Technology and Innovation
Decommissioning
Life cycle of any reactor consists of design, construction, operation and decommissioning stages. After the design life is over, reactor should be transformed into nuclear safety condition and decommissioned. Termination of operation can be caused by other reasons including economic, operational, technological ones and because of the accidents.
According to “General provisions on safety assurance during the process of decommissioning of NPPs and research reactors” (approved by the decree of Ministry for Environmental Protection and Nuclear Safety of Ukraine №2 of January 9, 1998) there are introduced following definitions:
Life cycle of any reactor consists of design, construction, operation and decommissioning stages. After the design life is over, reactor should be transformed into nuclear safety condition and decommissioned. Termination of operation can be caused by other reasons including economic, operational, technological ones and because of the accidents.
According to “General provisions on safety assurance during the process of decommissioning of NPPs and research reactors” (approved by the decree of Ministry for Environmental Protection and Nuclear Safety of Ukraine №2 of January 9, 1998) there are introduced following definitions:
Decommissioning – a set of measures after the process of nuclear fuel removal and operation termination of installation that makes it impossible to use for the purposes for which it was constructed and provides safety of personnel, population and environment.
Termination of operation – the final stage of installation operation that is performed after the making a decision about its decommissioning and in the course of which this facility is brought to the state when nuclear fuel is absent at its territory or being within this territory, is located in spent fuel storages (SFS) that are intended for a long-term safe storage.
Reactors closed following an accident or serious incident
|
Country
|
Reactor
|
Type
|
MWe net
|
Years operating
|
Shut down
|
Reason
|
|
Germany
|
Greisfwald 5
|
VVER-440/V213
|
408
|
0.5
|
11/1989
|
Partial core melt
|
|
Gundremmingen A
|
BWR
|
237
|
10
|
1/1977
|
Botched shutdown
|
|
|
Japan
|
Fukushima Daiichi 1
|
BWR
|
439
|
40
|
3/2011
|
Core melt
from cooling loss
|
|
Fukushima Daiichi 2
|
BWR
|
760
|
37
|
3/2011
|
Core melt
from cooling loss
|
|
|
Fukushima Daiichi 3
|
BWR
|
760
|
35
|
3/2011
|
Core melt
from cooling loss
|
|
|
Fukushima Daiichi 4
|
BWR
|
760
|
32
|
3/2011
|
Damage from
hydrogen explosion
|
|
|
Slovakia
|
Bohunice A1
|
Prot GCHWR
|
93
|
4
|
1977
|
Core damage
from fuelling error
|
|
Spain
|
Vandellos 1
|
GCR
|
480
|
18
|
mid 1990
|
Turbine fire
|
|
Switzerland
|
St Lucens
|
Exp GCHWR
|
8
|
3
|
1966
|
Core melt
|
|
Ukraine
|
Chornobyl 4
|
RBMK LWGR
|
925
|
2
|
4/1986
|
Fire and meltdown
|
|
USA
|
Three Mile Island 2
|
PWR
|
880
|
1
|
3/1979
|
Partial core melt
|
Reactors closed prematurely by political decision
|
Country
|
Reactor
|
Type
|
MWe net each
|
Years operating each
|
Shut down
|
|
Armenia
|
Metsamor 1
|
VVER-440/V270
|
376
|
13
|
1989
|
|
Bulgaria
|
Kozloduy 1-2
|
VVER-440/V230
|
408
|
27, 28
|
12/2009
|
|
Kozloduy 3-4
|
VVER-440/V230
|
408
|
24, 26
|
12/2006
|
|
|
France
|
Super Phenix
|
FNR
|
1200
|
12
|
1999
|
|
Germany
|
Greisfwald
|
VVER-440/V230
|
408
|
10, 12, 15, 16
|
1990
|
|
Muelheim Kaerlich
|
PWR
|
1219
|
2
|
1988
|
|
|
Rheinsberg
|
VVER-70/210
|
62
|
24
|
1990
|
|
|
Italy
|
Caorso
|
BWR
|
860
|
12
|
1986
|
|
Latina
|
GCR
|
153
|
24
|
1987
|
|
|
Trino
|
PWR
|
260
|
25
|
1987
|
|
|
Lithuania
|
Ignalina 1
|
RBMK LWGR
|
1185
|
21
|
2005
|
|
Ignalina 2
|
RBMK LWGR
|
1185
|
22
|
2009
|
|
|
Slovakia
|
Bohunice 1
|
VVER-440/V230
|
408
|
28
|
12/2006
|
|
Bohunice 2
|
VVER-440/V230
|
408
|
28
|
12/2008
|
|
|
Sweden
|
Barseback 1
|
BWR
|
600
|
24
|
11/1999
|
|
Barseback 2
|
BWR
|
600
|
28
|
5/2005
|
|
|
Ukraine
|
Chornobyl 1
|
RBMK LWGR
|
740
|
19
|
12/1997
|
|
Chornobyl 2
|
RBMK LWGR
|
925
|
12
|
1991
|
|
|
Chornobyl 3
|
RBMK LWGR
|
925
|
19
|
12/2000
|
|
|
USA
|
Shoreham
|
BWR
|
820
|
3
|
1989
|
Process of installation decommissioning is divided into the following stages:
Final shutdown – the stage of the process of installation decommissioning when it is brought to the state that includes the possibility to use the installation for the purposes for which it was constructed.
