France to send XNUMX tons of nuclear waste to Russia


The French company Orano, which maintains national nuclear power plants, will send over a thousand tons of spent uranium to Russia. At the same time, it is noted that the first consignments of waste were sent from France at the beginning of this year.


According to Greenpeace, citing an official confirmation from Orano, the shipment of uranium fuel to Russia is scheduled for late 2021. At the same time, the company noted that nuclear waste from French nuclear power plants will be re-processed by Rosatom and used at the enterprise in Seversk (apparently, it is about JSC Siberian Chemical Combine).

In fact, most of the reprocessed uranium will remain in storage in Russia indefinitely. Thus, this uranium can be regarded not as a raw material for the production of new nuclear fuel, but as nuclear waste, the import of which into Russia is prohibited.

- reports Greenpeace.

The international environmental organization added that earlier nuclear waste was actively supplied to Russia from Germany. France has not shipped spent fuel in over 10 years, but, as we can see, this practice has now resumed.
  • Used photographs: FSUE "RosRAO"
Ad
We are open to cooperation with authors in the news and analytical departments. A prerequisite is the ability to quickly analyze the text and check the facts, to write concisely and interestingly on political and economic topics. We offer flexible working hours and regular payments. Please send your responses with examples of work to [email protected]
37 comments
Information
Dear reader, to leave comments on the publication, you must sign in.
  1. Vladimir_ Voronov (Vladimir) 13 October 2021 10: 25
    +10
    Greenpeace is a CIA office. Why do they not say that money is paid for the removal of waste, and not small ones, as well as the fact that Russia has technologies for waste processing. The goal of Greenpeace is to provoke the brain cleaned by the exam and ignite an internal conflict.
    1. Oleg Valevsky Offline Oleg Valevsky
      Oleg Valevsky 13 October 2021 10: 37
      -9
      Quote: Vladimir_Voronov
      Russia has technologies for waste processing.

      Is there technology? or is there a REAL production capacity for this?
      Why doesn't Russia then process it?
      1. Vladimir_ Voronov (Vladimir) 13 October 2021 10: 48
        +6
        Here's a link for you: https://newsland.com/community/5654/content/zachem-i-kak-rossiia-pererabatyvaet-iadernye-otkhody/6341527, and listen to Mikhail Kovalchuk, who claimed that soon nuclear waste will be sell (as scrap), so use it while they are given and paid for ...
      2. kimvladimiril Offline kimvladimiril
        kimvladimiril (Vladimir) 15 October 2021 15: 49
        +1
        Who told you that Russia does not process nuclear waste?
        1. Oleg Valevsky Offline Oleg Valevsky
          Oleg Valevsky 15 October 2021 18: 51
          0
          And what does "nuclear waste processing" consist of today? Plutonium is extracted, and the remaining thousands of tons of materials (water) that wildly "fade" are rolled into concrete ..?
  2. Bakht Offline Bakht
    Bakht (Bakhtiyar) 13 October 2021 10: 42
    +3
    https://rosatom.ru/journalist/news/izgotovlena-pervaya-polnaya-peregruzka-moks-topliva-dlya-reaktora-bn-800-beloyarskoy-aes/

    Rosatom's strategic line on the creation of two-component nuclear power with thermal and fast neutron reactors, as well as closing the nuclear fuel cycle, will help to solve a number of important problems. First, to multiply the raw material base of the nuclear power industry. Secondly - recycle (after reprocessing) spent nuclear fuel instead of storing it... Third, to involve in the nuclear fuel cycle and utilize the DUHF stockpiles accumulated in warehouses. In addition, the development of recycling technologies in the nuclear industry is fully consistent with one of the UN Sustainable Development Goals - “Responsible Consumption and Production”.

    https://www.rosenergoatom.ru/development/innovatsionnye-razrabotki/razrabotka-proektov-aes-s-reaktorami-novogo-pokoleniya/reaktory-na-bystrykh-neytronakh/bn-800/

