Nuclear Waste

Nuclear Waste: Ethical and Political Issues Facing the Nuclear Industry Thomas G. Roddey Executive Assistant to the Chief Operating Officer Exelon Nuclear Overview • • • • Nuclear Energy and Nuclear Waste Options for Waste Management Political and Ethical Concerns Summary Nuclear Energy and Nuclear Waste "The Peril" The Peril "Science moves us in a certain direction, and it pushes the envelope, as it should. But as a society, we also must consider the religious, the moral, and the ethical values of that society, and that needs to be a part of this as well. So we cannot, just because it’s in a bill, we cannot, just because a scientist or a group of scientists say, 'Yeah, let’s do this;' that we don’t step back and assess for ourselves is this the moral, ethical, and appropriate thing to do?" Michael Steele, 2006 GOP Candidate for US Senate from Maryland (Meet the Press, Sunday, October 29, 2006) Defining Nuclear Waste: Sources • All human activities create waste • Nuclear waste needs special consideration • High-level waste comes from the mining and processing of Uranium (fuel), development of nuclear weapons, and from operation and maintenance of nuclear reactors • Low-level radioactive waste comes from hospitals (diagnostic isotopes), university test reactors, nuclear power stations, nuclear research facilities, government laboratories, and smoke detectors Defining Nuclear Waste: Sources Defining Nuclear Waste: Hazards • Typically, an individual exposed to low doses of radiation can incur biological damage without experiencing any immediate effects – Low doses tend to damage or alter the genetic code (DNA) of irradiated cells • High radiation doses tend to kill cells – High doses can kill so many cells that tissues and organs are damaged immediately • Proper radiation protection measures can limit the exposure of radiation workers to ionizing radiation • The main dangers inherent in handling nuclear waste are the potential for air and water contamination, and potential exposure of unprotected members of the public to radiation Defining Nuclear Waste: Basis for the Ethical Dilemma • The societal consequences of the use and development of nuclear technologies are far reaching, particularly when considering externalities such as waste management • We are led to ask whether considering an externality such as the waste issue, and the associated threat of weapons proliferation, would have precluded the initial development of the nuclear industry • Heidegger: "The unconcealing that sways in modern technique is a summoning, that puts to nature the demand to deliver energy, that can be furthered and stored up as energy." – Technique and The Turn Defining Nuclear Waste: Defining the Ethical Dilemma • Some externalities – – – – – – – Air and water contamination Thermal pollution High-voltage power lines (environmental and health risks) Transportation of waste on public routes and in residential areas Terrorist targets Radiation exposure Long-lived radioactive nuclides Defining Nuclear Waste: Fundamentals of Radiation Protection • Time: simply reducing the amount of time spent near or in contact with any source results in a proportionate reduction in dose (a linear reduction) • Distance: maximize the distance from sources – Increasing the distance from a source by a factor of two reduces the intensity to one quarter – Increasing the distance from a source by a factor of three reduces the intensity to one ninth (an inverse square reduction) • Shielding: proper shielding can result in an exponential reduction of dose for gamma emitters and a near-total reduction for beta emitters – Type of shielding must be appropriate for the type of radiation to achieve reduction (an exponential reduction) Options for Waste Management "The Peril that Saves" Nuclear Waste Options Waste Repositories – European Union • Three countries with nuclear power production plants - Italy, the Netherlands, and the United Kingdom - have decided to postpone disposal of high-level waste for periods ranging from at least fifty to more than one hundred years • Not one member state in the EU Union has designated a specific site for disposal • Large sectors of the public continues to oppose most proposals concerning the siting of repositories (NIMBY) Nuclear Waste Options Waste Repositories – European Union • The European Commission is funding studies to to assess the feasibility of European regional waste repositories – "We should ... consider multinational approaches to the management and disposal of spent fuel and radioactive waste. Over 50 countries currently have spent fuel stored in temporary locations, awaiting reprocessing or disposal. Not all countries have the appropriate geological conditions for such disposal - and, for many countries with small nuclear programs, the financial and human resources required for the construction and operation of a geological disposal facility are daunting." - Dr Mohamed El Baradei, Director-General of the UN's International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA), November 2003 Nuclear Waste Options Waste Repositories – China • Four or five repositories for low-level radioactive waste will be constructed in order to dispose of accumulated wastes from the nuclear industry, the decommissioning of nuclear facilities, and from nuclear power plant operation • China is unique in that its repository plans are being developed concurrently with the early stages of nuclear power plant construction • Current plans call for conducting feasibility studies between 2010 and 2020, followed by site licensing; repository operation will begin no earlier than 2040 Nuclear Waste Options Waste Repositories – Yucca Mountain (YMNWR) Nuclear Waste Options Waste Repositories – Yucca Mountain • Background – Yucca Mountain was designated as the site for the nation's nuclear waste storage facility by President George W. Bush in February 2002 • Nevada Governor Kenny Guinn, a Republican, vetoed the President's decision, but Congress overturned Guinn's veto in late spring/early summer 2002 • The State of Nevada has subsequently shifted its battle against the nuclear waste repository to the courts – In March 2006, the administration requested additional funding to facilitate potential "new builds" in the nuclear industry • The $544 million request for FY07 was $100 million more than Congress approved for 2006, but less than the $650 million FY06 request • The budget for YMNWR was $577 million in FY04 and FY05 Nuclear Waste Options Waste Repositories – Yucca Mountain • Current Status – Technical, legal, and political challenges still remain • In March 2005, DOE confirmed that internal e-mails referred to falsified data in technical analyses of the project • Attorneys have argued that the Yucca site may have been disqualified years ago if the true nature of the subterranean water flow was known • Some scientists argue that local fault lines and a nearby volcano may cause the mountain to fracture the repository and allow for more water intrusion • Safety concerns about the transporting nuclear waste over long distances through several U.S. states (particularly in an era of terrorist threats) • The Shoshone, who have been exposed to many years of nuclear weapons testing, suffer from high rates of cancer, leukemia, and other diseases Nuclear Waste Options Waste Repositories – Yucca Mountain • Current Status – Because of the numerous quality assurance issues, the proposed opening date of YMNWR has been delayed to 2020 – Legislation was drafted to raise the ceiling on the amount of waste that would be accepted, to promote reprocessing, to expedite a railroad spur and water usage provisions, and to place 147,000 acres near YMNWR under Department of Energy (DOE) control • Nevada took legal action against these provisions • Much of the land is claimed by the Western Shoshone Nation under the Treaty of Ruby Valley • This effort failed in the Senate – Several utilities filed and won lawsuits against DOE for the delays in establishing a long-term storage facility • Utilities are required to provide for waste storage in the interim Nuclear Waste Options Recycling/Partitioning/Transmutation • Reprocessing recovers waste uranium and plutonium for use as fresh fuel – Avoids the waste of a valuable resource because most of the spent fuel (uranium at less than 1% U-235 and a little plutonium) – Saves ~30% of the natural uranium otherwise required – Avoids leaving the plutonium in the spent fuel – In a century or two, the most toxic radiological isotopes will have diminished • In 1977, President Jimmy Carter, by executive order, indefinitely ended the commercial reprocessing and recycling of Plutonium produced in US nuclear power programs • In 2005, President Bush signed an "energy bill" that authorized $580 million over three years for DOE’s program for nuclear reprocessing and transmutation technologies Nuclear Waste Options Recycling/Partitioning/Transmutation • Because of European and Japanese reprocessing, more separated, weapons-usable Plutonium has been produced in civilian than in military nuclear programs worldwide • Only about one-third of this Plutonium has been used as fuel in power reactors, leaving a surplus of about 200 tons of weapons-usable plutonium in civilian hands • By the year 2010, there will be nearly 550 tons of civilian, weapons-usable plutonium, more than twice the amount in military programs • Germany, Belgium and Switzerland, have decided to end reprocessing programs for the foreseeable future • In the United States, the renewed interest in reprocessing was spurred by the ongoing political debate about YMNWR Nuclear Waste Options Recycling/Partitioning/Transmutation • Mixed Oxide (MOX) fuels – MOX is a means to "burn" the plutonium remaining in spent reactor fuel to provide energy and make electricity – MOX provides ~2% of the new fuel used today, but this proportion is increasing – MOX also provides a means of burning weapons-grade plutonium (from military sources) to produce electricity, though using thoriumplutonium fuel is another possible means of achieving this – A single recycle of plutonium increases the energy derived from the original uranium by ~12%, and if the uranium is also recycled, this becomes a ~20% Nuclear Waste Options Recycling/Partitioning/Transmutation • Transmutation – "Nuclear alchemy": changing the nuclear properties of material by imparting energy into target nuclei – Has the potential to contribute to solving many of the problems related to management of radioactive waste • May reduce the amount of long-lived isotopes and, therefore, the need for nearly total isolation for many thousands or even millions of years (making YMNWR feasible) • Partitioning and transmutation allows storage of waste in forms that can be more resistant leaching hazardous materials (making YMNWR feasible) • May reduce incentive for future re-entry of the repository for "mining" plutonium or other transuranics (fissionable materials) Nuclear Waste Options Recycling/Partitioning/Transmutation • Transmutation – Strontium-90, cesium-137 and plutonium-239 have too many neutrons, making their nuclei unstable; transmutation changes unstable isotopes to stable ones by knocking out the extra neutrons – When a neutron is removed, the resulting isotope has a considerably shorter half-life which then decays to a stable (nonradioactive) form in a reasonable amount of time – Examples • Irradiating technetium-99 isotope with neutrons will cause it to absorb a neutron and become