Mothballing – a stage of the process of installation decommissioning when it is brought to the state that corresponds to the safe storage of ionizing radiation sources during the certain period of time.
Hold-up – stage of the process of installation decommissioning during which it is in the quiescent mode that corresponds to the safe storage of ionizing radiation sources that are in it.
Dismantling – stage of the process of facility installation decommissioning when ionizing radiation sources that are in this installation, are removed from the facility or are located at its territory in radwaste storages.
The decommissioning activity is subjected to government regulation and is performed on the basis of certain permissions. The stage of operation termination precedes the stage of the decommissioning. Activity at the stage of operation termination is performed within the installation operation license, although the implementation of this stage requires separate permission of regulatory body. To gain such permission operating organization has to present following documents:
- Installation operation termination program;
- Report on safety analysis;
- Changes in technical regulation of facility operation.
Pursuant to the requirements of national standards of Ukraine it is necessary to elaborate the concept of nuclear facility decommissioning at the stage of its designing. The initial concept of installation decommissioning has to be presented by the operating organization during the process of documents submission in order to obtain the constructing license. The concept of installation decommissioning has to be reconsidered by taking into account the experience of operation conduction and acquisition of new knowledge in outlined issue.
Decommission of installation is performed according to the decommissioning design, approved by regulatory authority, which includes radiation protection programme, radioactive waste (RAW) management programme, quality assurance programme, action plan in case of radiation accident and facility physical protection action plan.
License for installation decommissioning presupposes obtaining of certain permit to implement each stage of facility decommissioning.
Hygiene passport of installation has to be processed by authorities of State Sanitary Control for each stage of installation decommissioning. Hygiene passport has to contain the main sanitary, radiation and radiation dose monitoring characteristics of the installation, which is in the process of decommissioning, that allow to determine the level of radiation safety for personnel, population and environment.
Operating organization presents a report on information about the conducted work on the certain stage to the regulatory authority upon completion of the installation operation termination stage and each stage of installation decommissioning. In the report there has to be included information about radiation and other dangerous impacts on the personnel, population and environment and evidences that facility is brought into the state planned by the design.
According to the IAEA recommendations there are three options of the NPP decommissioning: Safe Enclosure of NPP, Entombment, and Immediate Dismantling.
The option “Safe Enclosure” presupposes a state in which reactor installation and other radioactive systems and equipment are mothballed, isolated from outside environment and maintained in safe state with the following decontamination to the level that allows its unlimited use in the future. During the realization of this option it is possible to perform preparatory works, dismantle, remove the non-polluting and low level equipment with its further disposal and reprocessing, conversion of premises, buildings and constructions, consequent reprocessing of low level RAW, partially decontaminate etc.
During the process of “Entombment” the most dangerous radioactive items, including reactors, primary coolant equipment and others, are enclosed, for example, in concrete, and are cooled till in the result of radionuclide decay the radiation of it will achieve an acceptable level. According to this option it is used the effect of activity self-destruction in the result of radioactive decay. In addition it is possible to carry out works of uncomplete decontamination of premises, dismantling and disposal of equipment that is beyond the leak tight zone, and other types of activity that do not lead to violation of the indicated barriers integrity.
Option “Immediate Dismantling” presupposes the achievement of two possible stages of final state of the reactor installation. The exemption of the site presupposes the dismantling of equipment, buildings and constructions that are not intended for further use, reprocessing and removal of all RAW from the site of reactor installation and bringing the site to the state that is appropriate to the requirements of nuclear power, for instance, for new unit building or RAW storage facility. This state of the site is called as “brown site”.
Turbine shop at Greifswald NPP (Germany) before NPP decommissioning
Turbine shop at Greifswald NPP (Germany) after equipment dismantling
The state of the site as “green site” presupposes the dismantling of reactor facility buildings, reprocessing, packing and removal of the radioactive and nonradioactive waste, recultivation of the exempted territory for its unlimited further use.
Decommissioning of the certain installation is determined by national peculiarities and depends upon technical and economic, political and social and other aspects.
Costs for NPP decommissioning depends upon many factors (in particular such as type and state of the nuclear power facility, problems connected with processing and storage of residual materials, limit norms of the radiation protection, methodology of obtaining the license, costs for personnel, work schedule), including such items as capacity of the unit, its operating life, and time before the final shutdown.
According to rough estimates total costs for one nuclear power unit decommissioning and dismantling can amount from 20% to 30% of costs necessary for new unit building. National peculiarities, including volume of necessary works and method of RAW management, have a significant impact on costs. Total costs depend upon the quantity of RAW, methods of their reprocessing etc.
