1 / 42

The Future of Nuclear Waste Disposal in Europe

The Future of Nuclear Waste Disposal in Europe. Tashfin Haque Tim Kuykendall Chrissie Whitehead Erika Zavala. Nuclear Power Reactors in Europe. Nuclear Electricity Generation. Two Types of Disposal. Reprocessing by recovery and reuse of the usable plutonium and uranium portions

iram
Télécharger la présentation

The Future of Nuclear Waste Disposal in Europe

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 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. 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

  5. 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.

  6. 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

  7. 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.

  8. Waste Generated and Accumulated

  9. 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

  10. Near Surface Depository Near-surface disposal in caverns below ground level Near-surface disposal at ground level

  11. 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

  12. Deep Geological Depository

  13. 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

  14. 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

  15. 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

  16. 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

  17. Current Disposal PracticesFrance – Size of program • Largest in EU • 59 reactors • Largest reprocessing operation • 79% of electricity is from nuclear • Electricity is France’s 4th largest export • Committed to expansion

  18. 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 (T&M)

  19. 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

  20. Current Disposal PracticesGermany • 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 Nuclear waste reaches German site

  21. 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

  22. 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

  23. European Laws and Treaties

  24. 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

  25. 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

  26. 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

  27. 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

  28. 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

  29. European Laws and Treaties

  30. 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.

  31. 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.

  32. Current Situation

  33. 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

  34. 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

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

  36. Different National Legislation

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

  38. Different Time Schedules

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

  40. 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.

  41. Questions?

More Related