    CONSTRUCTION OF BN-800 WAS PURPOSED TO WORK OUT PROBLEM ISSUES OF NFC CIRCUIT:
    - creation of an industrial technology for the production of mixed uranium-plutonium fuel (MOX fuel) by the time the power unit starts up;
    - creation of industrial technologies for the processing of irradiated fuel and the manufacture of new fuel elements from it (recycling technologies).

    https://ru.wikipedia.org/wiki/Реактор_на_быстрых_нейтронах

    The fast neutron reactor allows convert spent nuclear fuel into new fuel for nuclear power plants, forming a closed cycle of using nuclear fuel, and allowing, instead of the currently available 3%, to use about 30% of the potential of nuclear fuel, hThis will provide a millennium perspective for nuclear power.
    1. Oleg Valevsky Offline Oleg Valevsky
      Oleg Valevsky 13 October 2021 11: 01
      .
      Wikipedia is great. and what ? Have you already processed a lot? .. At least a couple of percent of the already accumulated radioactive waste?
      I am silent about the fact that the technology is new, raw and it is not clear what will turn out in the end. And the waste is already being transported ..!
      Moreover, from only one, from the last batch, each Russian (including babies) will get ten grams of extremely radioactive garbage. How many more of these "gifts" will arrive? ..
      1. Bakht Offline Bakht
        Bakht (Bakhtiyar) 13 October 2021 11: 15
        +3
        Wikipedia is just one of the links. Didn't you see any links from RosAtom?
        Fast reactors are already in operation. And how long. The technology is not new. Especially for you the site of the Beloyarsk NPP
        https://www.rosenergoatom.ru/stations_projects/sayt-beloyarskoy-aes/
        Unit 3 start-up date - 1980
        Unit 4 start-up date - 2015
        Unit 5 is under construction. These are all fast neutron units. They run on spent fuel.
      2. boriz Offline boriz
        boriz (boriz) 13 October 2021 11: 51
        +5
        ... ten grams of extremely radioactive debris will get

        Extremely how much is this? In this case, uranium is imported, from where uranium 235 was taken out to the maximum. It is almost not radioactive. No recycling measures are needed. Millions of tons of such uranium are stored in the world. This is the same "depleted uranium" from which shells, armor of tanks, etc. are made.
        The Russian Federation has already mastered technologies that make it possible to use these "wastes" as fuel.
        These are BN and BREST-OD-300 reactors (further development of BN). BN reactors have been in operation for a long time.
        https://rosatom.ru/journalist/news/rosatom-nachal-stroitelstvo-unikalnogo-energobloka-s-reaktorom-na-bystrykh-neytronakh-brest-od-300/
        In anticipation of the emergence of controlled thermonuclear fusion, this fuel will last for 2 - 3 thousand years.

        How many more of these "gifts" will arrive? ..

        Let them carry such waste. The bigger, the better. There will be no need to extract uranium from the ground.
        1. guleg Offline guleg
          guleg 13 October 2021 12: 09
          -3
          Quote: boriz
          It is almost not radioactive. No recycling measures are needed. Millions of tons of such uranium are stored in the world. This is the same "depleted uranium" from which shells, armor of tanks, etc. are made.

          and then the whole world, led by you, yells that the damned Americans have filled up the whole of Yugoslavia and Iraq with these toxic "nuclear missiles" ... Double standards?
          1. boriz Offline boriz
            boriz (boriz) 13 October 2021 12: 15
            +6
            I, it seems, clearly wrote where Rosatom will use it.
            Didn't find the letters of your acquaintances?
            1. guleg Offline guleg
              guleg 13 October 2021 12: 19
              -5
              where does it say that French waste will go there? Russia is full of its own spent nuclear fuel

              And yet they did not answer for the Americans and their ammunition with depleted uranium cores. Or nothing to say?
              1. boriz Offline boriz
                boriz (boriz) 13 October 2021 12: 50
                +7
                And yet they did not answer for the Americans and their ammunition with depleted uranium cores.

