— We are paving the way for the “nuclear renaissance”

On the eve of the Day of the Russian Science Deputy Director General of Rosatom State Nuclear Energy Corporation Pyotr Schedrovitsky, who is responsible for the strategic development and the scientific-technical policy of the corporation, has told Interfax about the future of Russia’s nuclear industry.

— At what stage is the work to draft the federal target program of new nuclear technologies? When are you going to approve it? Do you already know its key parameters?

— For the moment we are finalizing the concept of the program, its pivot, its core, a document specifying its main parameters. We are expecting that the Government will shortly approve this concept and will thereby give us the green-light for further work. On Nov 26 2008 Prime Minister of Russia Vladimir Putin said that we do need such a program. But the key problem is that the program was planned before the crisis and now when the crisis has come we will have to revise its financial aspects.

The program is supposed to be launched in 2010. Were it not for the crisis, this date would be absolutely realistic. But now we are less sure that we will be able to comply with this deadline. Nevertheless, we do hope that the program will be started in time. The financing will, most probably, be reduced. We have already made some revisions for 2010–2011. We did it during the Nov 26 meeting. Now, we have to revise the schedule of the program: the point is that the deadline has not been changed, so, we have to consider postponing the financing of some parts of the program for later dates.

The total cost of the program is some 120bln RUR. The problem is that such a “conventionally positive” factor of the crisis as decline in material prices (concrete or metal) is having almost no effect on our program, while its negative factors are.

We very much hope that the budgetary commission will approve our program.

As regards the content of the program, I think that the heated debates we have had on it have given tangible results: now, it is much more target oriented. Over 60% of the financing will be spent on the development of a new technological platform based on fast-breeder reactors and closed fuel cycle elements. Part of the resources will be spent on the modernization of the experimental infrastructure, part – on the projects to develop controlled thermonuclear fusion.

By 2020 (the deadline) we will have to have all elements of the new technological platform in the form of production prototypes. We must be ready for enhancing the scale of the platform, i.e. by 2020 we must be ready to do it on a commercial basis.

— Thermonuclear fusion, is it the next stage after fast-breeder reactors?

— Thermonuclear fusion is not the next but the following, subsequent, technological program. So, we must lay necessary foundations for it in terms of research, development and testing.

— Why haven’t you developed this program before?

— The problem is that in science you can’t go the seemingly easiest way: choose the most ready project and focus on it. This is rather risky way to act: at some point you may find out that you have wasted your time, effort and money on nothing just because your choice was wrong.

That’s why we asked ourselves: can we afford focusing on one direction and neglecting the others? This question gave rise to long and heated debates inside our professional community – they lasted for a whole year. We have not come to 100% consensus but today our positions are much closer than before. We have realized that we cannot opt for one single direction, we must develop several projects. It would be good if we launched this program in 2009 but, in fact, we spent the whole year 2008 on debates.

The initial consensus on the program was reached in late 2007-early 2008. In 2008 it was revised by the ministries of economy and finance. Their criticism was very useful for us.

As a result, we have got a very well focused and balanced program with clearly formulated stages and specific products.

I believe that, even if in 2010 the program receives minimum financing, by 2013–2014 we will still be able to draft the necessary package of scientific and engineering solutions for further development.

— You mean that for the moment you are going to promote all the projects you have but, later, in some few years, you will decide which of them will be given focused attention and will become the basis of the new technological platform?

— Yes, you are quite right. Russia is still the leader in the field of fast-breeder reactors. We are the only country having not only plans or projects but specific experience of operation of sodium and lead-bismuth cooled reactors. This is our obvious advantage.

True, today our lead is not as big as before and many of our rivals are already breathing on our neck. To be a pioneer is a hard job. Those behind have a kind of handicap, a chance to weigh the situation, to maneuver and to outrun you at the finish. In this field we are pioneers and we are paving the way for the others.

— Do you already know what fuel you should produce for the new platform?

— We need compact fuel and our efforts are concentrated on this task. At the same time, the closed fuel cycle infrastructure must be common for all reactor technologies.

— Are you considering the possibility of private investments now that you are facing a crisis? I, first of all, mean the project of lead-bismuth cooled reactor.

— Of course, the crisis has changed the situation. But our partner is trying to meet all of his obligations and we very much hope that this partnership will be continued.

— Globally speaking, isn’t 120bln RUR too little for such a large program? We have lots of nuclear institutes developing advanced technologies.

— Since, we are building a general technological platform we need some coordinating center, which will manage the program irrespective of the number of institutes involved therein. We can’t just evenly spread the money all over the plate. That’s why we are planning to develop a single program with a single activity network and single coordinating center.

— Will it be part of Rosatom or some independent department or some institute?

— It is early yet to speak about specific formats. We are just considering this project. For the moment some of the necessary functions are being discharged by the Scientific Department of Rosatom State Nuclear Energy Corporation. In the future we will decide how to organize this process. One thing is clear: a mega project must have unified logistics and unified activity network. In the second quarter of this year we will start planning our activities under this project. This year we are planning to start training personnel reserve for the program.

I would like to say once again that, if we follow the logic that each institute must get its share of the total money and do its piece of the total work, we will never bring the pieces together in the end. We are planning to spend 2009 on preparations for the program and all institutes hoping to receive budgetary money in the framework of the program must carry out specific preparatory work.

— The “nuclear renaissance” term has become very popular in the last years. But now in the face of crisis skeptics are beginning to say that everything said about nuclear energy was mostly words with very little real action taken to develop it. Is “nuclear renaissance” a reality?

— I think that there is no alternative to “nuclear renaissance.” I perfectly realize that because of the crisis some of the deadlines may be revised but in the report of the new US energy secretary nuclear energy was given an even bigger share than it had before. Many other countries are also considering ways to develop nuclear energy. Nuclear energy is the only technology that is actually ready for commercialization. All the other technologies are just words.