Disposal Options for Radioactive Waste

Transcription

1 Disposal Options for Radioactive Waste Stefan Mayer, IAEA 8th edition of the International Summer School on Nuclear Decommissioning and Waste Management 1st Workshop on Planning R&D towards Geological Disposal European Commission, Joint Research Centre September 2016, JRC Ispra (Italy), Bldg. 58c

2 RW inventories generated from use of Nuclear Technologies RW inventories include Orange NPP SNF and/or reprocessing waste equivalent Purple RR SNF and/or reprocessing waste equivalent Green DSRS and institutional waste All countries are responsible to provide Solutions for the Safe, Secure & Safeguarded management of their national inventory. 2

3 Waste classes & Disposal solutions (Many) safe & secure disposal solutions exist and/or have been extensively studied for all classes of RW. Adequate disposal solutions must provide for required long-term safety, through isolation & containment of RW. 3

4 Waste Classification and associated viable disposal options VSLW VLLW LLW ILW HLW Activity, half-life Decay storage Disposal solutions Disposal solutions with increasingly robust Isolation and Containment 4

5 Estimate of 2013 Global Radioactive Waste Inventory (without SNF) Waste Class Storage Cumulative Disposal [m 3 ] [m 3 ] Very low level waste (VLLW) Low level waste (LLW) Intermediate level waste (ILW) High level waste (HLW) Estimates published AND COMMENTED - in IAEA Nuclear Technology Review 2014 Based on 2013 information available in IAEA s NEWMDB database 5

6 Spent fuel inventory Total 444 nuclear power reactors are in operation in 30 countries as of 26 May 2016 (PRIS, IAEA). Discharge of spent nuclear fuel (SNF)

7 Disposal A few well-studied solutions Near-surface disposal facilities Geological Disposal Facilities For LLW and ILW and Underground Research Facilities 7

8 Deep geological disposal - Examples At various stages of development or implementation Deep geological disposal required to provide for passive long term safety of HLW and/or SNF Deep geological disposal an option for ILW or LLW Development and implementation requires RD&D to develop the technical and scientific basis for the safety case

9 Deep Geological Disposal USA Waste Isolation Pilot Plant (WIPP) Layout of the WIPP DGR (Courtesy of Sandia National Laboratories) Safe disposal for TRU (LLW & ILW) waste in bedded salt

10 Deep geological disposal: License for construction Germany Konrad Layout within the formation of the former Konrad iron ore mine (Courtesy of Bundesamt für Strahlenschutz) Safe disposal for LLW & ILW in hard rock, surrounded by a Clay formation

11 Deep geological disposal: Licensing procedures Canada Bruce site Joint panel review: not likely adverse Layout of the OPG DGR for LLW/ILW (Source: Environmental Impact Statement Summary, Safe disposal for LLW & ILW in a clayey limestone

12 Side Event at the 2015 IAEA General Conference Developing Solutions for DGR of HLW and SNF Several countries have made substantial progress [ ] built on half a century of scientific and technical work and engaged actively and openly with the public. STUK ANDRA SKB US NRC

13 Disposal for SNF or HLW Sweden France Spent Fuel Repository at Forsmark (Courtesy of SKB) HLW & IL-LLW Repository at Bure (Courtesy of Andra) USA Finland Yucca Mountain Project (Courtesy of SNL) STUK (2015): Nuclear waste facility can be built to be safe Spent Fuel Repository at Olkiluoto (Courtesy of Posiva)

14 HLW/SNF disposal concepts Sweden/Finland Crystalline KBS3-V disposal concept (Courtesy of SKB) Germany - Salt USA UZ/Tuff Spent Fuel borehole concept (Courtesy of DBE Technology GmbH) YMP disposal concept 14 (Courtesy of Sandia)

15 HLW/SNF mature disposal concepts - Clay Belgium France French HLW disposal concept (Courtesy of Andra) Switzerland Belgium supercontainer concept (Courtesy of Ondraf/Niras) Swiss SNF disposal concept (Courtesy of Nagra)

16 HLW/SNF disposal concepts Finland Sweden Safety assessment conducted: in crystalline rock (Sweden, Finland, previously Canada); in sedimentary rock (France, Switzerland, Belgium); in evaporite rock (Germany; USA-WIPP for ILW); and in volcanic tuff (USA-YMP). Safety cases developed for all these major formation types. France 16

17 Options for DGR in different host formations Comparative assessments of DGR concepts in different host formations (e.g. US DOE / Sandia). Long term safety of disposal system possible in salt, clay, hard rock. Main impact of host formation properties on operations, thermal loading, and required RD&D focus.

18 Planning RD&D towards DGR How to build on the available experience, on already mature solutions, to develop (and adapt?) solution for the national programme? More information throughout this workshop.

19 Thank you!