                Am I the President of the United States to be responsible for them? The United States is an extremely backward country in the field of nuclear technology. For them, depleted uranium is garbage, and it will remain garbage for a long time (if not forever). The Russian Federation is the only country in the world that is already capable of using this "waste" on an industrial scale.
                And the Americans are stupid, except how to scatter this good all over the world, they are not capable of anything. They not only harm others, they make armor out of it. The media periodically breaks through data that such armor is extremely harmful to the health of tankers.

                Russia is full of its own spent nuclear fuel

                We must take it while they give it for free. Soon they will see the light and start demanding money for it.

                where does it say that French waste will go there?

                And here it is said:

                At the same time, the company noted that nuclear waste from French nuclear power plants will be re-processed by Rosatom and used at the enterprise in Seversk (apparently, it is about JSC Siberian Chemical Combine).

                I draw your attention to the word "re". This means that the uranium is sent in the form of uranium hexafluoride, which is once again driven through centrifuges. Our centrifuges are orders of magnitude better than any others in the world.

                In fact, most of the reprocessed uranium will remain in storage in Russia indefinitely. Thus, this uranium can be regarded not as a raw material for the production of new nuclear fuel, but as nuclear waste, the import of which into Russia is prohibited.

                Do you understand? "Uranus", and not some kind of waste from the reactor.
                And waste, such uranium, or raw materials - depends on the point of view.
                The dung heap under the threshold is crap. Manure in the field is a fertilizer that costs money.
                1. guleg Offline guleg
                  guleg 13 October 2021 13: 39
                  -2
                  Quote: boriz
                  For them depleted uranium is trash

                  not garbage, but raw materials. What is waste for the nuclear industry, in this case, is the raw material for the weapons industry. Armor-piercing projectiles with a depleted uranium core are not inferior in quality to a projectile with cores made of much more expensive and scarce tungsten. Russia, by the way, also makes BOPS with uranium cores

                  Quote: boriz
                  They not only harm others, they make armor out of it. The media periodically breaks through data that such armor is extremely harmful to the health of tankers.

                  those. depleted uranium is still harmful, and not harmless, as you say?

                  Quote: boriz
                  A pile of dung under the doorstep is a shit

                  now try to answer yourself that for Russia this waste of the nuclear industry. In order for them to become raw materials, they need to be prepared for loading into the reactor and a processing cycle must be carried out. Until Rosatom builds its BREST, until it starts working, and one reactor is nothing at all. Enlighten yourself how many reactors and how long it takes to have production, and not experiment.
                  As for how it relates to waste. You can recycle everything. A question of price and feasibility. Do you know the cost of "recovered" fuel and obtained in a traditional way? Perhaps, in the future, technologies will appear for making something very important and expensive from human feces, and each of us will become a carrier of very valuable raw materials)) Will you start saving up now? Do not send, while they give away for nothing?))
                  1. boriz Offline boriz
                    boriz (boriz) 13 October 2021 22: 21
                    +2
                    those. depleted uranium is still harmful, and not harmless, as you say?

                    And where did I claim that he was harmless?

                    one reactor is about nothing at all.

                    Other reactors do not have such reactors. No one.
                    Obninsk nuclear power plant was also first built one. Not 10 and not 20.

                    You can recycle everything.

                    Depleted uranium doesn't need much processing. BN rectors are already working. They are not yet being built in large quantities. after Fukushima, new requirements arose, and progress does not stand still. BREST appeared.

                    Enlighten yourself about how many reactors and how long it takes to have production and not experiment.

                    All nuclear countries have this uranium in unthinkable quantities. And there are no special costs for its storage. Only Russia has a clear perspective on its use. And there is an understanding that it is better to store stocks of metallic uranium than to extract later from the ground. Now Uranium One mines it all over the world where possible and for the time being. But, when the world is divided into non-currency zones, the situation may not change for the better. And we have depleted uranium reserves.