Costs for NPP decommissioning
|
NPP, country
|
Type of reactor, capacity,
MW
|
Costs,
$ million
|
Remarks
|
|
Big Rock Point, USA
|
BWR, 70
|
25,0
|
Reactor vessel is removed after the offloading of spent nuclear fuel. Total mass of RAW was 290 t. Spent nuclear fuel storage with area 43,3 hectares remained at the site. Area of NPP was 182,2 hectares.
|
|
Fort Saint Vrain, USA
|
HTGR, 330
|
173,9
|
Variant of immediate dismantling. It was converted into gas-turbine station.
|
|
Tokaimura,
Japan
|
GCR, 166
|
772,5
|
Dismantling began in 2001 and it will have been accomplished in 2017. In the process of dismantling it will be created 177000 t of RAW, including 18000 t of highly radioactive ones.
|
|
Stade,
Germany
|
PWR,672
|
668,4
|
The first NPP that is decommissioned after the adoption of the law on nuclear phase out. Fuel will be sent to France for reprocessing. 150 people of personnel out of 300 have remained at dismantling works.
|
|
Biblis-A,
Germany
|
PWR,1225
|
141,2
|
Costs for total unit dismantling
|
|
Loviisa-1,
Finland
|
VVER, 440
|
166,5
|
Costs for total unit dismantling
|
Sources:
- Decommissioning of nuclear power installations” / А.Nosovskiy,V.Vasilchenko, A.Klyuchnikov, O.Yashchenko; Edited by A.Nosovskiy. – K.: Tekhnika, 2005. –P.27-39.
- Nuclear and Radiation Safety in Ukraine Annual Report 2010.
- О.Э.Муратов, М.Н.Тихонов. Снятие АЭС с эксплуатации: проблемы и пути решения // Агенство ПроАтом.
- Decommissioning Nuclear Facilities // World Nuclear Association.
Fusion Energy
To create an eternal energy source on the Earth. Does it sound like utopian idea? It is not so.

Nuclear fusion shall allow to obtain the so-called free energy just from the water, at this the production waste will be absolutely safe hydrogen and helium.
To create an eternal energy source on the Earth. Does it sound like utopian idea? It is not so.
Nuclear fusion shall allow to obtain the so-called free energy just from the water, at this the production waste will be absolutely safe hydrogen and helium.
And this process is not a human invention. The universe actively and globally uses fusion reactors. The nearest to us fusion reactor is the Sun.
The main problem is that scientists have not yet been able to create such fusion reactor for the energy released as a result of fusion reaction to exceed the energy required for the reaction itself.
From the physics: what is nuclear fusion?
Before proceeding to the main part of our material and understanding why there is so much talks about nuclear fusion, let us refresh in memory the lessons on physics for the 11th form, but if there is nothing to refresh (it happens) then read on.
We already know how the humanity receives the energy by means of controlled nuclear reaction. Currently operated nuclear reactors use nuclear fission during which the atomic nuclei are split into 2 or 3 smaller nuclei. On the contrary, nuclear fusion does envisage the fission but the union of atoms. In other words, nuclear fusion envisages receiving of heavy nuclei from lighter ones.
How does it work?
Atomic nuclei consist of two types of nucleons — protons and neutrons. They are bound together by the so-called strong interaction force. At the same time, binding force of each nucleon depends on the total number of nucleons in the nucleus. In light nuclei one can observe the increase of binding energy with the number of nucleons and in heavy nuclei – the decrease. If nucleons are bind to light nuclei or split from heavy atoms, the binding energy difference shall be denoted as the difference between reaction energy and kinetic energy of released particles.
Change of nucleus structure is called nuclear transformation or nuclear reaction. Nuclear reaction with the increase of a number of nucleons in the nucleus is called nuclear reaction or nuclear fusion. Controlled nuclear fusion process is based on fusion of light atomic nuclei to form heavier nuclei with energy release.
Nuclear fusion for deuterium and tritium
Nucleus protons have electric charge which means that they undergo coulomb repulsion. In the nucleus this repulsion is compensated by strong interaction that holds the nucleons together. But strong interaction range is much less than of coulomb repulsion. That is why, to combine two nuclei into one they must first be brought close enough together to overcome the coulomb repulsion. Several methods are known: in stellar interior — gravitational forces, in accelerators — kinetic energy of accelerated nuclei or elementary particles, in nuclear reactors and nuclear weapon — thermal motion energy of nuclei.
A little bit of history
In compliance with abovementioned data, fusion is not a human invention. In 1934 George Gamow, Ukrainian-born American physicist, observing the sky of stars proposed a hypothesis that burning of stars takes place due nuclear fusion reactions inside them.
His assumption was developed four years later by Hans Bethe, American nuclear physicist. Bethe assumed that in the center of the Sun the hydrogen nuclei collide transforming into isotopes and then into other elements. The difference between their mass numbers lights up the stella body.
In the 1940s, one of the participants of the Manhattan Project (development of nuclear weapon) proposed to the colleagues to create not fission but fusion bomb (hydrogen bomb).
