MILITARY THOUGHT (USSR): THE USE OF NUCLEAR POWER AT SOVIET MILITARY FACILITIES

• Document Type: CREST
• Collection: General CIA Records
• Document Number (FOIA) /ESDN (CREST): CIA-RDP10-00105R000100740001-4
• Release Decision: RIPPUB
• Original Classification: T
• Document Page Count: 10
• Document Creation Date: December 22, 2016
• Document Release Date: September 25, 2012
• Sequence Number: 1
• Publication Date: July 2, 1974
• Content Type: MEMO

Declassified in Part - Sanitized Copy Approved for Release 2012/09/25: CIA-RDP10-00105R000100740001-4
R
50X1 -HUM
Next 3 Page(s) In Document Denied
Declassified in Part - Sanitized Copy Approved for Release 2012/09/25: CIA-RDP10-00105R000100740001-4
150X1-HUM
Declassified in Part - Sanitized Copy Approved for Release 2012/09/25: CIA-RDP10-00105R000100740001-4
Page 4 of 12 Pages
Nuclear Power and the Maintenance of Combat Readiness
by
Engineer Captain First Rank V. Ivanov and
Engineer Lieutenant-Colonel I. Isakov
At the present time there is no need to furnish proof of the obviously
great importance of electric power engineering in ensuring that our Armed
Forces maintain a high level of combat readiness and combat effectiveness.
Suffice it to say that most combat complexes and systems and types of
military equipment are able to fulfil their combat .or support functions
only if they have an uninterrupted supply of electric power. The
development of the means of armed combat results in an increase in the
volume of the power supply to the forces, coupled with a growth in the
demands made on sources of electric power. The need is especially serious
for reliability and regularity of supply, independence, and the ability to
function when isolated from external conditions, when in transit, etc.
Potential power sources that meet all these requirements are nuclear
power plants and engineless generating sets with electrochemical generators
(fuel elements).
In the article "Certain Problems of Military Electric Power" we have
already dwelt briefly on these sources of electric power supply.* The goal
of the present article is to evaluate more fully the significance and
capabilities of nuclear power plants as one of the components of military
electric power engineering and their influence on the combat readiness of
weapons and the combat effectiveness of personnel.
Nuclear power engineering is in the forefront of world technical
progress. Whereas in the first 20 years of the worldwide development of
nuclear power engineering, only slightly more than 85 power reactors of
varying capacities and functions were built, in the last 5 to 6 years this
figure has nearly doubled, and the total capacity of nuclear power plants
increased by a factor of 8 to 10.
50X1 -HUM
* Collection of Articles of the Journal "Military Thought", 1966, No. 2
(78).
50X1 -HUM
Declassified in Part - Sanitized Copy Approved for Release 2012/09/25: CIA-RDP10-00105R000100740001-4
Declassified in Part - Sanitized Copy Approved for Release 2012/09/25: CIA-RDP10-00105R000100740001-4
C
50X1-HUMof 12 Pages
The development of nuclear power engineering is proceeding in two
different directions. On the one hand, the capacity of nuclear power
plants is increasing greatly (up to 500 to 1000 MW in one unit), while on
the other hand small-capacity power installations are being built, most of
which are earmarked for special use. At present, small-capacity nuclear
power already plays an important role in ship propulsion units (the nuclear
engines of submarines, surface ships, and icebreakers) and is beginning to
assume a prominent place in overland military energy, space research, etc.
In the present article,law-yield nuclear power is examined only as a
basis for the construction of self-contained overland sources of thermal
and electrical energy; in order to impart a more accurate understanding of
its significance, we shall first give a military-technical assessment of
nuclear power plants by comparing their basic tactical-technical indices
with data on power plants operating on conventional organic fuel.
The main advantage of nuclear power plants over all other power plants
is that they do not need a continuous supply of fuel. Nuclear power
plants, depending on their operating schedule, can already function without
a new supply of nuclear fuel for a period of 2 to 4 years, and in the next
few years the duration of this period should be increased to 5 to 6 years.
Consequently, nuclear power plants can make any installation or group of
installations totally self-sufficient in heat and electricity for an
extended period of time, since they do not require delivery of large
quantities of POL. It should be observed that the longer the period of
self-sufficiency of operation, the more appreciable this advantage of
nuclear power plants will be.
