
5 1/1.5 99.8
WM’03 Conference, February 23-27, 2003, Tucson, AZ
Page - 7 -
Table 5. Dynamics of Cs-TPB Precipitation from Solutions of Different Composition
Using the data from Tables 2 – 5 for guidance, we selected the optimum conditions for the precipitation of cesium,
the time of contact for the feed solution and the reagent additives to determine the optimal volume of the reaction
chamber. Taking into account the filtering capacity of the “TruMem” membranes for the solutions of different
composition, we determined the surface area of the membranes to be installed in the unit to provide the throughput
needed. The desired precipitate concentrating factor is established by varying the ratio of the feed flow rate and the
concentrate removal rate. In Fig. 4, the general view of the semi-large scale MSR facility with capacity of 150 L/hr
is shown.
RESULTS OF THE MSR OPERATION
[Na] = 2 mole/L
(NaOH/NaNO3 =2/1)
[Na] = 2 mole/L
(NaOH/NaNO3 =2/1)
Precipitation time,
min
Cs precipitation factor,
%
Precipitation time, min Cs precipitation factor,
%
1 1.0 99.94 1 1.0 99.58
2 3.0 99.93 2 2.0 98.88
3 5.0 99.93 3 3.0 98.57
4 60 99.85
5 180 99.75
6 360 99.65
7 960 99.5
Fig. 4. General View of the Semi-Large Scale 150 L/hr MSR Facility
WM’03 Conference, February 23-27, 2003, Tucson, AZ
Page - 8 -
The Membrane Sorption Reactor was used for decontamination of low-level LRW of different chemical and
radiochemical composition. The results are summarized in Table 5. The data prove the high efficiency of the MSR
facility for decontamination of radioactive waste.
Table 5. LRW Decontamination With the Membrane Sorption Reactor
Firm, enterprise Volume and composition and of the
solution
Results
1 NPP “Ekoatom”
Nuclear powered submarine
decommissioning solutions
Waste volume – 50 m3
Suspensions 980 mg/L
Petroleum products 230 mg/l
137Cs – 103 Bq/L
90Sr – 103 Bq/L
60Co – 102 Bq/L
Suspensions < 3 mg/L
Petroleum products < 0.05 mg/l
137Cs < 0.3 Bq/L
90Sr < 0.3 Bq/L
60Co < 0.3 Bq/L
2 MosNPO “Radon”
Technological solutions
Waste volume – 120 m3
137Cs – 3. 103 Bq/L
90Sr – 2. 102 Bq/L
239Pu – 2.5. 103 Bq/L
Suspensions < 3 mg/L
Petroleum products < 0.05 mg/l
137Cs < 0.3 Bq/L
90Sr < 0.3 Bq/L
239Pu < 0.3 Bq/L
3 RTP “Atomflot”
Murmansk Shipping Co.
Decontamination solutions
Waste volume – 75 m3
Suspensions 10 g/L
Salt bearing 4.0 g/l
137Cs – 103 Bq/L
90Sr – 102 Bq/L
Suspensions < 3 mg/L
Hardness salts < 0.05 mg/l
137Cs < 0.3 Bq/L
90Sr < 0.3 Bq/L
4 Hydrometallurgy
plant waste
V = 120 m3/year
Radionuclides 239Pu, 241Am,
235,238U
= 103 – 104 Bq/L
pH = 7 – 14
Salt bearing 900 – 2000
mg/L
Σ 239Pu, 241Am, 235,238U
α < 1 Bq/L
5 Low-level RW of PA
“Mayak”
V = 20 m3/year
Radionuclides 137Cs, 90Sr,
FP, 241Am, 244Cm
= 102 Bq/L
= 103 Bq/L
pH = 7 – 9
Suspensions 1000 – 2000
mg/L
Σα < 0.1 Bq/L
Σβ < 1 Bq/L
Suspensions 3 mg/L
The MSR was used as the baseline technology for the facilities currently being designed for decontamination of
large LRW quantities at the Production Association “Mayak”. The design parameters for the waste type and quantity
to be treated are given in Table 6.