Stanislaw Ulam, mathematician, described possible fusion algorithm and started the research. In 1951, six years after nuclear testing, the United States conducted preliminary and a year later — full-scale testing of fusion charge. It consisted of liquid hydrogen isotopes which were replaced by a mixture of 40% lithium deuteride and 60% lithium deuteride-7 to increase power.
Soviet physicist Oleg Lavrentiev purposed the idea to use nuclear fusion for industrial purposes. Soon enough, simultaneously with the Americans, Igor Tamm and Andriy Sakharov revised Lavrentiev’s concept and proposed to confine plasma in copper doughnut–shaped (toroidal) vacuum chamber (so called tokamak) isolated with magnetic plates. That is how appeared the idea of tokamak facility constructed in 1954. By the way, the first fusion reactor — stellarator was constructed in 1951 by Lyman Spitzer, astrophysicist, in the framework of implementation of secret Matterhorn Project.
However, tokamak technology is currently considered to be the most advanced since we have accumulated great knowledge about it. That is why, it was chosen as the basis for the design of the International Thermonuclear Experimental Reactor (ITER) but we shall talk about this later.
Formally, stellarators are considered to be more advanced in comparison to tokamaks. There are several reasons for this. First, in stellarators the plasma is heated up and confined only by external currents and coils. In tokamaks heating takes place due to electric current in plasma which, at the same time, creates additional magnetic field. Due to this, free electrons and ions with their own magnetic fields, which seek to destroy the main field and decrease the temperature and spoil everything at all, appear in the doughnut-shaped tokamak.
Second, stellarator chambers are not just doughnut-shaped but they have the form of flat doughnut: unlike tokamaks they do not have azimuthal symmetry. At the same time, flat doughnut-shaped coils of stellarators have helical form (tokamaks` coils are straight and parallel to each other), they spin the filed lines, in other words, cause rotational transformation. It also stabilizes plasma and shifts theoretical limit for optimal pressure inside the chamber. The higher is the pressure, the faster is the reaction.
Comparison of the tokamak structure (at the left) and the stellarator (at the right)
The Sun but on the Earth
In the south of France, near Aix-en-Provence city, 35 countries collaborate for construction of the International Thermonuclear Experimental Reactor (ITER). The button enabling the device which weight makes 23 thousand tons shall be pushed in 5 years. The construction of the world’s first fusion reactor lasts for more than 30 years.
“Our device is like the Sun but on the Earth” that is how the developers describe their project.
Construction. ITER image
ITER is the first-of-its-kind machine and unique scientific device. This is the final experiment to prove that humanity has technology, materials and knowledge to take the next step and build fusion power plant.
Project implementation started in November 1985 at the Geneva Summit when Mykhaylo Gorbachev, USSR General Secretary, proposed to Ronald Reagan, President of the United States of America, the idea of implementation of joint international project related to the development of fusion energy for peaceful purposes.
Negotiations lasted for a year and then an agreement was reached, European Union (Euratom), Japan, Soviet Union and the United States joined the project. The conceptual design development started in 1988 and then was followed by technical design development. In 2001, member states approved the final ITER project.
In 2003, People’s Republic of China, Republic of Korea and then India joined the project. The site selection for ITER construction was also a long-term process which terminated in 2005.
In compliance with the abovementioned data, ITER design is based on tokamak. This technology was chosen entirely due to the collected knowledge on tokamak.
There is a verity of fusion technologies such as stellarators (Wendelstein-7X), laser induced synthesis (Laser Megajoule і National Ignition Facility), proton-boron fusion (Tri-Alpha energy), etc. But scientific community believes that tokamak concept is the best way to achieve pure fusion energy.
Tokomak sectional drawing
Safety is perhaps the most important advantage of fusion reactor. And as it was explained earlier, uncontrolled chain reaction that causes core melting is impossible in ITER. After all, it is very difficult to create fusion reaction and sustain it. But whatever happens, in case when heating, cooling or fuel supply is out of control, the heat inside the vacuum chamber will disappear naturally. It’s almost like a gas jet goes out when you cut off the gas supply. The nuclear fusion process is safe by its nature. There is no gas explosion or gas escape hazard.
Preliminary safety analysis report of ITER contains the analysis of the risks and events that can cause site accidents. During normal operation, ITER radiological impact on the most at-risk population groups is thousand times less than impact of natural background radiation. And at worst-case scenarios, such as fire at tritium plant, evacuation or other population protective measures shall not be necessary.
And now, let us discredit the myth of free energy. Fusion energy shall never be for free. It is called free because it is clean and safe for future generations.
ITER shall produce 500 MW of fusion power. This amount is enough to study plasma combustion, a state which has never been achieved before on Earth in controlled environment.
It is expected that commercial fusion reactor power will exceed 500 MW for more than 10-15 times. For example, 2000 MW fusion power plant will be able to supply electricity to 2 million buildings. The scientists predict that industrial fusion plants may be commissioned in 2040. The exact date depends on public demand level and political will manifested in financial investment since it is not to come cheap.
The initial cost of 2000 MW fusion power plant is about $ 10 billion. These capital expenses are reimbursed by extremely low maintenance and fuel costs and rare component replacement during facility 60-year lifetime.
