Johan Swahn presentation Retrievability Reims 101216.pptx

The Swedish NGO Office for
Nuclear Waste Review
0
Johan Swahn, The Swedish NGO Office for Nuclear Waste Review, MKG
An environmental view of the advantages and
disadvantages of post-closure retrievability for a
final repository for spent nuclear fuel
Dr. Johan Swahn, Director
The Swedish NGO Office for Nuclear Waste Review (MKG)
e-mail: [email protected], mobile: +46 70 467 37 31
1
The Swedish NGO Office for Nuclear Waste Review (MKG)
Box 7005, SE-402 31 Göteborg, SWEDEN,
Tel: +46 31 711 00 92, Fax: +46 31 711 46 20
Johan Swahn, The Swedish NGO Officewww.mkg.se
for Nuclear Waste Review, MKG
Overview
1.  Long-term environmental and safeguard challenges to final
disposal of spent nuclear fuel
2.  The simple ethics of post-closure retrievability
3.  Post-closure retrievability in a perfect simple world (advantages)
4.  Post-closure retrievability in a the normal complicated world
(disadvantages)
5.  Long-term safety always comes first
6.  The long-term future for nuclear energy (and weapons) is a
deciding factor
7.  Moving forward in an uncertain world – deep boreholes and more
2
Johan Swahn, The Swedish NGO Office for Nuclear Waste Review, MKG
1. Long-term environmental and
safeguard concerns for the final
disposal of spent nuclear fuel
•  Radiation risks for hundreds of thousands of years
•  Nuclear weapons proliferation risks for over one
• 
3
hundred thousand years
Chemical risks for all future time
Johan Swahn, MKG, OECD/NEA ”Reversibility & Retrievability”
Reims, France, 14-17 December 20101
2. Simple ethics of
post-closure retrievability
• 
• 
• 
• 
4
The KASAM principle in Sweden in the late 1980s:
1.  1. A final repository should be designed to render controls and
corrective measures unnecessary (= no monitoring)
2.  2. A final repository should be designed so as to not render
controls and corrective measures impossible (= retrievability)
Underlying idea is to minimize burdens on future generations =>
sustainability
Appears to fit the Swedish KBS method
with a mined final repository at 500 m depth
in the bedrock
…. and all other planned repository systems
And (more ethics) long term
safety always comes first!
Johan Swahn, MKG, OECD/NEA ”Reversibility & Retrievability”
Reims, France, 14-17 December 20101
3. Post-closure retrievability in a perfect
simple world (advantages)
• 
• 
• 
• 
Retrievability means you can change your mind – makes decisionmaking easier
Retrievability means you can use another method later
Retrievability means you can use the spent nuclear fuel later for
other purposes (often means more nuclear energy)
Retrievability means that you might be able to repair a broken
repository
and
• 
5
In the best of all worlds it all looks good – “happy talk” thrives
Johan Swahn, MKG, OECD/NEA ”Reversibility & Retrievability”
Reims, France, 14-17 December 20101
4. Post-closure retrievability in a the normal
complicated world (disadvantages)
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
6
In a more normal and complicated world there are also security concerns
to deal with !
All spent nuclear fuel in the world, wherever it is, is now under
international safeguards because the fuel and the plutonium in the fuel
pose a serious security risk – plutonium in spent nuclear fuel can be used
for the construction of nuclear weapons
75 years after the beginning of the nuclear era, nuclear weapons, nuclear
proliferation threats and risks for nuclear terrorism are still very high on
the international political agenda
So (due to retrievability!) after closure a mined spent fuel repository needs
to be kept under international safeguards (IAEA says so!) as long as the
international security situation find it necessary => we need to keep
control of the “plutonium mines”
Monitoring/surveillance may not be needed for 100 000 years, but the
need for monitoring and surveillance of a repository for spent fuel will
clearly put burdens on future generations in many future civilizations
Johan Swahn, MKG, OECD/NEA ”Reversibility & Retrievability”
Reims, France, 14-17 December 20101
But wait ….
• 
… so if we are only disposing of reprocessed high-level waste
where plutonium has been removed, we can keep on with the
“happy talk”. This “plutonium mine” thing is only a problem for
those that did not opt for reprocessing !
No, sorry …
• 
• 
7
Only if you get that long-term plutonium energy economy going
with the fourth and fifth generation reactors etc
Otherwise you are going to be stuck with spent MOX fuel and
ordinary spent nuclear fuel in your repositories too
Johan Swahn, MKG, OECD/NEA ”Reversibility & Retrievability”
Reims, France, 14-17 December 20101
5. Long-term safety always comes first
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
8
In any discussion of retrievability, it is always emphasized that any
modifications made to a repository in order to enhance retrievability
must not in a negative way affect the long term safety of the
repository
That “long-term safety always comes first !” is actually a more
general ethical principle for management of nuclear waste – it is a
concept that everyone will agree too
But does safety also mean security (risks for nuclear proliferation
etc)?
I think that the case can be made that safety and security need to
be dealt with on the same level
The environmental effects of the use of plutonium in nuclear
weapons in the future could be catastrophic
Johan Swahn, MKG, OECD/NEA ”Reversibility & Retrievability”
Reims, France, 14-17 December 20101
6. The long-term future for nuclear energy
(and weapons) is a deciding factor
• 
• 
9
So where does this leave us? So retrievability is not only a good
thing? What does this mean?
Well …
–  It becomes much more important to understand what the global
energy future will likely look like
–  In the next 20 years we will have good indications if the postfossil world will be renewable (i.e. sustainable) or nuclear – or
perhaps, but unlikely, both
–  The environmental movement understands that a long-term
nuclear future may be possible, but that it does not meet the
criteria for an environmentally sustainable energy future
–  So a preferable (and also highly plausible) scenario is a postnuclear world towards the second half of this century (in which
both nuclear power and weapons are history)
Johan Swahn, MKG, OECD/NEA ”Reversibility & Retrievability”
Reims, France, 14-17 December 20101
7. Moving forward in an uncertain world –
deep boreholes and more
• 
• 
• 
10
So, what are the conclusions?
There is no necessity to rush forward !
–  Our first responsibility for future generations is to make wellgrounded decisions, not to start to dig holes as soon as possible
–  We can not wait for too long for decisions, but we should at least
wait out a better understanding for where the global energy
future is heading
We should in the mean-time develop alternatives that may give
higher long-term safety and security !
–  Deep boreholes?
–  Accelerator-drive transmutation
in a post-nuclear world?
–  Perhaps a combination of both?
Pre-closure retrievability is still interesting
Johan Swahn, MKG, OECD/NEA ”Reversibility & Retrievability”
Reims, France, 14-17 December 20101
For more Information about the Swedish NGO
Office for Nuclear Waste Review, MKG
English:
www.mkg.se
11
Johan Swahn, MKG, OECD/NEA ”Reversibility & Retrievability”
Reims, France, 14-17 December 20101
Johan Swahn, [email protected], +46 70 467 37 31
12
The Swedish NGO Office for
Nuclear Waste Review
Johan Swahn, The Swedish NGO Office for Nuclear Waste Review, MKG