The lack of dependence of nuclear power plants on supply bases is
especially important to military installations, since it makes them
independent of sources of fuel and of transportation facilities. In
addition, it should be borne in mind that during the very first nuclear
strikes, supply and communications bases may be destroyed or damaged and
the supply of fuel disrupted, which in the end could render inactive those
important combat installations with power plants using conventional thermal
engines. When there is mass destruction (and fuel bases are extremely
vulnerable to nuclear strikes) and disruption of communication routes and
lines of control and communications, the power supply of especially
important installations can be quickly restored with the aid of nuclear
power plants. Nuclear power plants can be delivered where needed by using
the most available transportation under existing circumstances. and
50X1-HUM
Declassified in Part - Sanitized Copy Approved for Release 2012/09/25: CIA-RDP10-00105R000100740001-4
Declassified in Part - Sanitized Copy Approved for Release 2012/09/25: CIA-RDP10-00105R000100740001-4
50X1 -HUM
Page 6 of 12 Pages
installed and put into operation within a short time without organizing
supply services.
The length of time a nuclear power plant functions continuously
(without stopping) is calculated in thousands of hours. There is not a
single diesel or gas turbine power plant that can ensure this. The maximum
period of uninterrupted work of diesel power plants generally amounts to
150 hours, and only a few models can achieve 240 hours. This illustrates
the much greater reliability of nuclear power plants and their superior
operational characteristics.
Nuclear power plants with a steam-turbine cycle generate steam for
heating purposes in addition to electric power, which is especially
important in the northern areas of the country. It is extremely difficult
to bleed heat efficiently for heating purposes from diesel power plants.
It is also inadvisable to bleed heat for heating purposes from gas turbine
power plants, in view of the fact that the low temperature of the gases
produced (180 to 200 degrees C) makes it necessary to employ huge, heavy
heat recovery boilers. The use of diesel and gas turbine power plants as a
rule entails building auxiliary heating units in the form of separate
boiler rooms or even heat and electric power plants. As will be shown
below by specific examples, the operation of and supply of fuel to these
units in the northern areas of the country entails a large expenditure of
material means and of effort on the part of the personnel of military
installations.
The restoration of a protected or semi-protected nuclear power plant
is greater and simpler than that of any other power plant, since the
absence of air ducts and pipelines eliminates the possibility of a
shockwave penetrating the installation and causing its usual damage. The
aftereffects of the seismic loads that accompany a nuclear burst are
approximately the same for nuclear power plants as for other types of power
plants.
When nuclear power plants are located in protected and semi-protected
buildings it is easy to establish a system of prolonged, complete
insulation from the atmosphere. This will decrease and possibly even
preclude infiltration of the premises by chemical and bacteriological
warfare agents and radioactive particles and their affecting the
maintenance personnel. Other types of power plants are unable to do this,
since the air necessary for the maintenance of fuel combustion is not
50X1-HUM
Declassified in Part - Sanitized Copy Approved for Release 2012/09/25: CIA-RDP10-00105R000100740001-4
50X1-HUM
Declassified in Part - Sanitized Copy Approved for Release 2012/09/25: CIA-RDP10-00105R000100740001-4
Page 7 of 12 Pages
cleansed of these substances and leakage and rupture of air ducts enables
contaminated air to invade the premises of the power plant.
As has already been said, large fuel storage units need not be built
for nuclear power plants, whereas conventional power plants must have fuel
storage units with a capacity that provides either a month's fuel
requirements with the power station working at maximum load, or (in the
case of long-distance delivery of fuel) two years' fuel requirements.
Under the conditions of the Far North and the Far East, even when power
consumption is comparatively low (1 to 3 thousand kilowatts of electric
power and about 5 to 10 kilocalories per hour of heat), the necessary fuel
reserves are calculated in tens of thousands of tons. The lack of a need
for large, protected fuel storage units in nuclear power plants decreases
the volume of construction work and the quantity of construction materials
and equipment needed, and consequently reduces the cost of construction.