It should be noted that ITER is an experimental facility it is not designed to generate electricity. All the produced energy shall be converted into steam and released through the cooling towers.
And what about Ukraine?
Taras Shevchenko National University of Kyiv, Kyiv Institute of Physics and Kharkov Institute of Physics and Technology as well as some private laboratories study nuclear fusion in Ukraine. Although Ukraine is not a member of ITER international project, our physicists also participate in this project by means of cooperation with European experts. Such cooperation became possible due to the fact that since 2017 Ukraine is a full member of the European Physical Society for fusion research.
In his interview Anatoly Zagorodny, Ukrainian physicist, President of the National Academy of Sciences of Ukraine, said the following about ITER: “Among the wide range of tasks the issue, which relates to the improvement of the strength of the reactor internal wall contacting with thick and hot plasma, is of top importance for the increase of reactor power. Ukrainian physicists actively participate in corresponding research. Other tasks that our scientists are working at are improvement of diagnostics and development of theoretical models of plasma processes. The construction of commercial fusion reactor turned out to be much more complicated task than it seemed at first. However, the most of the way has been covered, this project shall bring us closer to new more powerful and environmentally safe source of energy”.
ITER official information was used at preparation of this material.
Uranium Facilities
Uranium in Ukraine and Abroad: Realities and Prospects
The world: demands and reserves
According to the IAEA, 451 nuclear reactors are currently operated in the world (in 31 countries), which produce in total about 11% of the world’s electricity generation. Although a number of countries are rejecting the use of nuclear and thermal energy, they are heading towards recovery energy.
Uranium in Ukraine and Abroad: Realities and Prospects
The world: demands and reserves
According to the IAEA, 451 nuclear reactors are currently operated in the world (in 31 countries), which produce in total about 11% of the world’s electricity generation. Although a number of countries are rejecting the use of nuclear and thermal energy, they are heading towards recovery energy.
The refusal from electric energy produced at thermal power plants is primarily due to the need to reduce air pollution by coal combustion products and decrease the rate of global climate change since according to forecasts, the temperature rise on the planet could grow by 39% by 2050. Under these conditions, the demand for clean and low-carbon energy will be even more urgent than it is now. Therefore, it is worth thinking about minimizing the use of coal by complementing the country’s energy profile with cleaner maneuvering sources.
There is nothing surprising in the fact that with the current trend for the energy of the sun, wind and water, the countries (our neighbors including the nearest ones) strive to achieve a balanced energy mix and plan to strengthen their own energy industry with nuclear power. In particular, Poland expresses its intention to construct a nuclear power plant, and two VVER-1200 reactors will be put into operation in Belarus very soon.
In turn, the construction of nuclear power units means an increase in demand for nuclear fuel. Three types of nuclear fuel are known today: uranium, thorium and plutonium fuel. The last two types are not used for a number of reasons, although they are considered promising. In this regard, uranium fuel remains the only one that is currently operated in nuclear reactors in the world, therefore the demand and price for uranium will grow. According to some estimates, the total demand for uranium by 2030 may amount from 50 to 140 tons per year. According to the IAEA, the world produces about 60 thousand tons of uranium annually as a whole today. According to the assessments of scientists from the Nuclear Energy Agency (NEA) and the IAEA, the world reserves (excluding reserves of undiscovered deposits) will be enough for about 118 years with the current level of dynamics of demand for uranium.
20 countries among 170 IAEA members mined uranium as of 2018. For a long time, the leaders in uranium mining have been Kazakhstan, Canada and Australia, which in general produce about two-thirds of the world’s uranium. However, only a few countries are involved in uranium enrichment and nuclear fuel production.
Uranium ore mining in Ukraine: who and where?
The uranium mining industry of Ukraine is developing according to the State Target Economic Program “Nuclear Fuel of Ukraine”. In recent years, uranium production in our country has fluctuated approximately in the range from 500 to 800 tons per year, which does not allow meeting the demands of the domestic nuclear energy even by 50%. Ukraine makes up for shortfall of national uranium through imports from Russia and Kazakhstan; it also buys nuclear fuel from Westinghouse Company, but does not abandon plans to provide itself with uranium due to its own production.
The need for uranium oxide concentrates for Ukrainian nuclear power plants is in general 2.5 thousand tons per year. Let us give an example to understand the logic: a 1000 MW reactor operating with a load of about 80% requires 20 tons of nuclear fuel containing 3.5% of uranium-235. It is necessary to enrich about 153 tons of natural uranium to obtain such amount of nuclear fuel. In turn, it is worth noting that about 1000 tons of ore should be extracted from the earth crust interior to obtain one ton of uranium oxide U3O8 and ore with uranium-235 content of 0.1%.
Ukraine ranks first now in terms of uranium ore deposits in Europe. According to the data provided by the World Nuclear Association, they amount to 114,100 tons, which are 2% of the world reserves, and take 11th place in the world. 14 types of uranium ores and more than 100 uranium minerals are known in total, but only 12 of them are of industrial importance, and uranium tar, uranite and carnotite are of the greatest importance among them.
