skip to main content
OSTI.GOV title logo U.S. Department of Energy
Office of Scientific and Technical Information

Title: Cogeneration in the former Soviet Union

Abstract

The former Soviet Union made a major commitment to Cogeneration. The scale and nature of this commitment created a system conceptually different from Cogeneration in the west. The differences were both in scale, in political commitment, and in socio economic impact. This paper addresses some of the largest scale Cogeneration programs, the technology, and the residual impact of these programs. The integration of the Cogeneration and nuclear programs is a key focus of the paper. Soviet designed nuclear power plants were designed to produce both electricity and heat for residential and industrial uses. Energy systems used to implement this design approach are discussed. The significant dependence on these units for heat created an urgent need for continued operation during the winter. Electricity and heat are also produced in nuclear weapons production facilities, as well as power plants. The Soviets also had designed, and initiated construction of a number of nuclear power plants {open_quotes}ATETs{close_quotes} optimized for production of heat as well as electricity. These were canceled.

Authors:
Publication Date:
Research Org.:
Brookhaven National Lab., Upton, NY (United States)
Sponsoring Org.:
USDOE Assistant Secretary for Nuclear Energy, Washington, DC (United States)
OSTI Identifier:
493376
Report Number(s):
BNL-63998; CONF-970701-4
ON: DE97006730; TRN: 97:013259
DOE Contract Number:
AC02-76CH00016
Resource Type:
Conference
Resource Relation:
Conference: 32. intersociety energy conversion engineering conference, Honolulu, HI (United States), 27 Jul - 2 Aug 1997; Other Information: PBD: 1997
Country of Publication:
United States
Language:
English
Subject:
21 NUCLEAR POWER REACTORS AND ASSOCIATED PLANTS; HEAT DISTRIBUTION SYSTEMS; DESIGN; STEAM; EXTRACTION; LWGR TYPE REACTORS; REACTOR COOLING SYSTEMS; PWR TYPE REACTORS; USSR; DISTRICT HEATING; COGENERATION; ECONOMIC IMPACT; ELECTRICITY; NUCLEAR POWER PLANTS

Citation Formats

Horak, W.C. Cogeneration in the former Soviet Union. United States: N. p., 1997. Web.
Horak, W.C. Cogeneration in the former Soviet Union. United States.
Horak, W.C. 1997. "Cogeneration in the former Soviet Union". United States. doi:. https://www.osti.gov/servlets/purl/493376.
@article{osti_493376,
title = {Cogeneration in the former Soviet Union},
author = {Horak, W.C.},
abstractNote = {The former Soviet Union made a major commitment to Cogeneration. The scale and nature of this commitment created a system conceptually different from Cogeneration in the west. The differences were both in scale, in political commitment, and in socio economic impact. This paper addresses some of the largest scale Cogeneration programs, the technology, and the residual impact of these programs. The integration of the Cogeneration and nuclear programs is a key focus of the paper. Soviet designed nuclear power plants were designed to produce both electricity and heat for residential and industrial uses. Energy systems used to implement this design approach are discussed. The significant dependence on these units for heat created an urgent need for continued operation during the winter. Electricity and heat are also produced in nuclear weapons production facilities, as well as power plants. The Soviets also had designed, and initiated construction of a number of nuclear power plants {open_quotes}ATETs{close_quotes} optimized for production of heat as well as electricity. These were canceled.},
doi = {},
journal = {},
number = ,
volume = ,
place = {United States},
year = 1997,
month = 7
}

Conference:
Other availability
Please see Document Availability for additional information on obtaining the full-text document. Library patrons may search WorldCat to identify libraries that hold this conference proceeding.

