What's new

Duplication of KANUPP/SMR paper

Karl

FULL MEMBER
Joined
Mar 16, 2011
Messages
152
Reaction score
0
Good 2018 presentation of plan to use indigenous Kanupp technology to create a heavy water SMR for desalinisation/power. Also useful to NOT put these reactors or their separated or unseparated spent fuel under IAEA safeguards and instead use them as leverage for a nuclear deal like India did. No deal, no safeguards!

Duplication of KANUPP Incorporating Current SMR Applications, Technology & SMR Features

 
.
Whatever happened to the 100 plants President Ghulam Ishaq promised long time ago?
 
.
Duplication of KANUPP Incorporating Current SMR Applications, Technology & SMR Features
What our country is waiting for? Pakistan should go ahead with full throttle in this field, it can bring both the electricity and water especially for our Baluchistan area, This is a revolutionary idea for the progress and prosperity of the country.
 
Last edited:
.
Very interesting read and probably many will not like it.Steps to ensure such duplication requires delicate international play .If done we can tap small market
 
.
Very interesting read and probably many will not like it.Steps to ensure such duplication requires delicate international play .If done we can tap small market

Kanupp utilises vintage 1960's technology, but even so, Pakistan could struggle to duplicate the reactor due to various industrial manufacturing capacity deficiencies. However Pakistan does possess a fuel fabrication line dedicated to Kanupp type reactors, it has some experience in procurring and manufacturing spare parts, and its reprocessing plants are designed to handle Kanupp style spent fuel.

India's duplication of RAPPS-1 and RAPPS-2 in the 1970's and 1980's are instructive here. It took India 20 years from the completion of RAPPS-2 (which was partially built with Canadian assistance) to the wholly indigenous RAPPS-3 (220MW(e)) which came online in 1990.

It would probably take Pakistan just as long, 15 - 20 years. Even so, Kanupp could be scaled initially to a 100 MW(e) - 150 MW(e) to even up to a 200 - 220 MW(e) reactor. Built in modues of two you're looking at 440 MW(e) for power and desalinisation, with export potential. Such modules may even be cheaper and more job creating than buying in CNP-300 PWR's.

Kanupp Candu technology is well understood. India, South Korea, Argentina and China can all to various degrees replicate it. Assistance from China would be helpful. One large impediment remains procurement of uranium fuel, which is why I would stress emphasis on co-operation of friendly countries, and experimental sea based extraction methods. Other cons are it wouldn't help much in the development of a prototype naval propulsion reactor ( they rely on integral PWR's) or development breeder reactors. It would certainly draw resources away from those projects if developed from scratch, but buying in those technologies was always the least expensive.
 
Last edited:
.
One large impediment remains procurement of uranium fuel, which is why I would stress emphasis on co-operation of friendly countries

You will find that difficult if you don't put the fuel under safeguards. You need to mine your own fuel if you want to go independent. And even then you run the risk of sanctions.
 
.
Several books describe the PAEC's early efforts in reactors design engineering back in the early 80s. The plans called for a modification of the KANUPP design.
However, it was shelved due to a lack of funds. It is believed that the R&D experience was later utilized in the 90s to design the Khushab reactor. We have lost several good chances mainly because of a lack of funding. There is a need to come up with creative methods of generating finances to plug the draining and atrophy of critical skills and experience of our workforce in the nuclear industry.
 
.
You will find that difficult if you don't put the fuel under safeguards. You need to mine your own fuel if you want to go independent. And even then you run the risk of sanctions.


There are ways around this. E.g importing raw phosphates for fertiliser with a high uranium content. But again it's a chicken and egg situation, either you build reactors w/o safeguards for leverage for NSG membership, or you remain reliant on foreign suppliers (china) for safeguarded fuel - forever. But seawater extraction is a way around this, while uneconomical now it represents the best future bet.

If Pakistan could do deals with Turkey, Indoenesia, Malaysia, Saudi, Iran, Kazakhstan (unlikely as Russia controls U reserves), UAE or Algeria, securing funding for reactor export in return for rebadged U it might be very doable.
 
Last edited:
.
Kanupp utilises vintage 1960's technology, but even so, Pakistan could struggle to duplicate the reactor due to various industrial manufacturing capacity deficiencies. However Pakistan does possess a fuel fabrication line dedicated to Kanupp type reactors, it has some experience in procurring and manufacturing spare parts, and its reprocessing plants are designed to handle Kanupp style spent fuel.

India's duplication of RAPPS-1 and RAPPS-2 in the 1970's and 1980's are instructive here. It took India 20 years from the completion of RAPPS-2 (which was partially built with Canadian assistance) to the wholly indigenous RAPPS-3 (220MW(e)) which came online in 1990.

It would probably take Pakistan just as long, 15 - 20 years. Even so, Kanupp could be scaled initially to a 100 MW(e) - 150 MW(e) to even up to a 200 - 220 MW(e) reactor. Built in modues of two you're looking at 440 MW(e) for power and desalinisation, with export potential. Such modules may even be cheaper and more job creating than buying in CNP-300 PWR's.

Kanupp Candu technology is well understood. India, South Korea, Argentina and China can all to various degrees replicate it. Assistance from China would be helpful. One large impediment remains procurement of uranium fuel, which is why I would stress emphasis on co-operation of friendly countries, and experimental sea based extraction methods. Other cons are it wouldn't help much in the development of a prototype naval propulsion reactor ( they rely on integral PWR's) or development breeder reactors. It would certainly draw resources away from those projects if developed from scratch, but buying in those technologies was always the least expensive.
Expertise wise no issue .funding wise definitely there are issues .I dont know what type of background you have but these Engineers sitting in dark have done some marvelous job
 
.

Country Latest Posts

Back
Top Bottom