If we take into account that the cost of uranium as of June 2020 in the world market is about 33.15 U.S. Dollars per pound ($ 73.06 per one kilogram), against the price in the beginning of April of about 29 U.S. Dollars per pound (63.91 dollars per one kilogram), then things do not look so bad for our country. The only competitors of Ukraine in Europe in this area are the Czech Republic that recently mined about 300 tons of uranium annually, and Romania that extracts about 80 tons of uranium oxide concentrate and fully meets the demands of its own nuclear power plants.
Uranium prices are currently not stable. In 2016, they reached their minimum level, and the price is not high now. In addition, IAEA uranium production specialist Bret Moldovan noted that “an excess of uranium concentrate reserves has accumulated over the past few years that has led to a decline in prices. This was due to high production rates and lower demand. That is why it is economically inexpedient to operate many mines at the current uranium price”. Because of this, many uranium mines have been transferred to standby and storage mode. Thus, we can say that the uranium crisis is a problem inherent not only in Ukraine.
Uranium ore deposits in Ukraine contain up to 0.1% uranium. According to the licensee of the Eastern Mining and Processing Plant (SkhidGZK), our ores are aluminosilicate, low in iron, and monometallic in terms of chemical composition. For example, in Canadian ore whose deposits are largely localized in the Athabasca Basin in the north of Saskatchewan and related to Precambrian quartz conglomerates, the average uranium concentration is 0.08% (from 0.03 to 0.18%), and Australian ore contains up to 0.2% or more of uranium and its main component is copper; uranium, gold and silver are mined together. It consists of medium-grained chalcopyrite, bornite, chalcosine, fine-grained uranite and brannerite, as well as gold, silver, and rare earth minerals.
The State Balance of Mineral Resources includes 17 deposits in total in Ukraine, 14 of which are located in Kirovohrad region, two are in Mykolaiv and one is in Dnipropetrovsk region, and 21 deposits in total have been explored with significant reserves of ore containing 0.1% of uranium.
The reserves of the explored in detail, but not exploited yet uranium deposits in the Kirovograd ore region in total could meet the demands of Ukrainian nuclear power plants at least for the next 100 years.
Uranium mining in Ukraine began at 11 deposits back in 1945. Four of them (Zhovtorichens’k, Pervomaysk, Devlatovo and Bratske) were exhausted before the 1970s. Three of them, namely Safoniv, Severyniv and Kvitneve deposits, either are in a status of final shutdown, or are not being exploited due to a number of circumstances. Accordingly, only Vatutinsk (separated subdivision of Smolinska mine, Smoline village in Kirovohrad region), Michurinsk and Central deposits are active (separated subdivision of Ingul mine in the city of Kropyvnytsky) as well as Novokostiantyniv deposit (separated subdivision of Novokostiantyniv mine that implements major construction of the underground and surface complex facilities in the mine and was included to the SkhidGZK on 1 September 2010 in accordance with Order of the Minister of Fuel and Energy of Ukraine No. 659 dated 26 November 2009, Oleksiyivka village, Kirovograd region).
The reserves of Novokostiantyniv mine are estimated as the most powerful ones in Europe and those that are in the top ten of the world and amount to about 76 thousand tons, at least 70 thousand tons of which are technically extractable.
According to specialists’ estimates, all these mines can produce up to four thousand tons of uranium ore annually. It was even planned to increase production of about 6.4 thousand tons of raw materials per year in 2025-2030, and even up to 7.5 thousand tons per year later.
According to the statement on the determination of the scope of strategic environmental assessment of the project of the State Strategic Environmental Assessment by 2024, task No. 1 for uranium production was to increase the amount of uranium ore production through the development of Novokostiantyniv, Kvitneve and other new uranium deposits, reconstruct the hydrometallurgical plant in the city of Zhovti Vody, increase the capacity of the tailing pit for the disposal of uranium ore processing waste, reconstruct the production facilities of ion-exchange resins in the city of Kamyans’ke, as well as implement new progressive technologies for uranium ore processing.
Thus, the uranium mining industry should receive a significant governmental support for the development and expansion of its production. However, the production of uranium concentrate has significantly decreased now due to certain circumstances in accordance with the Report on SkhidGZK Management for 2019.
Ukraine with its powerful uranium ore reserves is not among the countries that can independently enrich uranium and produce nuclear fuel. However, uranium oxide concentrate “yellowcake”, which is a yellow powdery substance and a material for obtaining uranium 233 and 235 isotopes used in nuclear power, is obtained from uranium ore of Ukrainian deposits at the hydrometallurgical plant in Zhovti Vody in the Dnipropetrovsk region.
The resulting uranium concentrate is partially used for the needs of the domestic market after enrichment and final production of nuclear fuel (in 2019, contracts with the Energoatom No. 8-020-08-18-00962 dated 5 December 2018 and No. 8-020-08-18 -00971 dated 19 December 2018) and is partially exported to other countries. In particular, the SkhidGZK exported uranium oxide concentrate in 2019 in accordance with Contract No. 914/09 dated 30 November 2018 concluded with INTERNEXCO GMBH, Switzerland.