Nuclear power plants have less noise and vibration than diesel power
plants. The noise created by diesels as a rule exceeds 110 to 115
decibels. The noise and vibrations penetrate other spaces of the
installation and seriously affect working conditions. To avoid this, the
engine rooms of diesel power plants are placed some distance away from the
working area of personnel, thus reducing the compactness of the
installation.
It may be possible to build military nuclear power plants that convert
thermal energy directly into electric power. These plants will possess a
number of even higher qualities and greater advantages over plants with
conventional generators.
Along with these advantages, nuclear power plants have definite
shortcomings. First of all, their initial cost is still comparatively
high. This can be attributed to insufficient experience in their planning,
manufacture, and operation; the lack of special production facilities with
well-developed technology for the manufacture of nuclear power plant
equipment systems; the necessity of using costly materials, etc. The
building of a new-type nuclear power plant involves a substantial amount,
not only of designing work, but also, of scientific-research and
experimental work. But these factors gradually become less significant
with the overall development of nuclear power engineering. Rapid
scientific and technological progress in the area of the use of nuclear
energy can lead to wider mass production of nuclear and special materials;
improvement of the technology of the production of5nV4Tumcomponents, and
50X1 -HUM
Declassified in Part - Sanitized Copy Approved for Release 2012/09/25: CIA-RDP10-00105R000100740001-4
Declassified in Part - Sanitized Copy Approved for Release 2012/09/25: CIA-RDP10-00105R000100740001-4
50X1 -HUM
Page 8 of 12 Pages
instruments; the standardization of their use; and the accumulation of
production and operating experience. The manufacture of a series of small
nuclear power plants earmarked for the military may prove especially
advantageous. Based on their own experience, the Americans have computed
that the initial cost of military nuclear power plants for the US Army,
including developmental expenditures, will be 50 percent lower in 1970 than
in 1963.
In the second place, nuclear power plants are more complex than diesel
and gas turbine power plants. They require more complex and sensitive
automatic control and have, as a rule, a greater number of systems in the
technological cycle.
In the third place, nuclear power plants require the establishment of
special protective measures against the effects of radioactive emissions on
people and the surroundings when the power plant is operating, when there
is an overloading of the active zone, when storing new heat-generating
elements of the reactor and burying waste elements, and when various types
of preventive and repair work involving the equipment are being carried
out.
In an overall evaluation of nuclear power plants as sources of power
for military installations, it should be stated that they have a number of
decided advantages over other types of power stations and will be widely
employed, primarily in remote areas that are difficult of access. The most
important advantages of nuclear power plants are independence from supply
bases, total self-sufficiency of operation, and the capability of operating
reliably and uninterruptedly for an extended period of time. These are
precisely the characteristics that could ensure that weapons and military
equipment have a high level of combat readiness without dependence on the
operations of certain auxiliary support services.
* * *
In view of the fact that the principal argument of those who oppose
the use of nuclear power plants for military purposes concerns the large
initial capital investments required for their construction, a separate
appraisal of the economic advisability of using nuclear power plants in the
armed forces is of interest.
First a few remarks.
50X1 -HUM
50X1 -HUM
Declassified in Part - Sanitized Copy Approved for Release 2012/09/25: CIA-RDP10-00105R000100740001-4
Declassified in Part - Sanitized Copy Approved for Release 2012/09/25: CIA-RDP10-00105R000100740001-4
50X1 -HUM
Page 9 of 12 Pages
When deciding whether or not to use nuclear power plants in military
installations, economic expenditures are indisputably of great importance,
but nevertheless they should not predetermine the fate of these plants. It
is the tactical and military-technological advantages of nuclear power
plants that are to be considered above all other factors. In fact, if as a
result of using nuclear power plants the reliability and survivability of a
military installation increase, if a complex or military unit has a higher
level of combat readiness and combat effectiveness, and if vulnerability is
decreased, for example, in the event of a sharp reduction in fuel supplies,
etc., then economic factors, in our opinion, should take second place to
these important combat aspects. Economic indices may become decisive only
when the power factors and other tactical-technological data of the various
types of power plants and power installations are being compared.
In order to arrive at a technical-economic evaluation of nuclear power
plants, the technical-economic characteristics of mobile and component-
transportable nuclear power plants was compared with those of diesel, gas
turbine, and steam turbine power plants. The calculation was based on
statistical data obtained in planning and operating small-capacity power
plants. Attention was focused primarily on the use of mobile power plants,
which constitute the most numerous group in the armed forces.
