The THTR Circulars from 2004

***

***

THTR Circular No. 94 Oct. 2004

HKG: After a gap in the measuring strips in 1986, now there is also a memory gap!

Excerpt from the HKG chronology on their current website:

Yes you've read correctly. Between 1985 and 1988 the former operator of the THTR gave no indication of the sensational incident, about which even Umberto Eco from distant Italy wrote in the weekly newspaper "Die Zeit" on July 18.7.1986, XNUMX.

Our webmaster Werner Neubauer commented on the unbelievable history of the HKG on our homepage as follows: "thtr.de received the expected content ..." and accused the HKG of disinformation. Mr Dietrich invited Werner Neubauer to a conversation in Hamm-Uentrop by email, which he declined with thanks with the remark that the operators had lost all trust in him. As if that weren't enough, answered ...

Günter Dietrich, technical director of HKG on August 16.8.2004, XNUMX by email to Horst Blume.
Here's the amazing content.

Quote beginning

"(...) I can renew my offer for a meeting in Hamm-Uentrop, especially to you, Mr. Blume, since Mr. Neubauer does not consider such a thing to be necessary. Our Internet pages contain facts and are not at supposed future costs and / or take risks.

We have shown the costs of the past and those of the current phase including the costs borne by those involved. The "taxpayer costs" you may have thought of, for example for final disposal, are listed insofar as they relate to the previous and the current phase (advance payment for final disposal).

The "incident" from 1986 that you mentioned was not an incident but a "reportable incident of category N". The repeatedly rumored releases and the resulting radioactive emissions amounted to 1 / 5.000th of the natural and civilizational pollution, were below the approved daily and half-yearly values ​​and at the same time had a ratio of 1: 500.000. This was stated in the notification at the time and in the safety report submitted for the decommissioning of the THTR 300 plant, and was noted and confirmed by experts and authorities in 1986 and also during the decommissioning.

I therefore ask, for the sake of the truth, to accept the correct facts here and not to repeat the same false claims over and over again.

The difficulties encountered during the trial operation of the THTR 300 system, which are naturally to be expected with a prototype, have been published in numerous publications, including by my predecessors, Prof. Knizia and Dr. Bäumer. So it is not "filtered information" and tricks that we pass on.

However, there are certainly different opinions about what to put in a "web site" and what not. Nevertheless, I would like to repeat my offer to you to meet us in Hamm Uentrop. "

End of quote

- Comment by Werner Neubauer: Where does this measured value come from? I thought the measuring instrument had failed at the time in question? -

Why are we now being approached by the former THTR operators, how do we get the honor? The advantages and disadvantages of the HTR line are now being discussed around the world, as various energy companies want to build the HTR again. The HKG does not like the fact that we are disseminating critical information about the THTR via the Internet, which is accessible to everyone. - And what do you do with critics? Discuss with them, keep them busy, distract them so that they are no longer so much in the media. If you talk shop about technical problems over tea, you won't be so snappy afterwards. At the same time, the HTR lobby can create a fait accompli in the EU and does not have to worry that people in the immediate vicinity of the bankruptcy reactor will irritate potential investors. 

Horst Blume

On September 5.9.2004, 93, Gerhard Schmidt from the Ökoinstitut had spread the reassuring news in the FAZ Sunday newspaper: "At the moment nobody is making the necessary graphite balls" (see THTR-RB No. XNUMX). Already two weeks later the reported "atw" in their September supplement "European Nuclear Features" the opposite!

The English-language magazine published by atw together with "Nuclear Espana" and "Revue Generale Nucleaire" (France) contained a three-page article on the HTR line by D. Hittner (HTR-TN, Framatome ANP) and MT Dominguez (Empresarios Agrupados). In it it says: "Taking into account previous experience have that Research Center Karlsruhe and CEA in France brought the know-how of older GSP (Gel Support Precipitation) and HMTA (Hex-Methylene Tetra Amine) processes up to date. The first coated particles (Fuel particles, PAC spheres, approx. 30.000 are in a spherical fuel element, THTR-RB) were established by CEA in 2003 with UO₂ (low enriched, THTR-RB) and Karlsruhe delivered their first cores with plutonium in early 2004. These activities will be continued in the sixth EU framework program in order to continue the production process with new fuel. "

CEA is the French group "Commissariat al´Enegie Atomique", which together with Framatome, Cogema, Siemens and KWU form the umbrella group AREVA merged. AREVA is to deliver the PBMR to South Africa (see THTR circular no. 89).