How is uranium ore mined in Ukraine and abroad?
Miklos Gaspar and Noah Mayhew noted in their article “Ebb and Flow: the Economics of Uranium Mining” for the IAEA Bulletin “Uranium. From Exploration to Remediation” that “uranium mining is practically no different from the extraction of other basic metals: exploration, obtaining a license, deposit development and mine closure at the end of its life”.
It takes a lot of time and effort in general to mine uranium at the site of probable uranium ore deposit. Therefore, deposit exploration takes from 10 to 15 years; the development of a feasibility study lasts from one to three years. Approximately the same amount of time is required for mine construction, namely, deposit operation, mining and processing to obtain uranium concentrate takes from 5 to 50 years depending on deposit resources. Rehabilitation and remediation after operation completion will last another 2 — 10 years.
This all is surely reflected in the cost of the raw materials obtained.
The prime cost of Ukrainian uranium is slightly higher than the prime cost of this product of competitors, but Ukraine has one very significant advantage for its European partners, that is the distance. When it comes to yellowcake transport, let us say, from Australia or Canada to any of the European countries, the transport from Ukraine is much easier, more profitable and safer. European nuclear power plants will require about 18-19 thousand tons of uranium annually and the suppliers for them are Australia, Canada and some African countries.
The cost of raw materials is also influenced by the method of its extraction. Uranium ore is mined today by conventional (open and underground) mining, underground (borehole and in-situ) mining and heap leaching.
Open-pit mining is used when ore is deposited close to the surface. This method is the simplest and cheapest. Underground mining is used when ore is deep. The danger of this uranium mining method is that radon gas is one of uranium decay products; it is radioactive and has a harmful effect on the body. Consequently, when it comes to uranium mines, their operation is impossible without powerful ventilation systems.
According to the SkhidGZK, Ukraine uses mainly underground uranium mining method. It is said particularly about the use of in-situ and heap leaching, as well as downhole leaching in sandstone-type deposits. The underground leaching technology is widely used now in Australia, Kazakhstan, and the USA. The Devladiv and Bratsk deposits were mined in a similar way in Ukraine, and activities have been started in the Safoniv deposit. A significant amount of uranium is mined in this way in the world, and it is considered the safest and most environmentally friendly uranium mining technology. In addition, its application reduces the cost of raw materials by 2.5 times.
The production process of uranium oxide-oxide is complex and multistage. Therefore, particularly ore from Ukrainian mines goes to the hydrometallurgical plant, where it is unloaded and sorted, and then fed to the feed hopper of the mill section for grinding.
Triuranium octoxide production process is complex and multistage. Thus, ore from Ukrainian mines goes to the hydrometallurgical plant, where it is unloaded and sorted, and then transferred to the feed hopper of the mill section for grinding.
Ore is transported by vibrating feeders and belt conveyors to grinding blocks, where it is grinded according to the scheme of semi-self-grinding using steel balls with a diameter of 80—120 millimeters.
Substances that remain insoluble are called “tails” and require special handling.
Uranium is transferred from ore to solution at the next leaching stage. More than half of the ore is leached with sulfuric acid in autoclaves, and some part is leached in pachucas. The leaching process in autoclaves is carried out using an oxidizing agent such as nitric acid with pneumatic mixing, exceeded pressure and temperature.
In order to increase uranium concentration in the solution and purify it from admixtures, the sorption process is carried out on AMP anionite synthetic sorbent (or its analogs), as well as process of uranium desorption from anionite into enriched solution, which is further purified from admixtures and enriched by extraction to obtain crystals of ammonium uranyl tricarbonate (AUTC) that are fried at a certain temperature to triuranium octoxide. Thermal decomposition of AUTC crystals is carried out in a frying rotary oven.
The finished product contains triuranium octoxide mixture (yellowcake), and the content of tetravalent uranium should be at least 80%.
Uranium mining by borehole leaching at Safoniv deposit. Author: Yuliya Balashevska, SSTC NRS
Only one company: the Eastern Mining and Processing Plant (SkhidGZK) that controls the production sites in Dnipropetrovsk and Kirovohrad regions, three plants and about 20 auxiliary subdivisions in addition to mines has been engaged in uranium ore extraction and production of natural uranium concentrate in Ukraine until recently.
Nuclear Energy Systems of Ukraine LLC (NESU, Mykolaivka village in Mykolaiv region) obtained a permit for the exploration of uranium fields for the first time in Ukraine in 2019. It announced its intention to mine up to 300 tons of uranium per year in Mykolaiv region, construct a mining and processing complex in Kazankiv region and use SkhidGZK facilities in Zhovti Vody. The deposits that the NESU plans to mine were explored back in the days of the Soviet Union, but they have not been mined due to the lack of a technology for efficient uranium extraction from sandstone rocks at that time. This technology is widely used in foreign countries at present. The bedding of the rock in these fields is at the level of 50-70 meters from the surface, the extraction will be carried out by leaching.
