The Future of Nuclear Waste Disposal in Europe

1
The Future of Nuclear Waste Disposal in Europe

• Tashfin Haque
• Tim Kuykendall
• Chrissie Whitehead
• Erika Zavala

2
Nuclear Power Reactors in Europe
3
Nuclear Electricity Generation
4
(No Transcript)
5
Two Types of Disposal

• Reprocessing by recovery and reuse of the usable
  plutonium and uranium portions
• Direct ultimate waste disposal where the spent
  fuel elements are disposed of altogether as waste

6
Reprocessing

• Application of chemical processes to separate the
  valuable substances - the still existing uranium
  and the newly generated fissile material
  plutonium - from the fission products, the
  radioactive waste in the spent nuclear fuel after
  its use in the reactor.

7
Treatment and Conditioning

• Minimise the volume of waste requiring management
  via treatment processes
• Compaction
• Incineration
• Reduce the potential hazard of the waste by
  conditioning it into a stable solid form
• Cementing
• Vitrification

8
Three Types of Waste

• High Level Waste (HLW) Mainly vitrified waste
  arising from the reprocessing of spent nuclear
  fuel.
• Spent Fuel destined for Direct Disposal (SFuDD)
• Low and Intermediate Level Waste (LILW) Any
  waste that cannot be categorized as HLW or SFuDD.

9
Waste Generated and Accumulated
10
Storage and Disposal Options

• Near-surface disposal at ground level, or in
  caverns below ground level (at depths of 10m's)
• Implemented for LLW in many countries, including
  Czech Republic, Finland, France, Netherlands,
  Spain, Sweden and UK
• Implemented in Finland and Sweden for LLW and
  short-lived ILW

11
Near Surface Depository
Near-surface disposal in caverns below ground
level
Near-surface disposal at ground level
12
Storage and Disposal Options

• Deep geological disposal (at depths between 250m
  and 1000m) (suitable for long-lived wastes)
• Preferred site for HLW/Spent fuel selected in
  Finland
• Site selection taking place in Sweden for
  HLW/spent fuel
• Decision to be taken in France in 2006
• UK disposal policies under review

13
Deep Geological Depository
14
Current Disposal PracticesWaste Management
Practices

• 3 factors determine waste management
• Size of the nuclear program
• energy provided by nuclear power
• Financing of nuclear activities
• Public opinion

15
Current Disposal PracticesWaste Management
Practices Size Matters

• SAPIERRS members small generators
• Deep geologic repositories
• Cost prohibitive
• Waste stream does not justify construction
• Tend to locate on-site
• Looking for partnerships/regional solutions

16
Current Disposal PracticesWaste Management
Practices Size Matters

• Non-SAPIERRS
• Larger waste streams
• Immediate needs
• Combined methods
• Centralized
• Deep Geological
• Shallow
• Localized On-site
• Trade agreements

17
Current Disposal PracticesWaste Management
Practices Financing

• Key criteria for developing policies
• Financeability
• Fairness
• Efficiency
• Polluter Pays Policy
• Taxes on electricity generated
• Only on the nuclear sector
• On the whole electricity sector
• Payments based on characteristics of waste

18
Current Disposal PracticesFrance Size of
program

• Largest in EU
• 59 reactors
• Largest reprocessing operation
• 79 of electricity is from nuclear
• Electricity is Frances 4th largest export
• Committed to expansion

19
Current Disposal PracticesFrance Financing

• Generator is responsible for
• Waste classification
• Transportation
• Polluter Pays Principle
• Per package cost for small scale generators
• Established annual contracts larger scale
• Fixed costs charged per volume
• Variable costs costs incurred (TM)

20
Current Disposal PracticesGermany

• 17 active reactors -3rd largest in Europe
• No central repository
• Exports waste to France for reprocessing
• Has explored several sights for deep geologic
  development
• Future of nuclear programs is in flux
• 2002 voted to phase out nuclear
• More recently - started re-considering phase out

21
Current Disposal PracticesGermany
Nuclear waste reaches German site

• The journey has been dogged by anti-nuclear
  protests
• A controversial shipment of nuclear waste has
  arrived at Germany's Gorleben storage site after
  a journey marred by the death of a French
  environmentalist.
• BBC News Nov 9, 2004

