Skip to main content
Log in

Nuclear power pros and cons: A comparative analysis of radioactive emissions from nuclear power plants and thermal power plants

  • Published:
Moscow University Physics Bulletin Aims and scope

Abstract

On the basis of the public data statistics of recent years on pollution and emissions from nuclear power plants (NPPs) and thermal power plants (TPPs) in the Russian Federation and the published investigation materials from Russian and foreign experts in this field, a comparative analysis of the radioactive emissions into the environment was performed for NPP emissions, as well as emissions from TPPs that operate using coal. It is shown that the total contents of radioactive nuclides in the TPP emissions substantially exceed those from NPPs, even for modern TPPs that operate using coal with ash contents of not more than 10% equipped with a filtering system that allows the removal of not less than 97.5% of the ash. An especially difficult situation for TPPs is due to long-lived radioactive isotopes, which are disposed practically without monitoring (and have a greater quantity of radioactive waste than NPPs by several orders of magnitude) with slag and are released into the atmosphere with the ash of organic fuels (particularly, shale oil, and coal).

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. The United Nations Today (United Nations, New York, 2008).

  2. A. McDonald, “Nuclear Power: The State of Affairs in the World. A Look at the Production of Electricity at Nuclear Power Plants around the World and its Future Prospects,” Byull. MAGATE No. 29-2 (2008), p. 45.

  3. I. I. Kryshev and E. P. Ryazantsev, Ecological Safety of the Nuclear-Power Complex in Russia (IzdAt, Moscow, 2010) [in Russian].

    Google Scholar 

  4. A. M. Akimov and N. I. Kovalev, in Ecological Safety Collection of Scientific Works of SNUYaEtaP (2009), p. 70.

  5. Uranium. Resources, Production and Demand (ONEA, IAEA, Paris, 1997).

  6. M. N. Tikhonov and O. E. Muratov, Ekol. Promyshl. Proizv., No. 4, 40 (2009).

  7. Ya. E. Yudovich, Geochemistry of Fossil Coals (Inorganic Components) (Nauka, Leningrad, 1978) [in Russian].

    Google Scholar 

  8. UNSCEAR. Sources and Effects of Ionizing Radiation (United Nations Scientific Committee on the Effects of Atomic Radiation, New York, 2000), p. 40.

  9. T. S. Mauricheva, “Quantitative Assessment of Radionuclides in the Environment during Working the Coal Thermal Power Station (for Example, the CHP-1 of Sveverodvinsk Sity,” Extended Abstract of Candidate’s Dissertation in Geology and Mineralogy (Moscow, 2007).

  10. M. N. Kumru and M. Bakac, Turk. J. Nucl. Phys. Sci., No. 22 (2), 95 (1995).

  11. V. V. Alekseev, Physics and Ecology (Znanie, Moscow, 1978) [in Russian].

    Google Scholar 

  12. I. Ya. Vasilenko, Toxicology of Nuclear Fission Products (Meditsina, Moscow, 1999) [in Russian].

    Google Scholar 

  13. Radioactive Elements in Coal and Fly Ash. United States Geological Survey. http://pubs.usgs.gov/fs/1977/fs163-97/FS-163-97.html

  14. T. S. Mauricheva and G. P. Kiselev, Vestn. Pomorsk. Univ. (Arkhangel’sk), No. 1 (9), 110 (2006).

  15. L. A. Puchkov and A. E. Vorob’ev, Human and Biosphere: Entrance to Technosphere (Mosc. Gos. Geol. Univ., Moscow, 2000) [in Russian].

    Google Scholar 

  16. Ecological Portal. ESOFAQ.ru

  17. “Study of Hazardous Air Pollutant Emissions from Electric Utility Steam Generating Units,” Final Report to Congress No. EPA-453/R-98-004.

  18. N. A. Titaeva, in Proceedings of the International Conference Dedicated to 100 Years of Radioactivity Discovery on Radioactivity and Radioactive Elements in Human Environment (Tomsk, 1996), p. 500.

  19. Radioecologyafter Chernobyl: Biogeochemical Pathways of Artificial Radionuclides, Ed. by F. Warner and R. Harrison (Wiley, New York, 1993; Mir, Moscow, 1999).

    Google Scholar 

  20. G. D. Kovalenko and A. V. Piven’, Yad. Rad. Bezpeka, No. 4 (48), 50 (2010).

  21. T. I. Matvienko, L. T. Krupskaya, A. M. Derbentseva, and B. E. Lamash, Technogenic Pollution of Soils and Plants in the Zone of Thermal Power Plant (Dalnevost. Univ., Vladivostok, 2008) [in Russian].

    Google Scholar 

  22. M. N. Tikhonov, O. E. Muratov, and E. L. Petrov, in Ecological Expertise, Review Inform. (VINITI RAN, Moscow, 2006), No. 6, p. 38 [in Russian].

    Google Scholar 

  23. Annual Report 2010 of Rosenergoatom Concern. http://www.rosenergoatom.ru

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to V. A. Gordienko.

Additional information

Original Russian Text © V.A. Gordienko, S.N. Brykin, R.E. Kuzin, I.S. Serebryakov, M.V. Starkov, T.N. Tairov, 2012, published in Vestnik Moskovskogo Universiteta. Fizika, 2012, No. 1, pp. 123–130.

About this article

Cite this article

Gordienko, V.A., Brykin, S.N., Kuzin, R.E. et al. Nuclear power pros and cons: A comparative analysis of radioactive emissions from nuclear power plants and thermal power plants. Moscow Univ. Phys. 67, 120–127 (2012). https://doi.org/10.3103/S0027134912010055

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.3103/S0027134912010055

Keywords

Navigation