technetium-100, which undergoes complete radioactive decay into stable ruthenium within minutes • Similarly, iodine-129 can be transformed by neutron absorption into stable Xenon isotopes – Should not be considered as an alternative to deep geological disposal – Technical and safety-related challenges will require a long-term approach and the results of these efforts remain uncertain Nuclear Waste Options Ind. Spent Fuel Storage Installation (ISFSI) Nuclear Waste Options ISFSI • The ISFSI is often a concrete storage pad for the metal casks which store the spent fuel • The ISFSI must be licensed by the NRC in accordance with 10CFR72 • The ISFSI operator (usually the utility) must submit a safety evaluation report to prove to the NRC and the public that the facility meets the regulatory requirements Political and Ethical Concerns "The Turn" Political and Ethical Concerns Time • The isotope with the longest half-life is one of the most abundant as well (uranium-238 at 4.5B years; other isotopes have shorter half-lives, but still quite long: a) radium-226 (1,620 years), b) plutonium-239 (24.4K years), c) uranium-234 (247M years), d) thorium-230 (80K years), g) cesium-135 (2M years), h) uranium-235 (710M years), americium-243 (7,950 years), and iodine-129 (1.7M years) • In terms of time, legitimate long-term institutions must be established to take responsibility for maintaining information about nuclear waste over the millennia • How do we ensure that a government or commercial entity remains responsible for any structure storing radioactive waste (e.g., a repository), much of which is dangerous to biological life forms for thousands of years? Political and Ethical Concerns Distance • "Not in my backyard" (NIMBY) • Accidents at Three Mile Island and Chernobyl have contributed significantly to concerns over the proximity of nuclear plants to population centers • The threat of terrorism has brought a new focus to NIMBY as regards locating nuclear facilities close to large population centers – Indian Point in New York is currently the center of this debate following 9/11) – "In the wake of the terrorist attacks of September 11, 2001, the nation must re-examine the concept of safety related to the 103 nuclear reactors operating around the country. The twenty million people who live within the peak injury zone of the Indian Point plant deserve to be protected." - Environmental Advocates of New York Political and Ethical Concerns Distance – Environmental Justice • The questions of nuclear reactor operations and the corporate disposal of waste are central to the issues of democracy, site remediation, pollution prevention and pollution reduction • Communities chosen to suffer contamination are routinely poor, rural and people of color – communities that are hard pressed to value health and safety over short-term financial relief • Is it ethical to force people to choose between economic survival and sacrifice of future generations? Political and Ethical Concerns Shielding • Scientific hubris – The consequences of getting Yucca Mountain wrong can be devastating to the environment for centuries • Should we trust the scientists that created the waste problem to solve it as well? • Can any human-made structure for containment of nuclear materials be adequately designed to ensure that no hazard will ever be posed to the public, or is “good enough” good enough? Political and Ethical Concerns Protecting the Public Interest • There was limited public involvement in decision-making processes during the development of the nuclear industry; it can be argued that the industry and DOE used this same approach in selecting the Yucca Mountain site • Industry groups are supporting the Yucca Mountain project: a) Institute of Nuclear Power Operators (INPO), b) Nuclear Energy Institute (NEI), c) Electric Power Research Institute (EPRI) • Utility customers pay more than once for disposal: a) built into fuel costs structure, b) taxes used to pay for Yucca Mountain, c) construction incentives in the 2005 energy bill • Who is protecting the "public interest?" Political and Ethical Concerns Science, NGOs, and the Media • Swaying public opinion – "As part of the routine operation of every nuclear power station some waste materials are discharged directly into the environment. Liquid waste is discharged with 'turbine cooling water' into the sea or a nearby river, and gaseous waste is released into the atmosphere." [http://archive.greenpeace.org/comms/no.nukes/waste01.html] – Nuclear plant workers typically live in the area surrounding the plants; if there is an inherent danger associated with operating a nuclear power plant, would they jeopardize their own lives and those of their families willingly? – The media has the difficult task of transferring highly technical information from sources that are typically promoting a political, social, or economic agenda Political and Ethical Concerns Federal versus State Authority • Ultimately, the decision on how to handle the nation's waste issues may be resolved in the courts • Should political decisions also effect legal decisions in light of the externalities of the nuclear issue? • "President Bush's recent decision to make Yucca Mountain the nation's nuclear-waste storehouse is settling across Nevada's political landscape like a mushroom cloud." - Abraham McLaughlin, Staff Writer, The Christian Science Monitor Summary • The nuclear industry, in conjunction with researchers in the field, most likely will have to solve the problems it has created • We must consider externalities in decisions going forward with nuclear power and other technologies that can have such long-term and potentially life threatening consequences • Public involvement is essential in finding the "right" solutions