1 / 33

Ji ří Slov á k , Věra Šumberová , Karek Kunc Radioactive Waste Repository Authority

The Czech Geological Repository Reference Design 2011 Impacts on the strategy of the fuel cycle backend. Ji ří Slov á k , Věra Šumberová , Karek Kunc Radioactive Waste Repository Authority Geological Repository Development Dept. RAWRA statement.

hamish
Télécharger la présentation

Ji ří Slov á k , Věra Šumberová , Karek Kunc Radioactive Waste Repository Authority

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. The Czech Geological Repository Reference Design 2011Impacts on the strategy of the fuel cycle backend JiříSlovák, Věra Šumberová, Karek Kunc Radioactive Waste Repository Authority Geological Repository Development Dept. Slovák, Šumberová, Kunc: Cz Ref Design 2011 - impact on the strategy of fuel cycle backend, Liblice, 15.4.2009

  2. RAWRA statement RAWRA´s main responsibilities are set out in Article 26 Paragraph 3 of the Atomic Act, according to which RAWRA is obliged to: …among others… ensure the preparation, construction, commissioning, operation and closure of radioactive waste repositories and the monitoring of their impact on the environment ensureand co-ordinate research and development in the field of radioactive waste management For performing RAWRA roles the Czech government adopted on 15th May 2OO2: The Concept of Radioactive Waste and Spent Nuclear Fuel Management in the Czech Republic (RAWM Concept) Jiri Slovak: Presentation at ININ, Mexico, March 26th, 2009

  3. RAWM Concept 2002 LLW /ILW waste • Continuing disposal into existing repository • Bratrství - 2030 • Richard - 2070 • Dukovany – 2100 HLW / SNF • Geological Repository (GR) • 2015 – Two suitable sites – main and alternate • 2025 – Approve the safety of the main site • 2030 – Construction of Underground Research Laboratory • 2065 – Commissioning of the GR • Support to R&D of P&T • International GR • A potential appreciation of GR development investments Jiri Slovak: Presentation at ININ, Mexico, March 26th, 2009

  4. Content of the presentation • GR Reference design – 1999 – 2006 • New – GR Reference Design 2011 • Suitable site for GR, public acceptance and how to improve it • SNF / HLW - strategy for the future Slovák, Šumberová, Kunc: Cz Ref Design 2011 - impact on the strategy of fuel cycle backend, Liblice, 15.4.2009

  5. 1. GR Reference design – 1999 - 2006 Slovák, Šumberová, Kunc: Cz Ref Design 2011 - impact on the strategy of fuel cycle backend, Liblice, 15.4.2009

  6. Design of GR - History • General studies: • Before Reference Design (1999) – 18 studies • First studies were presented in 1993 • Initially all these studies were coordinated by NRI, Řež • RAWRA undertook coordination from 1997 • Studies concentrated on: typical designs, legislative, economic and social arrangements, and on general approaches to solve both, underground structures and surface facilities. • Studies were dedicated to: arrangement of technical operations associated with waste transportation, taking over, conditioning and emplacement. Slovák, Šumberová, Kunc: Cz Ref Design 2011 - impact on the strategy of fuel cycle backend, Liblice, 15.4.2009

  7. Reference Design(1999) – brief summary • One of documents that proved technical and economical feasibility of GR project in the condition of the Czech Republic • Elaborated from 1997 to 1999 • The objective was development of reference design of surface and underground repository systems in granitic host rock on hypothetical site: • identify and assess impacts by which the repository could affect the environment • demonstrate that the planned solution complies with nuclear safety and radiation protection requirements • define financial and time consuming demands of the repository lifetime • demonstrate its technical feasibility under conditions of the CZ Inputs HLW - 3000 m3 SNF – NPP Dukovany– 1940 t (40 years operation) SNF – NPP Temelin– 1790 t (40 years operation) Slovák, Šumberová, Kunc: Cz Ref Design 2011 - impact on the strategy of fuel cycle backend, Liblice, 15.4.2009