                    Perhaps in the future there will be technologies for the manufacture of something very important and expensive from human feces, and each of us will become a carrier of very valuable raw materials)

                    Perhaps. When will be - contact.
                    For depleted uranium, there is such clarity.

                    not garbage, but raw materials. What is waste for the nuclear industry, in this case, is the raw material for the weapons industry. Armor-piercing projectiles with a depleted uranium core are not inferior in quality to a projectile with cores made of much more expensive and scarce tungsten.

                    The military-industrial complex is unable to significantly reduce the reserves of depleted uranium. Martsinkevich speaks of millions of tons of such reserves in the world.
                    We (and you, including) brush our teeth 2 times a day with the hidden disposal of uranium enrichment waste. But this is not advertised.
                    1. guleg Offline guleg
                      guleg 13 October 2021 23: 37
                      0
                      Quote: boriz
                      They are not yet being built in large quantities. after Fukushima

                      Fukushima has nothing to do with it. These are just experiments, and you have already rolled your lip for industrial production. It remains to be seen whether it will be. However, it is a "fashionable trend" of today's commentators - to talk about the future as if it had already happened. It has become normal to present "they will create," "will be adopted," "they will build" as if they had already created, built, adopted.

                      And, by the way, for some reason the most important issue of the profitability of such production was ignored. Theoretically, gasoline can also be obtained from water, only, as they say, "there is a nuance" - how much more expensive it will be than that obtained from oil, and whether someone will need it like that.

                      Quote: boriz
                      All nuclear countries have this uranium in unthinkable quantities.

                      including in Russia. Therefore, there is no need to import nuclear waste from other countries. For the operation of experimental reactors, its spent fuel will last for tens (if not hundreds) of years.

                      You are just trying to pull the owl onto the globe. To justify by hook or by crook the fact that our country is being used as a landfill. There is no expediency to import other people's waste.
                      1. boriz Offline boriz
                        boriz (boriz) 13 October 2021 23: 49
                        +1
                        Fukushima has nothing to do with it.

                        Can't you read the whole text? After Fukushima, safety requirements have changed a lot. Generation 3+ reactors. Hence the lead heat exchanger. And much more.

                        Therefore, there is no need to import nuclear waste from other countries.

                        Well, don't bring it in, who is forcing you?

                        And, by the way, for some reason, the most important issue of the profitability of such production was ignored.

                        This uranium comes in the form of uranium hexafluoride. The French (and the Germans) can no longer get uranium 235 out of there. But Rosatom can. And he believes that it is cost-effective.
                        If you are not satisfied, write a complaint to Sportloto.
                        Tired of answering your stupidity
                      2. guleg Offline guleg
                        guleg 13 October 2021 23: 52
                        -2
                        Quote: boriz
                        Tired of answering your stupidity

                        nonsense is your writing. Moreover, you categorically do not want to answer uncomfortable questions (however, the absence of an answer is also an answer), and you write heresy to the rest hi and have already slipped into frankly childish babble (the arguments ended before they could begin?)
              2. Abakan Offline Abakan
                Abakan 13 October 2021 21: 31
                0
                Quote: boriz
                The United States is an extremely backward country in the field of nuclear technology.


                Not really, the US is the world's number one nuclear power producer.

                NUCLEAR POWER SUPPLY 2020 (GWh)

                1) USA 789,919
                2) China 344,748
                3) France 338,671
                4) Russia 201,821

                Nuclear reactors:
                1) USA 96
                2) France 58
                3) China: 50
                4) Russia 39
                5) Japan 33




                https://ru.wikipedia.org/wiki/%D0%AF%D0%B4%D0%B5%D1%80%D0%BD%D0%B0%D1%8F
                https://ru.wikipedia.org/wiki/%D0%A1%D0%BF%D0%B8%D1%81%D0%BE%D0%BA
                https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nuclear_power_by_country
                https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_nuclear_power_stations