On October 22.4.2004st, 1.10, she answered the questions about the funding of high-temperature reactors put by MEP Hiltrud Breyer on April 2004nd, XNUMX. XNUMX the EU Commission. We document:

1. If such funding has taken place, by whom were the applications for funding submitted and by which body were they approved? What were the main reasons for the approval?

One of the themes of the Specific Program on Nuclear Energy of the Euratom Fifth Framework Program (FP5) (1998-2002) was the "Safety and Efficiency of Future Systems". Research on high temperature reactors (HTR) was part of the work program implementing the specific program. Several European research organizations and companies responded to calls for proposals under the work program in October 1999 and January 2001. The Commission selected the research proposals to be funded on the basis of a qualitative assessment by independent experts.

2. Is this subsidy a one-off payment from 2001 or was there any other subsidy before or after? If so, how much were these grants?

Around 50% of the € 17 million in support of HTR research came from the Commission, the other 50% came from the European research institutions that took part in the research projects. Of the € 8,5 million made available by the Commission, 4 million were committed in the 2000 budget and 4,5 million in the 2001 budget. The payments are made in tranches as the projects progress. The project duration is three to four years.

3. For which projects was the money approved and which research institutions were entrusted with this task?

The HTR research projects of the fifth framework program are: HTR-N / N1 (reactor physics, waste and fuel cycle), HTR-F / F1 (fuel technology), HTR-M / M1 (materials), HTR-E (components and systems), HTR-L (security system and permits), HTR-C (coordination) and HTR-ECS (Eurocourse). The research institutions and companies mentioned by Joel Guidez in his August 7, 2001 article in the journal Nuclear Worldscan are the main participants in the project.

4. What are the reasons for promoting the further development and research of high-temperature reactors in Europe? What is the research goal?

Research and development work on the safety and efficiency of HTRs is due to the inherent safety properties of the reactors, their potential to generate electricity at competitive prices, the potential for use in high temperature industrial processes and the fact that their fuel is extremely difficult to use Nuclear proliferation can be used, supports. The main objective of research under FP5 is to develop advanced concepts for safety and efficiency with a view to a new generation of HTRs.

5. Have the negative experiences at the THTR Hamm-Uentrop (for example the accident in 1986 at the same time as Chernobyl) been included in the assessment of eligibility for funding?

The thorium high-temperature reactor (THTR) in Hamm-Uentrop was a demonstration reactor that was originally planned for high-temperature applications. Despite some "teething troubles", important positive insights could be drawn from the operation of the THTR. The THTR project was supplemented by the positive results in terms of safety and performance of the prototype reactor of the Arbeitsgemeinschaft Versuchsreaktor (AVR) Jülich and the operation of various gas-cooled reactors in the United Kingdom, France and the United States. The research and development projects for innovative concepts for the next generation of HTRs selected within the framework of FP5 will be based, among other things, on the experience gained from the THTR project.

6. Were the German federal government and the state of North Rhine-Westphalia asked about their experience with this reactor line when the funding was approved?

The advisory committee for the research and training program (Euratom) in the field of nuclear energy (nuclear fission), in which the government of the Federal Republic of Germany is represented, was consulted by the commission on the funding proposals for research projects.

7. Are further research and funding for high-temperature reactors planned for the future? If further funding is planned, what is the research goal?

Further research and development on the safety and efficiency of HTR is foreseen in the Sixth Framework Program (FP6). HTR research is medium-term and the objectives are largely the same as in FP5. HTR research projects of the 6th framework program represent a contribution from Euratom to the V (very) HTR system of the Generation IV International Forum (GIF) should.

According to the European Commission, the European research institutions have been "asked" to make suggestions for their own projects at HTR Research. The fact that a decision in principle to promote the HTR line had to be made beforehand is discreetly concealed here. As a result, the EU Commission allows the targeted establishment of this special nuclear line to appear as normal, ongoing business of the EU administration, in which the European research institutions cannot help but obey this "request".