  8. Reference Design – brief summary • Arrangements of surface area • Surface area consists of two basic parts: the active operations and operations servicing the underground repository part • Total area of DGRsurface parts amounts 29.5 ha, active zone fills 3 ha General view of DGR surface area - situation in DGR area during repository operational period Slovák, Šumberová, Kunc: Cz Ref Design 2011 - impact on the strategy of fuel cycle backend, Liblice, 15.4.2009

  9. Reference Design – brief summary • Arrangements of underground area • Access by vertical shafts, placement of SNF & HLW at level -500 m, construction of a tech. horizon to provide dewatering at the level of -550 • Volume of ex. rock: 1 615 000 m3; underground facilitiesarea: 200-300 ha Disposition of SNF and HLW emplacement horizon Slovák, Šumberová, Kunc: Cz Ref Design 2011 - impact on the strategy of fuel cycle backend, Liblice, 15.4.2009

  10. Optimised Ref. Design (2003) – brief summary • Elaborated in 2003 and concentrated on following procedures: • technical progress; • incorporation of research results; • international development of SNF/RAW disposal • development of opinions on site choice; • possibility of object optimisation and layout arrangement of GR surface and underground facilities; • amount and SNF characteristics • GR operation safety; • legislation changes; Slovák, Šumberová, Kunc: Cz Ref Design 2011 - impact on the strategy of fuel cycle backend, Liblice, 15.4.2009

  11. Optimised Ref. Design – brief summary • The main objective – rationalised and updating the individual parts of GR R&D and to gain more accurate data defining requirements for future DGR locality. • GR was divided into construction facilities and operational facilities (so-called functional modules) with technological, material, transport and other relations. • All over 14 functional modules have been created • Functional modules have been updated and optimised independently from each other from various points of view. • Total area of surface facilities: 18 – 20 ha • Volume of excavated rock: 950 000 m3 • Area of underground facilities: 200-300 ha Slovák, Šumberová, Kunc: Cz Ref Design 2011 - impact on the strategy of fuel cycle backend, Liblice, 15.4.2009

  12. Reference Design – visualisation • Optim. Reference Design – visualisation 2004 Slovák, Šumberová, Kunc: Cz Ref Design 2011 - impact on the strategy of fuel cycle backend, Liblice, 15.4.2009

  13. Visualisation of disposing vertical drill Detail of disposed waste - section Reference Design – visualisation Slovák, Šumberová, Kunc: Cz Ref Design 2011 - impact on the strategy of fuel cycle backend, Liblice, 15.4.2009

  14. Comparison of V&H dispose of SNF - 2006 • Project comparison of V & H dispose of SNF – finished 12/2006. • Main objectives: • compare the basic layout of H system with V system proposed in the Reference Design (RD) and Optimised RD; • study on different shapes of excavated tunnels for H and V dispose of system; • comparison of required area for surface and underground facilities suggested in the RD and its optimised version with H system; • proposed excavated rock volume comparison within V and H disposed of system; Slovák, Šumberová, Kunc: Cz Ref Design 2011 - impact on the strategy of fuel cycle backend, Liblice, 15.4.2009

  15. Comparison of V&H dispose of SNF • Layout of DGR surface facilities is in principle the same • Main difference is in usedexcavation technique (before drill & blast and now TBM for small profile disposal galleries, diameter 2,2m) • By using TBM method decrease volumeof excavated rock was calculated + TBM is time efficient (purchase price) • Manipulation and placement of disposal unit into disposal gallery not easy task • Comparison of two possible access ways: • by excavation shaft; • by incline access tunnel – helix (2-3 time more difficult on excavation work) • Total area of surface facilities: 18 – 20 ha • Volume of excavated rock: 293 000 m3 • Area of underground facilities: 40-60 ha Slovák, Šumberová, Kunc: Cz Ref Design 2011 - impact on the strategy of fuel cycle backend, Liblice, 15.4.2009

  16. Cross & longitudinal section Scheme of DGR Layout Intersection detail Comparison of V&H dispose of SNF Slovák, Šumberová, Kunc: Cz Ref Design 2011 - impact on the strategy of fuel cycle backend, Liblice, 15.4.2009

