Multi-Criteria Comparison and Ranking of Possible Russian Nuclear Energy Deployment Scenarios with Thermal and Sodium-Cooled Fast Reactors
The authors present the results of a multicriteria comparative assessment of possible Russian nuclear power deployment scenarios with thermal and sodium-cooled fast reactors in a closed nuclear fuel cycle (the so-called two-component nuclear power system). The comparison and ranking were carried out taking into account the recommendations and using the IAEA/INPRO tools for comparative assessment of nuclear power systems, including the means of sensitivity/uncertainty analysis in relation to weighting factors. Within this work, 10 possible Russian nuclear energy deployment scenarios with different shares of thermal and sodium-cooled fast reactors were considered, including options involving the use of MOX fuel in VVER. Eight key indicators were used, assessed as of 2100 and structured into a three-level objectives tree. The comparative assessment and ranking were carried out on the basis of multi-attribute value theory. The model for assessing key indicators was developed using the IAEA/INPRO MESSAGE-NES nuclear energy planning tool. The information base of the study was formed by publications of experts from JSC SSC RF-IPPE, NRC Kurchatov Institute and NRNU MEPhI. The presented results show that it is possible to significantly increase the stability of the Russian nuclear power system, when considering several criteria of the system’s efficiency, through the intensive deployment of sodium-cooled fast reactors and transition to a closed nuclear fuel cycle. The paper outlines the tasks for further research, which will make it possible to obtain more rigorous conclusions regarding the preferred options for the development of a two-component nuclear energy system.
- Two-component Nuclear Power System with Thermal and Fast Reactors in the Closed Nuclear Fuel Cycle. Ed. by the Academ. of RAS Ponomarev-Stepnoy N.N. Мoscow. Tekhnosfera Publ., 2016, 160 p. ISBN 978-5-94836-434-6 (in Russian).
- Alekseev P.N., Asmolov V.G., Gagarinskii A.Yu., Kukharkin N.E., Semchenkov Yu.M., Sidorenko V.A., Subbotin S.A., Tsibulskii V.F., Shtrombakh Ya.I. On a Nuclear Power Strategy of Russia to 2050. Atomnaya Energiya. 2011, v. 111, iss. 4, pp. 183-196 (in Russian).
- Alekseev P.N., Gagarinskii A.Yu., Kukharkin N.E., Semchenkov Yu.M., Sidorenko V.A., Subbotin S.A., Tsibul’skii V.F., Shimkevich A.L., Shtrombakh Ya.I. Strategic View on Nuclear Power in Russia at the Present Stage. Atomnaya Energiya. 2017, v. 122, iss. 3, pp. 123-126 (in Russian).
- Gulevich A.V., Dekusar V.M., Kagramanyan V.S., Klinov D.A., Usanov V.I. Development of Sodium-cooled Fast Reactors under Modern Conditions: Challenges and Stimuli. Atomnaya Energiya. 2018, v. 125, iss. 3, pp. 131-135 (in Russian).
- Kuznetsov V., Fesenko G., Schwenk-Ferrero A., Andrianov A., Kuptsov I. Innovative Nuclear Energy Systems: State of the Art Survey on Evaluation and Aggregation Judgment Measures Applied to Performance Comparison. Energies. 2015, v. 8, pp. 3679-3719.
- Kuznetsov V., Fesenko G., Andrianov A., Kuptsov I. INPRO Activities on Development of Advanced Tools to Support Judgement Aggregation for Comparative Evaluation of Nuclear Energy Systems. Science and Technology of Nuclear Installations. 2014, v. 2014, Article ID 910162, 15 p.DOI: https://doi.org/10.1155/2014/910162.
- Schwenk-Ferrero A., Andrianov A. Nuclear Waste Management Decision-Making Support with MCDA. Science and Technology of Nuclear Installations. 2017, v. 2017, Article ID 9029406, 20 p. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1155/2017/9029406
- Schwenk-Ferrero A., Andrianov A. Comparison and Screening of Nuclear Fuel Cycle Options in View of Sustainable Performance and Waste Management. Sustainability. 2017, v. 9(9), p.1623.
- Andrianov A.A., Andrianova O.N., Kuptsov I.S., Svetlichny L.I., Utianskaya T.V. Multi-criteria Comparative Evaluation of Nuclear Energy Deployment Scenarios with Thermal and Fast Reactors. Journal of Nuclear Fuel Cycle and Waste Technology, v. 17, no. 1, pp. 47-58.
- IAEA. MESSAGE – Model for Energy Supply Strategy Alternatives and their General Environmental impacts. User manual (DRAFT). Vienna, Austria. IAEA, 2016.
- IAEA. Modelling Nuclear Energy Systems with MESSAGE: A User’s Guide. IAEA Nuclear Energy Series NG-T-5.2. Vienna, Austria. IAEA, 2016, 126 p.
- Andrianov A.A., Korovin Yu.A., Fedorova E.V. Optimization of Nuclear Energy Systems by means of the Energy Planning Tool MESSAGE. Obninsk. INPE NRNU «MEPhI» Publ., 2012. 132 p. (in Russian).
- IAEA. Application of Multicriteria Decision Analysis Methods to Comparative Evaluation of Nuclear Energy System Options: Final Report of the INPRO Collaborative Project KIND. IAEA Nuclear Energy Series NG-T-3.20. Vienna, Austria. IAEA, 2019, 229 p.
- Kuznetsov V., Fesenko G., Zherebilova A., Phillips J.R. Scenario Analysis and Decision Support Tools for Enhancing Nuclear Energy System Sustainability. Proc. of the V-th International Scientific and Technical Conference «Innovative Designs and Technologies of Nuclear Power», October 2–5, 2018. Moscow. NIKIET Publ., 2018, pp. 40-42 (in Russian).
- Andrianov A.A., Kuptsov I.S., Osipova T.A., Andrianova O.N., Utyanskaya T.V. Optimization Models of Two-component Nuclear Energy System with Thermal and Fast Reactors in a Closed Nuclear Fuel Cycle. Izvestiya vuzov. Yadernaya Energetika. 2018, no. 3, pp. 100-112; DOI: https://doi.org/10.26583/npe.2018.3.09 (in Russian).
- Zardari N.H., Ahmed K., Shirazi S.M., Yusop Z.B. Weighting Methods and their Effects on Multi-Criteria Decision-Making Model Outcomes in Water Resources Management. Springer International Publishing, 2015.
- Wigeland R. et al. Nuclear Fuel Cycle Evaluation and Screening. Final Report «Fuel Cycle Research & Development», October, 2014, Department of Energy (DOE), FCRD-FCO-2014-000106.