P. O. Korchahin
JSC “Kyiv Research and Design Institute Enerhoproekt”, 4, Beresteiskyi Ave, Kyiv, 01135, Ukraine
https://orcid.org/0000-0001-7373-4548
V. I. Kholosha
Ukrainian Nuclear Society (NGO), Office 1211, 6, Stepan Bandera Ave, Kyiv, 04073, Ukraine
https://orcid.org/0000-0002-2269-4993
DOI: doi.org/10.31717/2311-8253.26.2.7
Abstract
The issue of nuclear non-proliferation has become increasingly important due to the efforts of certain states to acquire nuclear weapons capabilities. Under these circumstances, Ukraine continues to support the international nuclear non-proliferation regime established by the Treaty on the Non-Proliferation of Nuclear Weapons (NPT) and its safeguards system. The decision not to develop a closed fuel cycle enables Ukraine to pursue nuclear power development within the framework of an open fuel cycle, including the option of direct disposal of spent nuclear fuel (SNF). A number of countries support the direct disposal of SNF because this approach limits the separation and accumulation of fissile materials that could potentially be used for military purposes. In contrast, some states continue to develop spent fuel reprocessing technologies, which create the possibility of recovering such materials. This study analyzes the environmental consequences of the activities of the Soviet nuclear industry, including major accidents, radioactive contamination events, and the impacts of nuclear weapons testing. The results demonstrate the significant environmental risks associated with several stages of the nuclear fuel cycle, particularly those involving the production, reprocessing, and management of nuclear materials and radioactive waste. Based on this analysis, the study argues that the further development of Ukraine’s nuclear power sector should continue to rely on an open fuel cycle without spent fuel reprocessing. Such an approach offers advantages in terms of environmental protection, radioactive waste management, and compliance with international non-proliferation obligations. The availability of natural uranium resources and the absence of plans to deploy mixed uranium–plutonium (MOX) fuel technologies further support this strategy. The study also highlights that many of the most severe environmental consequences of the Soviet nuclear complex were associated with inadequate radioactive waste management practices. Ukraine has established centralized facilities for radioactive waste disposal and long-term spent fuel storage, which should remain an essential component of future nuclear energy development. Direct disposal of SNF, as provided for by the Joint Convention on the Safety of Spent Fuel Management and on the Safety of Radioactive Waste Management, represents a logical endpoint of the open fuel cycle. Deep geological formations are currently recognized as the only reliable long-term option for the isolation of high-level and long-lived radioactive waste, including spent nuclear fuel intended for direct disposal.
Keywords: Nuclear weapons, closed fuel cycle, spent nuclear fuel reprocessing, nuclear weapons testing.
1. Law of Ukraine “On Radioactive Waste Management” no. 255/95-VR, dated June 30, 1995. Vidomosti Verkhovnoi Rady Ukrainy, vol. 27, art. 198. (in Ukr.)
2. MIT releases study on nuclear energy’s future. MIT News, June 29, 2003. Available at: https://news.mit.edu/2003/nuclear.
3. Law of Ukraine “On Ratification of the Joint Convention on the Safety of Spent Fuel Management and on the Safety of Radioactive Waste Management”, no. 1688-III, dated April 20, 2000. (in Ukr.)
4. Kruglov A. K. (2002). The History of the Soviet Atomic Industry. Boca Raton: CRC Press. 288 p.
5. Josephson P. R. (2005). Red Atom: Russia’s Nuclear Power Program from Stalin to Today. Pittsburgh: University of Pittsburgh Press. 360 p.
6. Schmid S. D. (2015). Producing Power: The Pre-Chernobyl History of the Soviet Nuclear Industry. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press. 320 p.
7. Bruno A. (2022). The Soviet Nuclear Archipelago: A Historical Geography of Atomic-Powered Communism. Budapest: Central European University Press. Available at: https://www.jstor.org/stable/10.7829/jj.4032516
8. Thomas S. (1999). Economic and Safety Pressures on Nuclear Power: A Comparison of Russia and Ukraine Since the Break-up of the Soviet Union. Energy Policy, vol. 27 (13), pp. 745–767. doi.org/10.1016/S0301-4215(99)00074-9.
If the article is accepted for publication in the journal «Industrial Heat Engineering» the author must sign an agreement on transfer of copyright. The agreement is sent to the postal (original) or e-mail address (scanned copy) of the journal editions.
Authors retain copyright and grant the journal right of first publication with the work simultaneously licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution License International CC-BY that allows others to share the work with an acknowledgement of the work’s authorship and initial publication in this journal.