  17. Comparison of V&H dispose of SNF Summary of chosen data from the comparison H system – small profile tunnels and TBM = decrease volume of excavated rock of 50%. Slovák, Šumberová, Kunc: Cz Ref Design 2011 - impact on the strategy of fuel cycle backend, Liblice, 15.4.2009

  18. 2. New – GR Reference Design 2011 Slovák, Šumberová, Kunc: Cz Ref Design 2011 - impact on the strategy of fuel cycle backend, Liblice, 15.4.2009

  19. New Reference Design of GR – 2011 • Updating of initial GR Reference Design (1999) - main goals: • summarise all available data from field of GR development • evaluate technical and economical feasibility of GR in CZ • develop individual real layout variants and technological solution of GR • impact identification and quantification of different construction and operational phases of GR on environment within range of nowadays knowledge • condition identification of GR design solutions which comply with requirements of nuclear safety, radiation & physical protection and emergency planning Slovák, Šumberová, Kunc: Cz Ref Design 2011 - impact on the strategy of fuel cycle backend, Liblice, 15.4.2009

  20. Design of GR 2011 – contents New GR Reference Design 2011 is divided in several areas: Analysis of initial solution presumptions Solution variants and their design Initial safety report Environmental impact assessment of GR construction and operation Solution uncertainties of GR and proposal of other works Proposal of time schedule of GR realisation Evaluation of economical demandingness of GR construction and operation Slovák, Šumberová, Kunc: Cz Ref Design 2011 - impact on the strategy of fuel cycle backend, Liblice, 15.4.2009

  21. GR Reference Design 2011 – Future Trends Flexible and follow evident future changes directly influenced design of GR • Life time extensionof current nuclear sources • Transition to fuel of higher degree of burn up (4 years cycle – direct impact to source term) • Future utilisation of SNF (MOX fuel, NPP fourth generation, transmutation) • New sources of nuclear power (progress of nuclear power area) • HLW 6000 m3 • SNF total amount 9000 t Slovák, Šumberová, Kunc: Cz Ref Design 2011 - impact on the strategy of fuel cycle backend, Liblice, 15.4.2009

  22. 3. Suitable site for GR, public acceptance and how to improve it Slovák, Šumberová, Kunc: Cz Ref Design 2011 - impact on the strategy of fuel cycle backend, Liblice, 15.4.2009

  23. GR site selection in the Czech republic Stages • Stage 1 – Evaluation of the whole territory of the Czech Republic (study of archive geological data) • Stage 2 – Narrowing the area of sites (geological research works without drilling – geological research) • Stage 3 – Site selection – to 1+1 (geological works with drilling – geological survey) Slovák, Šumberová, Kunc: Cz Ref Design 2011 - impact on the strategy of fuel cycle backend, Liblice, 15.4.2009

  24. Current status of GR development program Site selection process • Latest step - preliminary airborne geophysical survey of 6 potential sites (2005) • Host rock – pseudo-homogenous granite blocks – each about 10km2 All selected sites – public opposition Government decision (June 2nd 2004) - to interrupt ongoing geological surveys at the sites until 2009 The Spatial Development Policy of the Czech Republic (approved by government, May 17th 2006) • In this document: • 6 evaluated sites have been reservedas potential sites for future exploration and evaluation for GR – to reserve these sites to 2015 Jiri Slovak: Presentation at ININ, Mexico, March 26th, 2009

  25. RAWRA´s approach for near future (1) • Motivation program for selected sites(one as main + one as alternate site) • local communities must be aware of potential rewards • motivation program for exploration process - support for the public involved in the selection program – direct payment from Nuclear Account to local public – as option – need approving bygovernment • Direct involving local public into selection by local public experts • Information campaign – general across the whole Czech Republic and specific for regions with potential sites All for to receive local public agree with geological survey in this year– its NO agree with future GR construction Slovák, Šumberová, Kunc: Cz Ref Design 2011 - impact on the strategy of fuel cycle backend, Liblice, 15.4.2009