On the basis of a study of the requirements of the armed forces for
power units, and taking into consideration the existing scales of
capacities, a series of mobile power plants was selected with rated
capacities of 500, 800, 1000, and 1500 kilowatts. The efficiency of a
given capacity was ascertained for various periods of usage, specifically:
1500, 3000, 5000, and 7000 hours per year, and with organic fuel costs of 7
to 90 rubles per ton of conventional fuel. The calculated annual
expenditures and the cost of the power produced were used as criteria of
comparative efficiency.
Analysis of the calculations made shows that mobile nuclear power
plants are inferior to conventional power plants when used less than 3000
hours per year and when the cost of conventional fuel is less than 80
rubles per ton, if the nuclear fuel is not regenerated. When the nuclear
fuel is regenerated, nuclear power plants become profitable when the cost
of conventional fuel is as low as 71 to 72 rubles per ton. The higher the
cost of organic fuel and the longer the period of time per year that
nuclear power plants are used, the more appreciable their economic
superiority over conventional power plants.
50X1 -HUM
50X1 -HUM
I Declassified in Part - Sanitized Copy Approved for Release 2012/09/25: CIA-RDP10-00105R000100740001-4
vi _.um
Declassified in Part - Sanitized Copy Approved for Release 2012/09/25: CIA-RDP10-00105R000100740001-4
Page 10 of 12 Pages
Moreover, calculations show that it is extremely advantageous to
operate nuclear power plants in conjunction with diesel power plants. When
so doing, the nuclear power plant should operate as the main basic power
plant at the rated load, while the diesel power plant is used only to
maintain peak loads and as a reserve. Substantial savings result when a
nuclear power plant and a diesel pbwer plant are combined in this manner.
Thus, when a component-transportable nuclear power plant with a 3000-
kilowatt capacity is operating as a main plant, the cost of the power
produced is only 2.6 kopecks per kilowatt-hour without fuel regeneration,
and 2.31 kopecks per kilowatt-hour with fuel regeneration. This compares
with 3.14 kopecks per kilowatt-hour when the same plant is operating on an
independent basis.
At the present time, in a number of remote areas of the country, there
are military installations that are in need of a reliable power supply.
Their basic sources of electric power are low-capacity diesel and steam
turbine generators, with heat obtained from a large number of separate
boiler rooms. Large amounts of diesel fuel, fuel oil, coal, and
lubricating oils are needed to keep these units working. The distance
involved, the difficulty and the seasonal nature of deliveries, the
frequency of transshipment of fuel, and the impossibility and
inadvisability of a return shipment of containers increase costs
substantially.
Whereas, for example, the cost per ton of diesel fuel for the central
areas of the country is 34 to 36 rubles, according to the data of the
Lenaeroproyekt Institute, in the Amderma settlement (Nenetskiy National
Okrug) it would be as high as 84.3 rubles; on Kamchatka--134.8 rubles; in
the Tiksi settlement--139.6 rubles; in Kresty Kolymskiye--194.7 rubles; and
in the Chokurdakh settlement (Chukotka)--214.9 rubles. This does not
include the cost of delivering the fuel to consumers from the main bases.
In view of the rigorous climatic conditions, the poor roads, and the
difficulties involved in making local shipments, one must assume that the
above indices of the cost of organic fuel may increase even when it is only
shipped over short distances.
Other figures relating to the transportation of fuel oil are both
interesting and extremely indicative. When the temperature of the ambient
air is law, the transfer of fuel oil can be accomplished only if it is
first preheated. Occasionally, prior to its use in boiler rooms, the fuel
oil must be transferred two to three times, and consequently must be
preheated two to three times. When this occurs, for each ton of fuel oil
50X1 -HUM
50X1 -HUM
Declassified in Part - Sanitized Copy Approved for Release 2012/09/25: CIA-RDP10-00105R000100740001-4
Declassified in Part - Sanitized Copy Approved for Release 2012/09/25: CIA-RDP10-00105R000100740001-4
50X1 -HUM
Page 11 of 12 Pages
transferred 0.6 to 0.9 tons of the very fuel oil being transferred must be
spent on preheating alone. These losses impede the use of fuel oil even
though this fuel is cheaper than diesel fuel and not in as short supply.