                The US also ranks first in electric vehicle production, with Tesla built 500000 vehicles in 2021 and will build nearly 2021 million vehicles in 1.
                1. boriz Offline boriz
                  boriz (boriz) 13 October 2021 22: 24
                  +3
                  I was referring to the technological lag. They are unable to enrich uranium. Their latest achievement in the construction of a nuclear power plant is Fukushima. Westinghouse is bankrupt.
                2. Dmitry Kor Offline Dmitry Kor
                  Dmitry Kor (Dmitry Korobkov) 14 October 2021 17: 19
                  +2
                  Well, yes, well, yes ... the United States managed to build reactors around the world in due time ...
                  Just tell me - how many reactors have been built in the United States, say, over the past 20 years?
              3. bobba94 Online bobba94
                bobba94 (Vladimir) 13 October 2021 22: 55
                +2
                I spoke with a person related to the storage of nuclear waste. He says so - I don’t know when and where the first controlled thermonuclear fusion units will be launched, but I know for sure that in a certain number of years, when the reserves of oil, coal and gas begin to dry up, the reserves of spent nuclear fuel will be valued in the same way as the reserves of fresh water in planet ......
                1. boriz Offline boriz
                  boriz (boriz) 13 October 2021 22: 56
                  +2
                  Totally agree.
            2. Dan Offline Dan
              Dan (Daniel) 13 October 2021 14: 49
              +1
              Quote: Phantom
              for the Americans and their ammunition with depleted uranium cores

              Here the fact is that when the core of a projectile of depleted uranium strikes the armor and passes it through the armor (or other obstacle), a different quality of uranium comes to light than radioactivity. In this case, uranium manifests its so-called. pyrophoric, its shavings ignite, forming a large cloud of dust from uranium and its oxides. And they, in turn, when they enter a living organism, cause the growth of oncological diseases. This is, if very short.
              1. guleg Offline guleg
                guleg 13 October 2021 15: 34
                -3
                Quote: Dan
                This is if it's very short

                In short, the "concerned" are worried about those shells that did not hit anywhere and are simply lying in the Iraqi desert or on the territory of the former Yugoslavia. Someone under the nickname boriz is generally speaking for the armor of tanks (which were not knocked out).

                Quote: Dan
                Here the fact is that when the core of a projectile of depleted uranium strikes the armor and passes it through the armor (or other obstacle), a different quality of uranium comes to light

                I am very aware of the characteristics of the depleted uranium core and its effects, thank you.
                1. boriz Offline boriz
                  boriz (boriz) 13 October 2021 23: 12
                  +1
                  Those "concerned" are worried about the shells that did not hit anywhere and are simply lying around in the Iraqi desert or in the territory of the former Yugoslavia.

                  The only trouble is that among the concerned residents of Iraq, Serbia, Kosovo, the United States and Great Britain.
                  https://www.ieer.org/ensec/no-32/no32russ/uhealthrisks.html
                  The projectile can simply "roll around" if it successfully hits the sand. If something is harder, then it collapses, uranium begins to oxidize, people breathe dust. Low radioactivity makes it impossible to find fragments efficiently. And they remain in nature, continue to oxidize.

                  Someone under the nickname boriz is generally speaking for the armor of tanks (which were not knocked out).

                  Yes, imagine. Uranium sheets do not bend or weld. They are collected in bags (with a gap). Fastening - mechanical. Due to vibrations, uranium dust is formed at the place of attachments, which is immediately oxidized. People breathe this, it gets into the irrigation water for plants.
                  Even if the armor has fulfilled its function, then it is partially destroyed, again dust and oxides. The crew breathes dust from the armor.
                  I didn’t come up with this problem. Read more.
        2. Dmitry Kor Offline Dmitry Kor
          Dmitry Kor (Dmitry Korobkov) 14 October 2021 17: 16
          +2
          Why double standards at once? The key to such screaming is very simple. Depleted uranium is not particularly radioactive, but it has another disgusting property - it is toxic. And when ingested, it causes very bad consequences in the form of cancerous tumors, etc. And American tankers are especially happy about this .. because if a shell hits the Abrashi's armor, it may not pierce it, but it will heat up pretty much at the point of impact (the laws of physics have not been canceled), and besides, it can cause uranium dust from the armor to enter the air inside the tank .. and therefore in the light tankers .. with all that it implies
  • savage1976 Offline savage1976
    savage1976 13 October 2021 10: 56
    0
    Spent nuclear fuel is fuel immersed in a reactor; as a result of the reaction, electricity and fuel residues are obtained, which no longer give heat for power generation, discharged from the reactor. And the tailings are not fully processed uranium-containing ore during the creation of nuclear fuel. So what are they taking all the same?
    1. Bakht Offline Bakht
      Bakht (Bakhtiyar) 13 October 2021 11: 50
      0
      It seems to be the "tails" from the squeeze from uranium. It is less radioactive or even its radioactivity is lower than the natural background. Nuclear fuel can also be obtained from them, but the process is not yet very cost-effective.
      On the other hand, it is written about "waste from French nuclear power plants" and "spent fuel". Therefore, these are not "tailings", but precisely spent nuclear fuel.
  • Oleg Valevsky Offline Oleg Valevsky
    Oleg Valevsky 13 October 2021 10: 57
    -7
    Quote: Vladimir_Voronov
    listen to Mikhail Kovalchuk, who argued