  26. RAWRA´s approach for near future (2) • The other way how to get solutions (if process is unsuccessful) is Military Domains • Currently started project Critical bibliography search of existing geological information about military domains in the Czech rep.“ • The goal is to find potential area of existing military domain with potential siting of GR • To have 6 + 1 sites for site geological survey and next site selection = 1 + 1 (main and alternate sites) – all in 2015 First results from discussion with local public is: • All (motivation and possibility to search suitable site in military domain) have influence in public acceptance – involving principles of competition between motivation and acceptability from RAWRA point of view (Nuclear Account) • Public slowly agree with geological survey Slovák, Šumberová, Kunc: Cz Ref Design 2011 - impact on the strategy of fuel cycle backend, Liblice, 15.4.2009

  27. Potential GR sites and explored military domains Slovák, Šumberová, Kunc: Cz Ref Design 2011 - impact on the strategy of fuel cycle backend, Liblice, 15.4.2009

  28. 4. SNF / HLW - strategy for the future Slovák, Šumberová, Kunc: Cz Ref Design 2011 - impact on the strategy of fuel cycle backend, Liblice, 15.4.2009

  29. Summary of GR development program in the Czech Republic • Siting Strategy • 1 + 1 sites in 2015 (2020) –evaluation from 6 (+ 1) sites – including military areas • Nextsteps • 2030 – URL • 2065 – operation of GR • Regulations • no specific regulation for GR development – application of IAEA standards and international approach (as by geological law as nuclear law) • Host rock • Granites, granitic rocks (metamorphosed granites) Slovák, Šumberová, Kunc: Cz Ref Design 2011 - impact on the strategy of fuel cycle backend, Liblice, 15.4.2009

  30. GR development program in the Czech Republic – what news? New NPPs planed to be constructed – new 3 reactors be commissioned until 2025 (with 60 years life time operation) • HLW 6000 m3 • SNF total amount 9000 t – twice morethan in RAWM strategy • Only one real opposition of greens - in the CZR we haven't sitefor GR Need to change • Reference design • RAWM Concept of the CZR • New calculation of needed income on the Nuclear accout for future costs of GR New challenges how to degrees GR costs • IB x Natural Barriers system • Optimisation of the underground construction – GR will be operated longer time (100 years) – how to operated and care safety on the same level? • Container • Engineering system as main barrier or geology as main barrier? • Others - to support the technological R&D for optimization of fuel cycle backend Slovák, Šumberová, Kunc: Cz Ref Design 2011 - impact on the strategy of fuel cycle backend, Liblice, 15.4.2009

  31. Future – do we need GR?Few examples from open discussion GR – common international solution of collaborated countries? • It need selection process • Own solution (site) – better position for negotiation Reprocessing? • Why not – but only reduced (and its question) needed volume of GR • Reality is – only once and for new reactors P &T? • Why not– but technology mustbeoperational (economically) ….. andwastes?? Handover to another country? • Really we want to abandon this „gold business“? Slovák, Šumberová, Kunc: Cz Ref Design 2011 - impact on the strategy of fuel cycle backend, Liblice, 15.4.2009

  32. GR and RAWM concept2015 – 2030 – 2065 ?? GR – tree pillars as in another planed important building or investments • Advanced Technology • Adequate financial sources • Suitable Site • Do we need technology for application in 2065? • Yes, but only for feasibility of GR (in 2015) at the real site in real conditions • Financial sources? • YES – as for development, as for future construction • Site? – in any case – we will constructed building with provable long term safety – site has strong influence as for safety as for future technology –and ..... for financial sources too !! SITE 2015 !! And next steps? – potential future optimisations Slovák, Šumberová, Kunc: Cz Ref Design 2011 - impact on the strategy of fuel cycle backend, Liblice, 15.4.2009

  33. Thanks for your attention Jiri Slovak www.rawra.cz, slovak@rawra.cz Slovák, Šumberová, Kunc: Cz Ref Design 2011 - impact on the strategy of fuel cycle backend, Liblice, 15.4.2009

More Related