It must also be pointed out that the use of separate, inefficient, and
low-powered conventional power sources greatly impairs the combat readiness
and combat effectiveness of installations, since the power supplied is of
low quality. Breakdowns of machinery and other equipment frequently occur,
and a large number of personnel must be diverted to the service and repair
of the machinery and apparatus of the power plants and boiler rooms.
Let us turn to some concrete examples.
In one of the remote garrisons, seven separate boiler rooms and four
diesel power plants are used to supply heat and power to the garrison and
the combat complexes. The delivery of coal and diesel fuel is by
expedition--once every 12 to 18 months. Coal, the consumption of which
exceeds 10 thousand tons per year, is stored in piles in the open air and,
to prevent it from being scattered by the wind, it is flooded with water,
frozen, and covered with snow. As a result, when the time comes to extract
it for the second time, it is necessary to resort to various means,
including even blasting operations. Seventy privates and NCO are assigned
to service the boiler rooms alone, and they have to be completely excused
from combat training.
Another example. Thirty-six boiler rooms and several independent
diesel power plants with an overall installed capacity of approximately
2000 kilowatts are needed to supply heat and power to one military
cantonment. Coal is delivered to the boiler rooms by 10 ZIL dump trucks
during the winter period, and it is often necessary to resort to the use of
bulldozers. Here a whole company--120 persons--is engaged daily in the
servicing of the power stations and boiler rooms. The expenditure of motor
vehicle capacity is also very great. With a yearly consumption of 25,000
tons of coal and approximately 8000 tons of liquid fuel, annual expen-
ditures expressed in monetary terms amount to more than 1,300,000 rubles.
This is approximately the cost of two two-year loads of nuclear fuel for a
nuclear power plant with a 3000-kilowatt capacity, and which is capable
also of furnishing 7 to 10 giga calories per hour of heat. A plant such as
this could successfully replace all the abovtmentioned sources of electric
power for this installation.
50X1 -HUM
50X1 -HUM
I Declassified in Part - Sanitized Copy Approved for Release 2012/09/25 : CIA-RDP10-00105R000100740001-4
Declassified in Part - Sanitized Copy Approved for Release 2012/09/25: CIA-RDP10-00105R000100740001-4
50X1 -HUM
Page 12 of 12 Pages
And, finally, one more example. The military cantonments of a certain
garrison have 5 group and 13 individual boiler rooms and 9 power units with
a total capacity of 2085 kilowatts. Coal is sent by sea and then
transshipped by motor transport. The yearly consumption of coal is more
than 18,000 tons. Here 77 privates and NCO are assigned daily to service
the boiler rooms, and the equivalent of one million rubles per year is
spent on fuel.
One must also bear in mind that the above installations have been
forced by circumstances to obtain their supply of power and heat from
small-capacity power plants and boilers of the most diverse types: Shkoda
GS-350 diesel generators, turbo-generators produced in the US, our own
generating sets such as models AD-50, DES-30, DES-40, etc. The following
model boilers are installed there: Universal, Iskitim, MM3, MG-2, VNIISTO,
E5-D1, etc. Many of these units have a high rate of depreciation, and
consequently their operating reliability is low and the incidence of
breakdowns is correspondingly high.
Naturally all this has an extremely negative effect on the combat
readiness and combat effectiveness of the units deployed in the above
garrisons.
We have cited only three examples to demonstrate the urgent need to
solve the power supply problems of these and similar military installations
and garrisons by different, more rational and economical methods. We
believe this can be done with the aid of small-capacity military nuclear
power engineering.
The use of nuclear power plants makes it possible to centralize the
supply of heat and power to military cantonments, combat complexes, and
other important installations; free a substantial number of personnel for
combat training and the servicing of combat equipment; substantially
increase the quality and reliability of the power supply; improve the
living conditions of servicemen and their families; and on the whole
OX1:HUM
increase the combat readiness and combat effectiveness of 125_
Declassified in Part - Sanitized Copy Approved for Release 2012/09/25: CIA-RDP10-00105R000100740001-4