Toward a viable nuclear waste disposal program

Schaffer, Marvin Baker

doi:10.1016/j.enpol.2010.12.010

Cited by 19 publications

(9 citation statements)

References 2 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Central specific ethical issues are summarized as a set of disposal activity start-up questions [3,4]: 1) Have the persons employed/involved been given the free informed consent to the risk involved? 2) Who bear major responsibilities in waste disposal and who is responsible for what?…”

Section: Environment Ethicsmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

High-Level Nuclear Wastes and the Environment: Analyses of Challenges and Engineering Strategies

Rana¹

2012

WJNST

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The main objective of this paper is to analyze the current status of high-level nuclear waste disposal along with presentation of practical perspectives about the environmental issues involved. Present disposal designs and concepts are analyzed on a scientific basis and modifications to existing designs are proposed from the perspective of environmental safety. A new concept of a chemical heat sink is introduced for the removal of heat emitted due to radioactive decay in the spent nuclear fuel or high-level radioactive waste, and thermal spikes produced by radiation in containment materials. Mainly, UO 2 and metallic U are used as fuels in nuclear reactors. Spent nuclear fuel contains fission products and transuranium elements which would remain radioactive for 10 4 to 10 8 years. Essential concepts and engineering strategies for spent nuclear fuel disposal are described. Conceptual designs are described and discussed considering the long-term radiation and thermal activity of spent nuclear fuel. Notions of physical and chemical barriers to contain nuclear waste are highlighted. A timeframe for nuclear waste disposal is proposed and time-line nuclear waste disposal plan or policy is described and discussed.

show abstract

Section: Environment Ethicsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…It is extremely difficult for policy-makers worldwide to develop a consensus on final disposal of high-level nuclear waste. The disposal of high-level nuclear waste [1][2][3] is gaining a new momentum [4] due to the need for more electricity with minimal emission of CO 2 and other greenhouse gases to limit global warming.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

High-Level Nuclear Wastes and the Environment: Analyses of Challenges and Engineering Strategies

Rana¹

2012

WJNST

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Although the storage of HLW is one of the main issues we are facing today [23], little literature is available on this topic. Högselius [13] puts the different national spent nuclear fuel policies in a historical perspective and explains some countries opt for direct disposal, reprocessing or SNF export.…”

Section: Literature Reviewmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Furthermore, he states that the future of nuclear power greatly depends on amongst others solving the problem of radioactive waste management. Schaffer [23] deals with the lack of a suitable permanent storage site in the U.S. from a technological point of view and argues that current oppurtunities for waste reduction are overlooked. Borges Silverio and Lamas [30] give an overview of the development and research on spent nuclear fuel reprocessing.…”

Section: Literature Reviewmentioning

confidence: 99%

Transporting and Storing High-Level Nuclear Waste in the U.S.—Insights from a Mathematical Model

et al. 2019

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The nuclear industry in the United States of America has accumulated about 70,000 metric tons of high-level nuclear waste over the past decades; at present, this waste is temporarily stored close to the nuclear power plants. The industry and the Department of Energy are now facing two related challenges: (i) will a permanent geological repository, e.g., Yucca Mountain, become available in the future, and if yes, when?; (ii) should the high-level waste be transported to interim storage facilities in the meantime, which may be safer and more cost economic? This paper presents a mathematical transportation model that evaluates the economic challenges and costs associated with different scenarios regarding the opening of a long-term geological repository. The model results suggest that any further delay in opening a long-term storage increases cost and consolidated interim storage facilities should be built now. We show that Yucca Mountain’s capacity is insufficient and additional storage is necessary. A sensitivity analysis for the reprocessing of high-level waste finds this uneconomic in all cases. This paper thus emphasizes the urgency of dealing with the high-level nuclear waste and informs the debate between the nuclear industry and policymakers on the basis of objective data and quantitative analysis.

show abstract

“…Many countries have decided to phase out nuclear energy or to postpone or cancel plans to build new plants (e.g., Belgium, Germany, the Netherlands, and Switzerland) . Still, nuclear waste accumulates, posing a latent threat to humans and the environment and making the issue of nuclear waste disposal relevant and urgent . However, so far, nowhere has an actual repository for the long‐term storage of high‐level radioactive waste been built.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Perceived Risk and Benefit of Nuclear Waste Repositories: Four Opinion Clusters

et al. 2012

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Local public resistance can block the site-selection process, construction, and operation of nuclear waste repositories. Social science has established that the perception of risks and benefits, trust in authorities, and opinion on nuclear energy play important roles in acceptance. In particular, risk and benefit evaluations seem critical for opinion formation. However, risks and benefits have rarely been studied independently and, most often, the focus has been on the two most salient groups of proponents and opponents. The aim of this exploratory study is to examine the often-neglected majority of people holding ambivalent or indifferent opinions. We used cluster analysis to examine the sample (N = 500, mailed survey in German-speaking Switzerland) in terms of patterns of risk and benefit perception. We reveal four significantly different and plausible clusters: one cluster with high-benefit ratings in favor of a repository and one cluster with high-risk ratings opposing it; a third cluster shows ambivalence, with high ratings on both risk and benefit scales and moderate opposition, whereas a fourth cluster seems indifferent, rating risks and benefits only moderately compared to the ambivalent cluster. We conclude that a closer look at the often neglected but considerable number of people with ambivalent or indifferent opinions is necessary. Although the extreme factions of the public will most probably not change their opinion, we do not yet know how the opinion of the ambivalent and indifferent clusters might develop over time.

show abstract

Toward a viable nuclear waste disposal program

Cited by 19 publications

References 2 publications

High-Level Nuclear Wastes and the Environment: Analyses of Challenges and Engineering Strategies

High-Level Nuclear Wastes and the Environment: Analyses of Challenges and Engineering Strategies

Transporting and Storing High-Level Nuclear Waste in the U.S.—Insights from a Mathematical Model

Perceived Risk and Benefit of Nuclear Waste Repositories: Four Opinion Clusters

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About