22
Belgium

• 7 nuclear reactors currently provide nearly 56
  of Belgium's electricity.
• Gradual phase-out
• Exports waste to La Hague for reprocessing
• Primary storage is through on-site pools
• Current storage facilities are at approximately ¼
  capacity

23
Czech Republic

• Historical waste treatment agreements with
  Soviet Union
• Waste processing
• Waste exchange/storage
• Centralized security and management
• Developing deep geological repository
• 1990s favorable nuclear environment
• Current socio-political climate does not support
  further development

24
European Laws and Treaties
25
European Laws and Treaties

• International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA)
• Work to foster cooperation for the safe,
  peaceful, environmentally friendly use of nuclear
  energy
• Sets broad standards world-wide
• Inhibit nuclear proliferation
• Three main pillars of work
• Safety and Security
• Science and Technology
• Safeguards and Verification

26
European Laws and Treaties

• The European Union (The EU) - formed to promote
  economic cooperation among Member States
• The European Commission (The Commission)
• Executive body of the EU
• Proposed and implements rules and directives
• Ensures that all Member states are in compliance
  with the EU law

27
European Laws and Treaties

• EURATOM Treaty
• Founding treaty of European Union
• Originally established means for speedy
  development of nuclear energy
• Research and develop peaceful use of atomic
  energy (guards against proliferation)
• Uniform safety standards
• Common market for nuclear energy
• Adequate supply for development

28
European Laws and Treaties

• Joint Convention on the Safety of Spent Fuel
  Management and on the Safety of Radioactive Waste
  Management
• Under IAEA
• Aimed to achieve a high level of world-wide
  safety
• Spent nuclear fuel
• Radioactive Waste
• Holds members responsible for safety of people
  and environment in regards to all stages of the
  nuclear waste

29
European Laws and Treaties

• The Code of Practice on the International
  Transboundary movement
• Binding to states that are party to The Joint
  Convention
• Provides broad international standards for
  movement of radioactive waste
• Recognizes right of states to prohibit movement
  in and out of its boundaries

30
European Laws and Treaties
31
EU Public Opinion of Nuclear Waste

• A majority of EU citizens are against nuclear
  energy.
• Most do not feel informed about radioactive
  waste.
• For a vast majority of citizens of the EU, all
  radioactive waste represents a high risk.
• Trust environmental NGOs for their information on
  the management of radioactive waste over their
  national government the EU.

32
Public Opinion of Nuclear Waste

• Citizens are almost unanimous as to the need for
  there to be no further delay in setting up a
  national strategy for high-level radioactive
  waste.
• Less than half agree that deep underground
  disposal represents the most appropriate solution
  for long-term management of highly radioactive
  waste.
• Most want a harmonized strategies supervised by
  the EU in order to set up management policies for
  their radioactive waste.

33
Current Situation
34
Issues for small countries?

• Some countries unable to develop own solutions
• insufficient financial, human, technical
  resources
• Advanced national nuclear power programs have
  larger waste management programs have invested
  bn in
• developing encapsulation technologies
• developing disposal concepts

35
Example Costs

• Slovakia geological repository
• SKK 60 billion (year 2000) 25 of national
  budget
• appr. EUR 1.5 billion
• Total inventory 2,300 tons
• Yucca Mountain, USA
• USD 49.3 billion (year 2000) 2 of national
  budget
• Total inventory 70,000 tons

36
Challenges of MultinationalRepositories (MNR)

• Transport
• Different (national) legislations, definitions
• No higher authority
• Cost distribution
• Different time schedules
• ... and politics!

37
Different National Legislation
38
Challenges of MultinationalRepositories (MNR)

• Transport
• Different (national) legislations, definitions
• No higher authority
• Cost distribution
• Different time schedules
• ... and politics!

39
Different Time Schedules
40
Challenges of MultinationalRepositories (MNR)

• Transport
• Different (national) legislations, definitions
• No higher authority
• Cost distribution
• Different time schedules
• ... and politics!

41
Conclusion

• The future of Europe does not hold a central
  waste repository for nuclear waste.
• Most likely a dual track will be taken, with the
  EU setting deadlines and coordinating disposal
  practices
• EU citizens will push for a decision to be made
  sooner rather than later.

42

• Questions?