Iran Energy News Oil, Gas, Petrochemical and Energy Field Specialized Channel
Related Articles
Hoping to drum up some much-needed cash to help fuel the Kremlin’s war effort in Ukraine, Rosatom, Russia’s state-controlled nuclear entity, is hyping atomic energy as a “green” solution to Central Asia’s power problems. But Rosatom’s efforts to assuage Central Asian citizens on the safety and greenness of Russian nuclear solutions are undermined by reports of haphazard operational practices.
The rickety electricity grid across Central Asia is struggling to meet rising demand, with even Kazakhstan, the region’s most economically advanced state, grappling with power outages. Kazakhstan, Uzbekistan and Kyrgyzstan are all considering nuclear energy as a potential solution to electricity-supply challenges. The main concern about building nuclear plants in Central Asia involves safety in a seismic zone: the region is prone to powerful earthquakes.
Rosatom is hard at work trying to reassure Central Asian leaders and citizens alike that it has the answers to meet the region’s nuclear needs.
In an interview with Kyrgyzstan-based Kaktus Media, Dmitry Konstantinov, Rosatom’s chief representative in the Central Asian state, attempted to dispel concerns about the safety standards of Russian-designed reactors. Such concerns are not just connected to the legacy of the 1986 Chernobyl disaster, but also such tragedies as the sinking of the nuclear submarine Kursk in 2000.
“The increased seismic activity of the region [Central Asia] requires increased attention to ensuring the safety of a nuclear power plant,” Konstantinov said. “Modern Russian reactors … fully comply with them [safety standards].”
The reactors that Rosatom is seeking to build in Central Asia are small, low-power models, dubbed RITM-200N. So far, these reactors have been deployed mainly at sea, powering three Russian icebreakers plying Arctic waters, as well as on the floating nuclear reactor Akademik Lomonosov.
Konstantinov asserted that “active and passive safety systems” allow RITM-200N reactors to operate safely under “high shock loads,” thereby protecting against accidents caused by earthquakes registering 8 on the Richter Scale. To sharpen his sales pitch, Konstantinov noted nuclear power generation does not emit greenhouse gases and is compatible with other “green” energy sources, including wind and solar power. He said nuclear power can act as a “base,” working in tandem with renewable energy sources to “smooth out peak loads.”
“Only Russia has experience in the construction of low-power stations,” Konstantinov claimed.
In the interview, he made it sound like Rosatom was close to finalizing a deal with Kyrgyzstan to build a nuclear plant with six RITM-200N reactors with a total capacity of 330 Megawatts annually, and an operational lifespan of up to 60 years. Kyrgyz officials have not made any public announcements concerning a decision to build a plant, although the country’s parliament earlier in 2024 approved the resumption of uranium mining.
Uzbekistan in June signed an agreement with Russia to install up to six low-power reactors, each with a generating capacity of 55 MW, similar to those planned in Kyrgyzstan. Kazakhstan will be holding a nationwide referendum in October on whether to proceed with plans to build a nuclear plant there. Kazakh officials have not disclosed which entity would get the contract to build the plant, if the referendum is approved.
While the designs of modern Russian nuclear reactors may meet international safety standards, Russia has a history of haphazard practices in the operation of plants, as well as in the handling of nuclear waste. In late 2023, for example, Rosatom used a cargo vessel with a history of safety violations to deliver a fresh supply of nuclear fuel to the Akademik Lomonosov. Last April, a state of emergency was declared in the Far Eastern city of Khabarovsk due to a radiation leak.
Russia likewise has a spotty legacy of disposing of spent nuclear fuel. With Russian resources focused on supporting its war effort in Ukraine, the state’s ability to pursue cleanup efforts of nuclear pollution in the Arctic are on hold.
