REGIONAL AND INTERNATIONAL REPOSITORIES: NOT IF, BUT HOW AND WHEN Charles McCombie Neil Chapman Asso

1
REGIONAL AND INTERNATIONAL REPOSITORIESNOT
IF, BUT HOW AND WHENCharles McCombie
Neil Chapman Association for Regional and
InternationalUnderground Storage
2
Goals of Nuclear Waste Storage and Disposal

• to store, then dispose of long-lived wastes so as
  to ensure the SAFETY of future generations,
  without leaving them any burden of active
  maintenance
• to enhance world SECURITY in the short and long
  term by minimising the threat of potential misuse
  of U and Pu (including from dismantling of
  surplus weapons)

3
(No Transcript)
4
Who in Europe needs a deep repository?
5
One repository for the USA?
6
Just compare !
7
The Problem..

• There have been few serious efforts to provide
  internationally available disposal routes
• Consequently
• there is duplication of effort and waste of
  resources
• the global environment may be less well protected
• global security may be more endangered
• the future of nuclear power is more easily
  questioned

8
Important recent developments

• Growing acceptance of climate change led to
  increased interest in nuclear power and in
  availability of environmentally correct backend
  solutions for all user countries, no matter how
  small their nuclear programme
• New wave of terrorism deepened appreciation of
  necessity of safeguarding securely all spent fuel
  and other materials around the world including
  those from small countries which may never have a
  national deep repository

9
IAEA Dyck Bonne, 2000
.... concepts for developing multinational
facilities for spent fuel storage or waste
disposal can present interesting advantages to
countries with small amount of produced spent
fuel or waste. There are many benefits in a
regional solution like the obvious economies of
scale achievable with multinational facilities.
  It is also clear that storing spent fuel in a
few safe, reliable and secure facilities will
facilitate safeguards and physical security and
reduce the risk of proliferation, especially for
highly enriched uranium fuel from research and
test reactors.
10
US National Academy of Sciences June 2001
.... all countries are responsible for their own
radioactive wastes. This does not exclude
centralizing ... facilities (for storage or
disposal) in specific countries. Laws,
regulations, or ethical assertions that would
prevent the transfer of HLW between willing and
competent partner countries could preclude sound
options to enhance safety, security, and
economics The committee believes that ......
both national and international storage and
disposal facilities will be needed in the future.
11
Energy Commission of Swiss Senate

• The search for a HLW repository should not be
  restricted to Switzerland. If there are available
  international solutions, Switzerland should
  participate. Clearly, the same conditions as for
  a Swiss repository must then be satisfied.
• Aargauer Zeitung 1st Sep 2001

12
UK HoL Select Committee

• ... if the chosen policy is phased geological
  disposal, this country should take a lead in
  discussions on international regional
  repositories and offer help to those countries
  that need , but lack the resources, to develop
  them.

13
International repositories - a valuable service
to countries with

• small areas, complex geologies
• limited nuclear power
• no nuclear power - but long-lived wastes
• limited financial means
• interest in economic optimisation
• commitment to non-proliferation
• interest in maintaining the nuclear power option
  nationally or globally

14
International repositories a valuable asset for
countries with

• suitable geological conditions
• suitable siting environments
• a stable political and societal system
• the trust of the international community
• ability to provide high-tech infrastructure
• interest in economic development
• interest in expanding their global influence

15
Roads to International Solutions

• A number of initiatives, e.g.
• Non-Proliferation Trust (NPT) - private
  U.S.-based organization focusing on storage and
  disposal in Russia of surplus materials from
  weapons dismantling
• Pangea Project - international organization
  proposing commercial repositories for in
  specially chosen geological settings
• Russian initiatives (Minatom) aimed at earning
  revenue
• Arius the new international association

16
Pangea..some history

• 1997 Foundation of Commercial Company
• Australian company project
• Commercially based, short time-scale
• Scientific/business support political
  opposition
• 2000 Internationalisation
• International HQ in Switzerland
• Expand potential hosts and potential users
• Widen concepts (regional, not only
  high-isolation)
• 2002 De-commercialisation Expansion
• BNFL decision commercial development too distant
• Pangea ceases operation team re-orientates
• Goal non-commercial, wider association