In reality, the HTR lobby is cleverly exploiting the EU level for its own interests, because in view of the long-term planned "exit" in Germany it has become somewhat more difficult to obtain funds for nuclear research. With reference to the superordinate EU, the German research institutions in their own country can justify their continued nuclear research with "practical constraints" and requirements of the EU Commission and thus far from themselves any responsibility.

As the only one of the four founding treaties of the EU, the Euratom Treaty was never changed in 1957, thereby establishing the promotion of nuclear energy. The nuclear industry has made the EU its very own instrument. From here, nothing other than unconditional nuclear funding can proceed - unless the requirements are fundamentally changed. The Green Foreign Minister, as the economically most powerful representative in the European Convention, refrained from working towards the latter in 2003 during the constitutional deliberations. The consequence is that the EU Industry Committee is not only increasing nuclear loans from 4 to 6 billion euros, but also using them expressly for construction new Nuclear power plants recommended.

The EU Commission confirms that half of the 17 million euros for HTR research were financed by the EU and the European research institutes. If you take into account that Germany is the largest contributor to EU funding and that Forschungszentrum Jülich, which is significantly involved in HTR research, is the largest interdisciplinary research center in Europe with 4.200 employees, it can be stated that German funds for HTR research have only taken a detour via the EU!

The EU Commission claims that the HTR "is extremely difficult to use for the proliferation of nuclear weapons". In contrast, in the HTR country of origin, Germany, the former chairman of the Reactor Safety Commission Lothar Hahn pointed out the serious military implications of this reactor line and clarified the following in an expert report of several hundred pages:

• It is possible to branch off uranium while the reactor is in operation, as the tennis ball-sized, unmarked spherical fuel elements are particularly handy and can be replaced with dummy elements without being noticed.
• The radioactive material for an atomic bomb can be produced within two months of operation.
• The radioactive tritium produced by the HTR line is particularly important in order to increase the explosive power of atomic bombs and is not covered by the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty and is therefore not subject to any international control. (For details see the THTR-Newsletter No .: 86)
• Hahn has also demonstrated in detail that the HTR line does not involve fewer risks, but only fundamentally different ones. (Please refer Expert opinion v. Lothar Hahn)

The EU Commission describes the unprecedented series of breakdowns and the 1986 accident in the THTR as a "childhood illness" from which "positive findings" are to be drawn. The only real positive finding that the federal and state governments in Germany implemented after a long period of hesitation was its closure in 1989!

The EU Commission emphasizes that the Euratom advisory committee for the nuclear power sector, in which Germany is also represented, was "consulted" on HTR funding. It remains unclear how the representatives of the German government behaved in concrete terms.

After the last fifth Euratom framework program, the EU Commission decided to also support HTR research in the current sixth framework program (2003 to 2007). Your declared goal is that the "HTR nuclear energy system" should be ready for use in 2030!

While the German Research Ministry stubbornly denied in its answer to our questions on July 20, 7 that FZ Jülich is pursuing "an intensification of this research line at EU level", the EU Commission announced the exact opposite in its answer!

When the seventh master plan (2007 to 2013) is negotiated in the EU in the next few months, the next steps will be laid for further funding of the HTR line. And what does the red-green federal government say about it?

Horst Blume

The energy supply companies have never really come to terms with the (extremely long-term) "exit" from nuclear energy by the red-green federal government. In the leaflet "Forum in Berlin" from the atomic economy publisher "Inforum" the slogan was issued this year: "In politics, nothing is irreversible". Gert Maichel, member of the RWE executive board and president of the German Atomic Forum, made it clear at the winter conference of this forum this year that the nuclear industry cannot be wound up, but is already working on improved starting conditions for new generations of modern reactors (atw 3 / 2004).

Here, of all things, it relies on the cooperation and further development of structures that the red-green federal government has created in order to phase out the use of this dangerous form of energy over the next few decades. The time window looks as follows: Nuclear power plants will still be in operation in Germany until at least 2022, probably much longer because of the mutual offsetting of the remaining terms. In addition, there is still a need for experts for decades for the interim storage of spent fuel elements, the dismantling of the plant and the "disposal" and final storage of radioactive waste.