    I already listened to Rogozin .... who "asserted".
    And the rest too
    Do you remember who there categorically "argued" about the retirement age ..?
    I'm sitting here thinking who else to listen to ..))
  • Waste recycling is profitable! Here, scam, Ukrainians in Chernobyl built a nuclear burial ground for the whole of Europe!
    1. guleg Offline guleg
      guleg 13 October 2021 13: 43
      0
      Quote: BoBot Robot - Free Thinking Machine
      Waste recycling is profitable! Here, scam, a nuclear burial ground was built in Chernobyl for the whole of Europe!

      they, it turns out, are fabulously rich) It's just that they themselves don't know about it ... wassat
  • boriz Offline boriz
    boriz (boriz) 13 October 2021 12: 13
    +3
    The source deliberately used an indistinct presentation of information so that it was not clear what kind of waste it was. To promote the hype.
    Since Germany is mentioned, they imported uranium hexafluoride, a waste of the uranium enrichment process. From which Germany was no longer able to extract uranium 235. Ours, after that, took out some more uranium 235 (our technology is steeper), then recovered the remaining uranium (very weakly radioactive) and put it into storage. This is the so-called “depleted uranium.” Which can be further used as fuel in reactors of the closed nuclear cycle (closed nuclear cycle).
  • Eduard Aplombov Offline Eduard Aplombov
    Eduard Aplombov (Eduard Aplombov) 13 October 2021 18: 52
    -3
    many correct thoughts have been written, both for and against, but no one brought up the moment of military confrontation with NATO about which anyone else writes among specialists
    the question arises what will happen in the event of a targeted strike at the storage location, I doubt that they are guarded like Moscow, what the country will receive after a missile hit
  • Abakan Offline Abakan
    Abakan 13 October 2021 21: 45
    +1

    NUCLEAR POWER SUPPLY 2020 (GWh)

    USA 789,919
    Россия 201,821

    Nuclear reactors:
    USA: 96
    Russia: 39



    TOP-5 countries - world leaders in the production of nuclear energy
    https://zen.yandex.ru/media/electroom/top5-stran--mirovyh-liderov-po-proizvodstvu-atomnoi-energii-5cfde528fa15f800b0971885
    1. boriz Offline boriz
      boriz (boriz) 13 October 2021 23: 24
      +1
      First you need to compare the population, then the total electricity production per capita. Then the impression of these numbers will change greatly.
      population:
      USA 335 million
      Russia 144 million people
      electricity per capita:
      USA 12 984 kW / person.
      Russia 6 kW / person.
      It turns out parity. Plus, there are many old nuclear power plants in the USA, they are retiring, but they are not capable of building new ones themselves.
  • boriz Offline boriz
    boriz (boriz) 13 October 2021 23: 21
    0
    Since the post draws a parallel with Germany:
    https://www.rbc.ru/society/23/10/2019/5db0975d9a79476a1c1ce21e
    For France, there is no such statement yet. But the essence is clearly the same.