Where and how are uranium production “tailings” stored in Ukraine and what impact the uranium facilities have on personnel, the public and the environment?
The so-called “tailings” are among other uranium ore processing waste. SkhidGZK ensures its storage and monitors the environmental situation near the tailings, as well as the situation near other radiation-hazardous and chemical facilities of the enterprises, in particular the Ingul, Smolinsk, Novokostiantyniv mines, the hydrometallurgical plant, etc.
Up to 4-5 m3 of circulating water from settling ponds of “tailing pits”, which contaminates soil, surface and underground water due to the high content of chemical and radioactive substances, is used for processing of one ton of uranium ore in a closed cycle; therefore, they require constant monitoring and implementation of measures to reduce harmful effects on the environment.
A significant amount of waste was accumulated during the operation of the Prydniprovsky chemical plant, where 65% of uranium ore in the entire Soviet Union was processed in 1946-1972., Nine tailing pits that store about 42 million tons of waste with a total activity of 3.17 × 1015 Bq were constructed in 1948-1991. A significant content of natural uranium in the environment is also observed near the tailing pits in Zhovti Vody, where the uranium ore processing plant is located.
Monitoring and other measures to reduce the technology-related load of uranium processing waste on the environment should be continuously taken under such conditions. Thus, particularly, the measures for environmental protection and radioecological monitoring were taken, dams and pits were strengthened, and beach coating was applied to prevent dust-like particles from spraying on the tailing pit in the Shcherbakivka dam under the “Memorandum of Cooperation and Partnership between the SkhidGZK, State Concern “Nuclear Fuel” and Kirovograd City Council, Kirovograd Regional Council and Kirovograd Regional State Administration” in 2019.
Economic component
Despite the fact that uranium mining in Ukraine should bring significant profits, it is unprofitable today. Therefore, the National Energy and Utilities Regulatory Commission of Ukraine approved the price for uranium dioxide of $ 75 per kilogram for 2019, although the cost of production at the Novokostiantyniv, Smolinsk and Ingul mines ranges from $ 79 to $ 143 per kilogram. At the same time, the market price ranged from $ 27.7 to $ 29.9 per pound (that is, from $ 55.40 to $ 65.78 per kilogram). Full-fledged development of the industry, radiation protection of uranium facilities, and decent salaries to personnel on time become almost impossible with such a policy.
SkhidGZK received a warning about a possible electricity disconnection due to debt in May 2020, which practically means flooding of mines. The enterprise has currently significant debts to personnel due to non-payment of wages. The reason for this was Energoatom’s debts to the plant that in turn owed payments to the SC Guaranteed Buyer.
However, there is still hope that mining of uranium deposits using new and improved technologies, correct and responsible control, and competent management can include Ukraine to the world leaders in the uranium mining industry. Perhaps overcoming the monopoly in the uranium mining industry and the emergence of healthy competition will help overcome the crisis.
What are the prospects?
A gradual increase in nuclear energy generation is predicted according to the Energy Strategy of Ukraine for the Period up to 2035 “Safety, Energy Efficiency, Competitiveness”. Consequently, the electricity production of 8.76 billion kW*h was predicted at nuclear power plants for 2015, while it made up already 94 billion kW*h in 2035.
Therefore, the priority tasks for the nuclear fuel production sector are to ensure an increase in uranium and zirconium production, prepare for the industrial development of deposits suitable for open exploitation, develop explored deposits, optimize production and create a reserve of fresh nuclear fuel (uranium concentrate).
The advisability in extending the production range of components for nuclear fuel was also discussed, including production from zirconium, in order to enable further import substitution of nuclear fuel fabrication by creating appropriate capacities in Ukraine. The key task is also the actualization of the national program for the development of the mineral resource base of Ukraine for the long term in order to expand the national resource base of uranium and other minerals through the exploration, development and commissioning of new uranium deposits.
Uranium is not only nuclear fuel, but also…
Nowadays, uranium is mainly used in nuclear energy as a nuclear fuel. However, this is not the only way to use it. Uranium isotopes are also used in medicine, science and industry.
Uranium was earlier added in glass production as a pigment for pictures and painting of ceramics, uranyl nitrate was used in photography to enhance negatives and toning photographs in brown at the beginning of the 20th century. Uranium-235 carbide together with niobium carbide and zirconium carbide serves as fuel for nuclear jet engines. In addition, Ukrainian uranium will possibly become the fuel that will once help delivering people to distant stars.
References:
- Bekman, Uranium: Textbook, Lomonosov Moscow State University, Radiochemistry Department (2009) (in Russian).
- Data of the State Scientific and Technical Center for Nuclear and Radiation Safety.
- Data of the Eastern Mining and Enrichment Plant (in Ukrainian).
- Uranium Production, IAEA.
- Sorokin, Issues in the Development of Uranium Industry, Presentation at the International Conference “Ukrainian Nuclear Forum 2019: Nuclear Energy – State and Trends of Development” (in Ukrainian).