For this reason the red-green federal government has one in autumn 1999 Evaluation Commission which should ensure that research and teaching are carried out diligently in the field of atomic energy, so that the know-how in this field is retained in the future. In the year 2000, this commission naturally came to the recommendation in its final report that the "protective mandate of state precaution" can only be fulfilled if more is done for "maintaining competence in nuclear safety"!

The red-green federal government reacted immediately to the wishes of the nuclear industry and set up the on March 16, 2000 "Competence Network for Nuclear Technology" in order to intensify the cooperation between the research institutions. This network consists of:

• Research Center Jülich (RWTH Aachen, FH Aachen / Jülich)
• Research Center Karlsruhe (Uni Heidelberg, Karlsruhe, Stuttgart)
• Research Center Rossendorf (TU Dresden, FH Zittau / Görlitz)
• Society for Plant and Reactor Safety (TU Munich)

A few months later, the members of the association sounded the alarm and predicted a reduction in the number of jobs for specialist staff from 16.500 to 13.000 (atw 6/2004). The decline in nuclear technology-oriented university graduates is particularly dramatic, which has led to a reduced range of courses at the universities.

The upcoming age-related departure of the atomic friends was particularly heavy in the stomach HTR specialist Prof. Kugeler at RWTH Aachen University and at Forschungszentrum Jülich. This problem is currently being solved by establishing an endowed professorship (atw 6/2004).

The "Competence Network for Nuclear Technology", which meets twice a year, has meanwhile set itself ambitious goals. He believes "a targeted advertising initiative is necessary in order to attract top students to nuclear safety research". Special workshops, the provision of doctoral positions, colloquia "Perspectives on Nuclear Technology", the establishment of a virtual European nuclear university - all of this has already been created. From the 2004/05 winter semester, a completely new course on nuclear technology was set up at the Technical University of Munich.

Since it is currently not always that easy to get money from the red-green federal government for nuclear research projects, doctoral positions are being created through so-called third-party funds from the nuclear industry. With this "sponsorship concept", individual operators and manufacturers (Framatome ANP) finance qualified university graduates as doctoral candidates "themselves and oblige them to work in the relevant group in the future.

Despite the "nuclear phase-out", unlimited further research in all nuclear areas is possible in the future, as the nuclear industry itself admits: "In its statement of July 16, 2003 to the BMWA (Ministry of Economic Affairs, HB), the competence network considers the participation of German scientists from publicly funded research institutions in Generation IV and comparable international projects to be necessary in order to orientate themselves on the current state of science and technology and to be able to check the transferability of innovative safety approaches for future reactors and other spin-offs to existing reactor facilities in Germany Since this restriction only applies to those employees who are paid from public funds, the possibility of external financing was examined . As a result, the doctoral students financed by the operator and manufacturer can work on precisely these attractive topics. "!

By using its own financial resources that are not subject to any social control, the nuclear industry can simply ignore existing exit laws and work on the development of the Very-High-Temperature Reactor System (VHTR) on an international level. The atw says it quite openly in its 6/2004 issue: "This means that - albeit via a complicated detour - at least some of the security concepts of future systems abroad can be influenced and possibly new findings are checked for applicability in Germany. "

In its report of July 9, 2003, the Competence Network for Nuclear Technology "on page 77 clearly stated its support for further research on high-temperature reactors for the years 2002 to 2006:" The aim of the work on high-temperature reactors is to maintain a minimum level of competence for observation, evaluation and Influence on the safety philosophy for modular high-temperature reactor projects that are currently being carried out in other countries. To this end, scientific contributions to the use of the safety features inherent in the modular HTR are made with industrial support. " So when the new CDU / FDP federal government is in office in 2006, it can thank the old Red Green for the atomic "maintenance of competence" and continue to work consistently on the implementation of new high-temperature reactors!

Horst Blume

Gorleben: There will be a rally against the new Castor transport on November 6th in Dannenberg. The transport could arrive in Lüneburg on November 8.11.2004, XNUMX. Info: www.x1000malquer.de

***

Top

***

***

Top

***