Waste Management Symposium - Opening Plenary, Radioactive Waste Sections
February 26, 2007; Tucson, AZ
Panel: Education and Opportunity for the Next Generation of WM Professionals
Claes Lindberg, Chairman; SKB International Consultants AB, Sweden
Deep geological disposal of spent nuclear fuel (SNF) = Strategy, Challenges, and Experience. SNF can be safely handled and disposed of.
Strategy of 1976:
Avoid having to store waste at power plants.
Central interim storage for SNF, repository for low-level radioactive waste (LLW).
Long-term mgmt of SNF:
Underground/under-ocean repository
Reprocessing
Industry to finance (and eventually became responsible for disposing of as well - instead of the state).
1977 – Law passed requiring reactor owners to demonstrate safe disposal before loading any new fuel. Owners began KBS-3 process (safety concept - bury 500 meters underground in upright canisters in clay). At this point it became obvious that waste disposal would be the responsibility of industry.
Repository based on technology and location – lots of R&D.
Siting program for repository:
8 feasibility studies in communities that were interested, 1993-2000
2 suitable and willing, site characterization performed from 2002-2007
Promising results
(Design and construction of encapsulation plant, canister factory – and repository - currently in the works).
Program Management – need different parties to handle siting, licensing, operation.
Stakeholders:
Will hold hearings in March with environmental groups about how deep to bury waste.
A successful repository program requires the trust of the community. The public may visit existing facilities to witness safety practices.
Law requires structured R&D process. 3 years cycle for interaction with stakeholders (community may veto decision), then parliament must accept.
Future Timeline:
2011 - Hope to have construction of encapsulation facility and repository done.
2018 - Begin disposal.
2070 - Site turned to green field.
Dale Klein, Chair; US Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC)
US is well short of professionals, technicians, and craft workers for the nuclear industry.
Yucca Mountain (YM):
- NRC Commissioner Ed McGaffigan has spoken negatively recently about the way the YM project has progressed. McGaffigan has recused himself of any further decisions on YM and will retire when a replacement can be found.
- NRC will be ready to receive the YM license application when the Department of Energy (DOE) completes it, and will work with full technical rigor to make a timely decision.
- Oversight will be unabated as 30 or more new nuclear plant licenses come in.
- Country may need to consider reprocessing – GNEP could help reduce waste. But a repository at YM will still be required.
LLW – NRC is currently completing a strategic assessment of LLW (first since 1986) because of the potential closure of the Barnwell disposal facility in South Carolina and a National Academy of Sciences study on concerns of disposal availability. Klein doesn't foresee a catastrophe though – there is a potential new site in Texas being considered.
Decommissioning old reactors:
Have narrowed the timeframe from 37 months to 12 months.
Need to look into regulation of materials licenses and termination of those.
Long term mill tailing sites still need review.
Future Interests:
Communicating risk and informing the public of radiation risks. (Tritium in groundwater near reactors – why anxiety when no risk? Because misinformed.)
Small radioactive components in many everyday products.
Self radiate 40 mrem per year.
Need rational, science-based resolution.
Institute for Nuclear Power Operations – helps set guidelines and highlight issues in the nuclear energy industry to create regulations and spot troubles before there is public uproar/misinformation and legislation is required.
Should have similar institute of excellence for waste.
Q&A
When is a decision expected as to which of the 2 Swedish repositories will be chosen?
- Lindberg: Will submit a license in 2009, so will determine and make an announcement before then. Industry will decide, but the government must agree or disagree to the application.
Should we create more waste before we have a permanent disposal solution?
- Klein: NRC is a regulator, not a promoter of nuclear energy. NRC will evaluate the DOE license application for Yucca Mountain when it is ready. A repository could be for recycled (vitrified products) or SNF. Whether or not there are new reactors, the country must solve the existing waste disposal problem. SNF at reactors is safe and interim storage could be safe, but Klein believes a permanent repository is needed for a final solution. It is important for public to know that general radiation exposure to people per year (not related to reactors, disposal facilities) is about 300 mrem on average. Klein personally believes the US should have new reactors because we know how to dispose of the waste safely.
What is the cost of waste disposal in Sweden – geologic instruments, etc.?
- Lindberg: Sweden has uniform crystalline bedrock which is suitable for disposal. Have invested about 1 billion so far. 20-30 million per site.
How will GNEP be regulated?
- Klein: Each nation will have its own regulatory requirements; uniformity worldwide is helpful. Will need to maintain public confidence in order to have nuclear power which assists the environment (necessary if global warming is real).
The price of uranium is going up. Will the NRC have enough employees to review the fuel side?
- Klein: NRC has reviewed half of current reactors. License renewal is being done in a timely fashion, but they do need more employees – as does DOE. 370 new employees hired in 2006, plan for about 600 in 2007. Need to push for greater university/government support for nuclear science.
Comment: Also an aging workforce. Nuclear talent moving overseas. Federal offices are facing this by re-starting intern programs.
What is the veto authority of the community for the Swedish repository?
– Lindberg: The veto is in law, but there is a final option for the government to overrule. Unlikely though – very academic and would only occur if no other options exist. The main point is to communicate with the community and gain their trust, then they won't want to deny use of the land later (although they feel more comfortable having that right). Of 300 employees at SKB, about 30-40 work on communications with the public.
NRC should work with international institutions to see how they've dealt with public fears. Technical view needs to be pervasive and spread.
- Klein: Educating the public is critical!
 Return to Waste Management MENU page
Return to the Nuclear Waste Cleanup Menu Page
|
