The History of Nuclear Controversy in Belgium in European Perspective

1
The History of Nuclear Controversy in Belgium in
European Perspective
Gilbert Eggermont
PISA, SCKCEN, Mol, VUB Belgium email
geggermo_at_sckcen.be website www.sckcen.be/pisa
2
Get Insight in the Evolution of Decision Making
by Mapping Controversies
Mapping of controversies yields insight in
evolution of decision making

• How to explain a controversy?
• Methodology
• Study of interaction of 3 time axes
• Decisions
• Events
• Controversies
• Identification of turning points phasing
• Argumentation analysis
• Results - Typology of actors
• Conclusions

7NPP 1966
Tsjernobyl 1986
Ocean dumping 1982
3
Amplified social controversies always have a
reason le fait accompli

• Social phenomenon of interaction of (diverse)
  actors with other interests in a DM proces
• Typology, argumentation schemes
• Role of techno-political networks
• Cultural background of decision making (VdB
  vs.Deleuze)
• Filtering process of robust arguments
• Capacity to frame in common good perspective
• Learning process of actors
• Polarization of opinions in a spectrum of views
• New role of the media defining the scope

4
Participative approach of viWTA has directed the
argumentation analysis

• Systematic attention for time deformation
• Few historic studies
• Search in archives, literature, press, and
  international comparisons (Nl)
• Confronting interviews with selected actors
• Balanced steering committee
• Objective Reconstructing arguing scenarios

5
A wealth of information but different views on
nuclear perspectives

• How robust were the discourses? evidence,
  relevance, scope, coherence
• Role of black boxes PSA, PA, RA,
• Impact of controversies on governance
• Seldom new consensus afterwards due to the
  robustness of systems
• Long term restructuration processes towards trust
  and transparency
• Difficult to reach consensus on the message

6
Four major periods of controversies characterised
by critical events and decisions

• Prehistory (1945-1973)
• growth discussions following energy crisis
• Siting controversies (1973-1979)
• Harrisburg accident
• Period of crisis management with fuel cycle
  controversies (1980-1989)
• Tsjernobyl, reprocessing and waste problems
• New priorities Waste disposal, phase out and
  sustainable development (1990-2004)
• Climate issue

7
Prehistory (1945-1973) technological optimism
overshadowed by emerging risks

• Hiroshima, Nagasaki (1945)
• Eisenhower Atoms for peace UN (53)
• First accidents (Windscale, Kysthim (57)
• Energy euphoria structured
• EURATOM treaty
• Cold war atomic bomb tests (58-62)
• Belgian nuclear energy decisions (1966)
• Venus reactor criticality accident Mol 66
• EC launches proposal of 200 NPPs (73)

8
Few controversies during the economic boom
period, but military secrecy

• Belgian role in weapon development (Mol, U)?
• Complete industrial ambitions in Belgium
• Development of public research centre (US,
  military)
• Epidemiological evidence of cancer risk
• required regulatory frameworks
• Global pollution atomic bomb tests (60)
• Global agreements and TA institutes (IAEA)
• Impact of networks of critical experts
• Club of Rome (72), UCS, La Revue Nouvelle/Links

9
Siting controversies (73-79) on already ordered
NPPs were amplified by accidents

• Construction of 4NPP on 2 Belgian sites (66-74)
• Controversy on coastal siting option
• MIT reactor safety study (PSA-1975)
• Governemental Evaluation Commission (76)
• paved the way for controversies
• Anti-nuke local successes(REM U235) NIMBY?
• Harrisburg TMI accident, human error in the focus
• core melt with successful engineered barriers
• Start of studies on energy demand and decentral
  supply

10
SCK between dreams reality, while public
opinion started to set political agenda

• Maximimum use of electricity (oil crisis 1973)
• Limits to growth ration. energy use, renewables
• Spectrum of protest groups gain political impact
• Vulnerability criteria? Transparency!
• Utilities and government policies challenged
  (74-79)
• Impression of decision making by private industry
• Weak involvement of authorities lack of policy
  vision
• The real Belgian constraint siting DM role of
  Bayens
• Artificial coastal islands only solution for 20
  NPP/20 y
• Nuclear waste disposal neglected in most
  countries till 1980 proactive SCK

11
OCEAN DILUTION
12
Crisis Management (1980-1989)

• Ethical, social and technical problems with ocean
  waste dumping (82) ? Convention to stop
• Montlouis Accident (84) FC transport
  safety?
• Tsjernobyl (86) radioactivity in Europe
• Arguments of critical experts and anti-nukes
  taken over by unions and political parties
  greens
• Forum decennal investment plans
  utilities(Chooz,N8)
• Reprocessing MOx controversies (Pu transport)
• Eurochemic plant closed(77-86) decom costs?
• La Hague contracts critically reviewed
• Transnuklear scandal in Mol (86-90) -gtBP