Save / Share:
  • A brief overview is given of neural networks activities in the former Soviet Union that have potential aerospace applications. Activities at institutes in Moscow, the former Leningrad, Kiev, Taganrog, Rostov-on-Don, and Krasnoyarsk are addressed, including the most important scientists involved. 21 refs.
  • The end of the Cold War precipitated an unprecedented, fast-paced effort by the United States and states of the former Soviet Union (FSU) to dismantle nuclear weapons. At the same time, instability in the FSU as nuclear stockpiles are drawn down has given rise to a proliferation threat potentially more serious than any nuclear crisis faced by the superpowers during their 40-yr standoff. With the FSU more susceptible than ever to proliferation and terrorist threats, it is probable that countries that intend to develop nuclear weapons will attempt or may already have attempted to obtain nuclear material not only frommore » dismantled weapons but from civilian nuclear programs as well. Numerous reports have emerged in the international media during the past year alone on FSU nuclear material being lost, stolen, or recovered following theft attempts. Under the US initiative for nuclear weapons safety, security and dismantlement (SSD), and the President's Nonproliferation Initiative, the US Department of Energy (DOE) and the US Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) are engaged in establishing bilateral technical assistance programs with FSU states in nuclear material safeguards. The overarching objective of US assistance is to help the FSU states improve their capabilities to effectively safeguard and protect nuclear material. The assistance will be carried out under bilateral agreements for cooperation and supported by funds authorized by Congress in the Soviet Nuclear Reduction Act of 1991 and successor legislation, such as the Freedom Support Act (1992).« less
  • The former Soviet Union (FSU) was the largest country in the world and was one of the greatest emitters of greenhouse gases to the atmosphere. At the end of the 1980s and the beginning of the 1990s the CO[sub 2] emissions for the FSU amounted to 1.46 Pg C yr[sup [minus]1] (Pg = 10[sup 15] g). Total CH[sub 4] emissions for the FSU were 55.8 Tg C yr[sup [minus]1] (Tg = 10[sup 12] g) or approximately one-third of the global CH[sub 4] emissions; 53% of the FSU CH[sub 4] emissions was contributed by peatlands. Emissions of CFCs were 67 Ggmore » yr[sup [minus]1] (Gg = 10[sup 9] g) and comprised 12% of the global CFCs emissions. The forest sector was a net sink for 0.48 Pg C yr[sup [minus]1] of atmospheric carbon, offsetting approximately one-half of the CO[sub 2] emissions from industrial processes. FSU peatlands accumulated 52 Tg C yr[sup [minus]1], but overall they were a net source of 48 Tg C yr[sup [minus]1] to the atmosphere considering utilization of peat. The net CO[sub 2] emissions of the FSU were 0.68 Pg C yr[sup [minus]1]. The FSU and China shared the fifth and sixth places in the world ranking of net CO[sub 2] emissions. The FSU and European countries shared the fourth and fifth places in the world ranking of net CO[sub 2] emissions per capita.« less
  • The conference was intended to give members of the American government and business communities a better understanding of the changes taking place in science, technology and industry in the Former Soviet Union. Science and technology issues were accorded a prominent place in the program of perestroika. In the six turbulent years of perestroika great strides were made in identifying problems, shortcomings and difficult relationships. But implementation of solutions to the problems has been far more modest. The science and technology community has been affected by the turmoil in the country, and continues to search for a viable and productive future.more » The objective of the conference was to examine the current state of science, technology and industry in Russia and the other states of the Commonwealth, and consider its possible future development. The specific topics and questions conference speakers were asked to address included: Analyze current science, technology and industrial policy. What is the new legal framework for science, technology and industry How are property rights and intellectual property rights being handled What has been done to insure individual rights and freedoms What are the organizational and management structures at the national level and at lower levels What impact is decentralization having on priorities and funding What industries are being de-nationalized What will be the relationship between private and government sponsored research To what extent will reductions in the budget for military R D affect non-defense S T funding How will reductions in military R D affect the long-term outlook for research How serious has the brain-drain become in the military R D sector. What has been the effect of glasnost on the R D community. How might improved international contacts affect S T What economic forecasting, if any, is feasible« less
  • The terminology and principles of classification of oil reserves and resources that are presently used in Russia and other countries of the former Soviet Union (FSU) differ from those in the Western countries. This difference stems from the specificity of the Soviet practice in exploration, assessment, and keeping a record of resources that were controlled by the centralized government. In the FSU, the fundamental approach to the assessment of hydrocarbon resources is traditionally based on the extent to which the resources are explored. Such important factors as thickness of separate reservoir beds, their quality, physical characteristics of oil, the recoverymore » factor, and the economic efficiency are not considered. Owing to this approach, the resource base appeared to be strongly exaggerated due to inclusion of reserves and resources that are neither reliable nor technologically and economically viable. A critical analysis of the long-term dynamics of reserves in the leading oil-producing regions of Russia, including west Siberia, shows a negative effect of the obsolete classification and errors in resource assessment on the development and production of oil fields. The classification of hydrocarbon resources presently used in Russia should be changed so that the principles of the new classification would be similar to those commonly accepted in the oil business. A proposed new classification scheme will make the assessment of resource base for oil production in Russia more reliable. This scheme uses the principles of differentiation and assessment of hydrocarbon resources that are conventional in the world. Because no method of resource assessment is precise, the results of assessment should be presented in a probabilistic form or, at least, as an interval, but not as a single number assessment that is a common practice at present.« less