WM’03 Conference, February 23-27, 2003, Tucson, AZ
Page - 9 -
Table 6. MSR Facilities Under Design
Composition and volume of the feed Results
1 Hydrometallurgy plant waste
V = 120 000 m3/year
Radionuclides 239Pu, 241Am, 235,238U
= 103 – 104 Bq/L
pH = 7 – 14
Salt bearing 900 – 2000 mg/L
Σ 239Pu, 241Am, 235,238U
α < 1 Bq/L
2 Low-level RW of PA “Mayak”
V = 400 000 m3/year
Radionuclides 137Cs, 90Sr, FP, 241Am, 244Cm
= 102 Bq/L
= 103 Bq/L
pH = 7 – 9
Suspensions 1000 – 2000 mg/L
Σα < 0.1 Bq/L
Σβ < 1 Bq/L
Suspensions 3 mg/L
3 Solution after VVER fuel element digestion
600 m3/y
137Cs – up to 2 g/L
Suspensions up to 1 g/L
137Cs < 0.01 g/L
Suspensions 1-2 mg/L
POTENTIAL APPLICATIONS FOR TREATING ALKALINE RADIOACTIVE WASTE
IN THE UNITED STATES
While there are numerous potential applications of the Membrane Sorption Reactor technology for treatment of lowlevel
radioactive wastes in the United States, the following are two specific examples where this technology could
be used during treatment of wastes stored at Department of Energy facilities. The Department of Energy currently
manages approximately 206 million liters of alkaline radioactive wastes at the Hanford Site in Washington and an
additional 140 million liters of alkaline radioactive wastes at the Savannah River Site in South Carolina. The
alkaline radioactive wastes are stored in underground tanks at these sites and are comprised of salt cake, sludges,
and supernatant phases.
The Savannah River Site (SRS) currently plans to dissolve a portion of the saltcake waste and solidify a low curies
fraction in a cementitous waste form (SaltStone). Another fraction of dissolved saltcake waste may also be
solidified in SaltStone following removal of transuranic elements and 90Sr by adsorption using monosodium titanate.
The SRS currently plans to separate the monosodium titanate sorbent from the alkaline waste solution using sintered
metal, crossflow filter units. The high curie fraction of dissolved saltcake and supernatants would also be processed
to separate transuranic elements and 90Sr by adsorption using monosodium titanate, followed by 137Cs separation
using a solvent extraction process. The pretreated supernatants would then be solidified in SaltStone. Alternative
reagents (e.g., sodium permanganate) are being evaluated for removal of transuranic elements and 90Sr from the
supernatant and dissolved saltcake wastes.
SRS personnel have tested a centrifugal membrane separations unit (no reactor chamber) similar to the Membrane
Sorption Reactor and demonstrated that the centrifugal solid-liquid separation unit achieves four to six times the
throughput per area of filter media as a crossflow filter system. The Membrane Sorption Reactor combines the
chemical reaction chamber with the solid-liquid separation step, which offers the advantages of relatively high
throughput and small footprint for the radioactive equipment.
Another potential application for the MSR technology is in the treatment of sludges stored in the underground tanks
at the Hanford Site. The Department of Energy is evaluating whether some of these sludges are transuranic wastes
that could be packaged and shipped to the Waste Isolation Pilot Plant (WIPP) for disposal. The MSR could be used
to separate supernatants, remove soluble analytes and radionuclides by washing and dewater the potentially
transuranic sludges. Again, the Membrane Sorption Reactor offers the advantage of a compact processing unit with
relatively high throughput when compared to crossflow filtration or other solid-liquid separation devices.
Volume up, Stock up. I told you, easy money. News coming maybe?
I agree with you, it seems like they are not following through on alot of things. But how long is too long? Is 4 months long enough to say that's too long? Is that unreasonable? I don't know how long it takes to negotiate a formal marketing agreement or to negotiate a contract for the disposal of nuclear waste, do you? I would say it would take some time, maybe even more that 4 months.