17
A Wider Scope

• Expanded circle of supporting organisations
• Disposal and interim storage of spent fuel and
  HLW
• International facilities and regional facilities
• Safe disposal of all long-lived wastes (incl.
  TRU, LL-ILW surplus fissile materials, etc.)
• Alternative technical repository concepts in
  addition to high-isolation model expand siting
  possibilities

18
Mission of the New International Association

• To promote concepts for socially acceptable,
  international and regional solutions for
• environmentally safe, secure and economic storage
  and disposal of long-lived radioactive wastes

19
Main Fields of Activity

• Championing International and Regional Storage
  Disposal Options
• Organisation of Topical Meetings
• Information and Advice Service for Members
• Exploring Means of Growing and Strengthening the
  Association
• Studies to Benefit Members

20
Proposed Studies to Benefit Members

• Regional storage of long-lived waste in Europe
• Transport to international storage disposal
  facilities
• Regional repositories in Europe
• International repositories outside Europe
• Treaties/agreements/liabilities on import/export
  of wastes
• Regulatory and licensing processes
• Economics of shared storage and disposal
  facilities
• Public attitudes to import and export of wastes

21
Arius Status September 2002

• In February the ARIUS Association was founded
• Organisations from five countries joined ARIUS
  (B, Bu, Hu, J, CH)
• Study programme started Newsletter submission
  of CEC EoI
• First expansion ENEA, Italy
• Discussions with others in progress or planned

22
Summary and Conclusions

• For all HLW and spent fuel, safety and security
  must be assured for all future times
• International or regional facilities can improve
  both aspects and also the economics
• The time is ripe for progressing international
  concepts nuclear community support is vital
• The new non-commercial organisation ARIUS can
  help to enhance cooperation
• There will ultimately be both national and
  international repositories

23
The End
24
International RepositoriesDeveloping Views and
Responses

• 1990s Good idea, but politically impossible and
  we dont want to talk about it
• 1995 Could a commercial driver may make it
  possible?
• 1997 Non-proliferation needs a disposal
  solution
• 1999 It will undermine our national programmes
• - public fear of foreign waste import
• - implementer fear of being by-passed by export
• 2000 Small programmes need a champion
• - need technology on a similar timescale to
  national progs
• - costs must be justifiable
• 2000 National successes lead to relaxation
• 2001 Commercial projects?
• - timescales too long public distrust
• Today International repositories acknowledged
  as inevitable

25
The Russian alternative

• Politically advanced
• Large available regions
• Technologically advanced
• Only for storage and reprocessing
• Major opposition in Russia
• Large reservations in the USA
• Negative environmental image

26
Australian Feasibility

• Good sites exist
• Commercial basis exists
• Considerable interest expressed by the science,
  commercial and political sectors
• Enthusiasm still sustained, despite predictably
  volatile political process

27
The desert basins ofWestern and South Australia
Switzerland
Nevada
Japan
1000km
28
An Australian Problem??

• Australia has no nuclear power (but..)
• .......no nuclear weapons (but..)
• .......its own SEPARATE program for disposal of
  national LLW (but..)
• ....thus it is NOT a direct Australian problem
  .......BUT.....
• Australia has special geological environments
• .......a special world non-proliferation status
• .....thus Australia could CHOOSE to help solve a
  global problem

29
European Regional Repositories (EU Expression of
Interest)

• Phase 1
• basic safety concept
• social factors
• economic aspects
• legal and political boundary conditions
• Phase 2
• consultation with EU participants
• review of geological environments
• MAA

30
(No Transcript)
31
Yucca Mountain Cost Estimates
32
Swiss Backend Costs

• Total estimated 13-billion Swiss Francs
• Interim storage 1B
• Spent fuel management 4.7B
• LLW/ILW repository 1.7B
• Transportation 1B
• Casks and containers 0.5B
• HLW/SNF repository 4.7B