13
Fuel cycle controversies lead to moratorium on
NPP and reprocessing

• Attention for externalised nuclear FC costs
• Lack of funding for decommissioning who pays?
• Symptomatic problem of Russian safety High
  Cold War environmental impact, also in USA
• Political focussing on environmental issues
• Breeder development halted too expensive
  strategic impact on long term nuclear prospects
• Waste policymaking put on political agenda

14
Focus on waste, reprocessing, decommisioning
costs and phase-out (90-2005)

• Restructuring of nuclear research allowed real
  but difficult start of NIRAS ? referendum
  Beauraing!
• Controversies LLW siting geological HLW
  disposal
• spent fuel (SAFIR)/ return HLWglass
• Parliamentary decisions implemented
• Nuclear moratorium, no new reprocessing, stop
  breeder
• Impact liberalization European electricity market
• Climate change as pro nuclear argument
• Difficult creation of regulatory agency FANC
• Phase out decision to close eventually 7 NPPs
  after 40 years (2014-2023)

15
Difficult construct and lack of vision on public
waste and safety institutions trust building?

• Growing environmental concern (PP, SD)
• Sustainable Development concept used in nuclear
  sector
• climate issue but lack of ecosystem vision
  (Kr-85 anthropocentrism)
• waste, accident,
  proliferation, terrorism
• Integration of new concepts in political programs
  (Rio, Kyoto, OSPAR)
• European policy paradoxes (nuclear packages)
• Environmental issues
• Clearance in decommissioning consumer
  perception?
• Alternatives GEN IV ? Breeder, PT Political
  support?
• Fusion 2065 (ITER delay)

16
International comparison confirm crucial role of
trust and involvement of citizens

• Connection with military use and secrecy
• Lack of policy coherence (EU and IAEA)
• Different political views on FC safeguard
• Ethical responsibility of experts companies
• Experiments on humans (ICRP62)
• Safety culture human management reliability
• Polarised low dose debate impact on perception?
• Importance of institutional trust building
• In search for public support in nuclear waste
  policies RISCOM model

17
Poor dialogue between arguments of promoters and
anti- nuclear movement

• Promoters nuclear energy new reactors (FC)
• Growth consumption perspectives at world level
• Nuclear electricity needs in national context
• Climate issue nuclear contribution to
  sust.devel.
• Promising GEN IV new reactor developments
• Good pollution operational record Gen II III
• No real nuclear waste problem ? only political
• Competences for safety / waste are national
• Nuclear energy is competitive and sustainable
• Low dose effects are not taken serious
• 
  

18
Social support for nuclear is not yet convincing
due to what?

• Anti-nuclear movement moratorium/phase out
• Limits of growth
• Rational use of energy, renewables,
  decentralization
• Nuclear waste problem not solved and ethical
• Proliferation is existential problem
• Demonstrated nuclear accident risk in dense areas
• Nuclear Transport risks (Pu)
• Nuclear is too expensive with huge societal costs
  
• Nuclear energy not sustainable

19
Governance takes into account political and
social factors and involves the public

• Critical experts approach
• Define SD conditions looking for a social support
  
• Nuclear can contribute to climate, but is no
  solution
• Rational energy use is a basic growth requirement
• Total energy concepts promising (HTR)
• Independent intern. regulatory control (guardian)
• Intern. approach for disposal nuclear waste
  QA/QC?
• Distributive justice in costs/benefits (demo SD)
• Coherent proliferation policy (HV)
• Dominant role for safety culture and ALARA

20

History shaped perception shows challenges for
nuclear energy in framework of Sust. Devel.

• Early period (50-70) Cold war shadow
• Clean energy techn. optimism versus worldwide
  pollution
• Growth period (70-80) Reactor accident
• Balance industrial structuring - regulatory
  capacity
• High RD public financing left later costs
• Incomplete risk assessment (engineer safety
  concept)
• Debate period (80-90) Nimby?
• Lack of waste policy and decommissioning funding
• RD budget cuts Who guards the common good?
• (Green) feedback period (90-05) phase out or EPR
• Non uniform discovery of communication /
  participation
• New technological vulnerability terrorism
• Role of our lack of coherence?

21
Conclusions - Lessons Learned

• Growth paradigm is part of the problem
• Rational energy use also in nuclear technology
• Technological vulnerability
• Accident probability, terrorism,
• Long term radiotoxicity
• Independant strong agencies needed
• Long term social support
• Critical expertise and communication
• you are also part of the problem the solution

22
Thanks to

• The late Paul Govaerts who stimulated this
  ambitious initiative, with follow-up and approval
  of the whole document
• viWTA for the idea, call, financing and steering
  support
• The co-authors Prof L. Hens (MEKO), all
  collaborators in interviews, of course our
  secretariat,the reviewers andlast but not least
  
• Marc Matthijs for the financial annex, a
  demonstration of his accounting capacity just
  before his retirement creating transparency on
  our past financial flows
• You for your attention and critics