Moreover it only runs MOX now (far from a complete closed cycle), just as many classic REP do (for example in France).
It has problems and there is no plan to build another one: "problems at the recently completed BN-800 indicated a redesign of the fuel was needed. Construction of the BN-1200 was put on "indefinite hold". It could restart by 2035...
Source: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/BN-1200_reactor
Therefore Russia doesn't decline those 'BN' reactors, and it isn't because they aren't interested in industrial breeding because they are back to the drawing board with a small (lab) reactor of another architecture (lead-cooled): https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/BREST_(reactor)
It's a large 800MW reactor that is used to produce commercial power. I think it does qualify as an industrial.
> Moreover it only runs MOX now (far from a complete closed cycle), just as many classic REP do (for example in France).
It's right now the only commercial reactor that runs _completely_ on MOX. French reactors can work at most at 25% MOX fuel load, I believe. CFR-600 in China will be the second commercial reactor capable of 100% MOX fuel operation some time next year.
This is a step towards the closed fuel cycle. MOX fuel in BN-800 uses natural uranium (not enriched) and plutonium. It does not _breed_ enough plutonium to sustain itself, though.
> Therefore Russia doesn't decline those 'BN' reactors, and it isn't because they aren't interested in industrial breeding because they are back to the drawing board with a small (lab) reactor of another architecture (lead-cooled)
I know :) I've been following this for a decade. BREST-300 is developed by a competing organization, but they are even further from the actual reactor construction.
Right now, Russia just doesn't need more electricity, there's an excess of generating capacity. The plan had been to export electricity and technology to Europe and other countries, but "something has happened". And now all the financing goes towards "other needs".
Russia acknowledges BN-800 problems, doesn't want to deploy it, and postpones its successor (BN-1200) to 2035 ( https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/BN-1200_reactor ) while investing on a different architecture (indeed: way less explored) => BN is not industrial.
> It's right now the only commercial reactor that runs _completely_ on MOX.
True, however this 10% is quantitative, it isn't qualitative step forward (burning MOX is not new), and therefore not the giant leap as sometimes argued.
> CFR-600 in China will be the second commercial reactor capable of 100% MOX fuel operation some time next year
It is a demonstrator , and "will be". There is quite a road to an industrial version (only planned now, and named "CFR-1000"). The real objective here may not be some future industrial reactor but to efficiently obtain military-grade plutonium ( https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/CFR-600#Controversy ).
Impact of Ukraine invasion: sigh, indeed, and from this point I don't see any path towards relief.
I think we can agree to disagree on what "industrial" means. I think that the BN-800 reactor is an industrial reactor, just not a very good one.
> while investing on a different architecture
Not really investing. It's just that the committed BREST-300's financing will last a bit longer. But it will run out some time in 2025, and I'm pretty sure that they won't receive any new funds. The organization that develops it has some income of its own, as it is developing uranium nitride fuel (it's more uranium-dense compared to traditional oxides), but it won't be enough to finish the construction.
> True, however this 10% is quantitative, it isn't qualitative step forward (burning MOX is not new), and therefore not the giant leap as sometimes argued.
Pretty much nothing in the nuclear industry is a giant leap. It's all mostly a collection of small steps. Even lead-based fuel is not all that new, lead-bismuth reactors were used on submarines.
Most of the complexity arises because industrial reactors pack several gigawatts of power generation in just a few cubic meters of space. That has to last for decades without significant maintenance to be cost-effective.
They're not going to run out anytime soon regardless. If the price increases it makes it economical to extract deposits that currently aren't and then supply increases at the higher price.
But breeder reactors would also make it completely irrelevant as you say. U-238 is >99% of natural uranium but breeders can turn it into reactor fuel and then scarcity is a joke.
breeder reactors run the risk of weapons grade fuel, which i think is a risk. Also, you'd need a different reactor to use breeder fuel rather than refined uranium fuel - it'd have to be designed up front, rather than a pivot.
