Nuclear Waste Disposal Sea-Based Nuclear Waste Solutions Ambroise PIGNIER ERNW - 2010.
1 Nuclear Waste Brian OConnell NARUC Nuclear Waste Program Office Kansas Corporation Commission...
-
Upload
kimberly-hayes -
Category
Documents
-
view
217 -
download
0
Transcript of 1 Nuclear Waste Brian OConnell NARUC Nuclear Waste Program Office Kansas Corporation Commission...
1
Nuclear Waste
Nuclear Waste
Brian O’ConnellNARUC Nuclear Waste Program Office
Kansas Corporation CommissionTopeka February 2008
2
Intended Outline
• State interests in nuclear waste• Nuclear Waste Policy Act• Status of the Nuclear Waste Fund
– Warning: May stir feelings of outrage
• Yucca Mountain repository• Transportation of spent nuclear fuel• Legislation• A little bit on reprocessing
3
Nuclear Gets a Fresh Look
4
5
Nuclear Self-DeceptionPresidential Division
“ Resolving civilian waste management problems shall not be deferred to future generations.”
-- President Jimmy Carter
1980
6
State Interestsin Nuclear WasteState Interests
in Nuclear Waste• Health, safety• Transportation• Environment
EnvironmentFinancial
Power
supply
•Financial•Power supply
P
U
CTrans
Health, Safety
7
The Nuclear Waste Policy ActThe Nuclear Waste Policy Act
• The Federal Government is responsible for nuclear waste disposal
• Those who benefit shall pay for disposal
• Disposal (was) to begin in 1998
• The Federal Government is responsible for nuclear waste disposal
• Those who benefit shall pay for disposal
• Disposal (was) to begin in 1998
8
"The costs of disposal should be the responsibility of the generators ... of waste and spent fuel"
-- Nuclear Waste Policy Act
• Program funding derives from two sources: Nuclear Waste Fund and Defense Nuclear Waste Disposal Appropriation
• The realities of the Federal budget process have limited the Program's access to the Nuclear Waste Fund
• Funding over the last 8 years has been over $1 billion less than requested
• If the site is licensed, outyear funding needs to design, construct, and operation
a repository will increase significantly
Cost and Funding Overview
9
Current State of the Nuclear Waste Program
Current State of the Nuclear Waste Program
• The Federal Government has our money
• We have their waste
• The Federal Government has our money
• We have their waste
10
Current State of the Nuclear Waste Program
Current State of the Nuclear Waste Program
• The Federal Government has our money
• We have their waste
Commissioner Mike Wilson, FL PSC 1991
• The Federal Government has our money
• We have their waste
Commissioner Mike Wilson, FL PSC 1991
11
Nuclear Issues are Political Issues
“Any decision about the management of nuclear wastes must be made in the cauldron of intense public controversy.”
- Dr. Richard Meserve Former ChairmanNuclear Regulatory Commission
November 2000
12
Current Locations Of Spent Nuclear Fuel and High-Level Radioactive Waste
Commercial SNF Dry Storage (On-Site)
13
Nuclear Materials Destined for Geologic Disposal
14
0
10000
20000
30000
40000
50000
60000
70000
80000
90000
100000
110000
120000
130000
140000
1970 1980 1990 2000 2010 2020 2030 2040 2050
Year
Cum
ula
tive D
ischarg
ed S
pent Fu
el (
MTH
M)
Historical and Projected Commercial Spent Nuclear Fuel Discharges
Sources: * Based on actual discharge data as reported on RW-859’s through 12/31/02, and projected discharges, in this case, based on 104 license renewals.
** Represents the aggregate industry pool capacity based on pool capacities provided in 2002 RW-859 (less FCR) and supplemented by utility storage plans. However, the industry is not one big pool and
storage situations at individual sites differ based on pool capacities versus discharges into specific pools.As of May 14, 2007Discharge Curves 051407.ppt
Actual Discharges*, all reactors (operating & shutdown)
Projected discharges, all reactors, 48 license renewals
Projected discharges*, all reactors, 104 license renewalsActual discharges, shutdown reactors only
Actual MTHM in dry storage, all reactors
There are 104 operating reactors and 14 shutdown reactors
~ 9,500 MTHM in dry storage (as of 5/14/07)
~ 3,800 MTHM from14 shutdown reactors
Current Inventory: ~ 55,700 MTHM from118 reactors (as of 12/06)
Current pool capacity ~ 61,000 MTHM**
Nuclear Waste Policy Act of 1982
2055
~110,000MTHM total
~130,000MTHM total
15
Original
Plan
Fresh from reactor ~20 MT/yr
Cooling
Pools
Next stage Reprocessing
Reprocessing To be done on commercial basis
Final Disposition To be determined
Spent Fuel Management and Disposition
16
Original
Plan
Nuclear Waste
Policy Act 1982
Fresh from reactor ~20 MT/yr
Cooling
Pools
Cooling
Pools
Next stage Reprocessing Begin disposal in 1998 based on oldest first
Reprocessing To be done on commercial basis
Policy decision to not reprocess 1977
Final Disposition To be determined
Geologic
Repositories
Spent Fuel Management and Disposition
17
Original
Plan
Nuclear Waste
Policy Act 1982
Present
Reality
Fresh from reactor ~20 MT/yr
Cooling
Pools
Cooling
Pools
Pools expanded and at capacity
Next stage Reprocessing Begin disposal in 1998 based on oldest first
Dry cask storage and litigation
Reprocessing To be done on commercial basis
Policy decision to not reprocess 1977
Being reconsidered
Final Disposition To be determined
Geologic
Repositories
Repository
Stalemate
Spent Fuel Management and Disposition
18
Why Yucca Mountain?
Why Yucca Mountain?Why Yucca Mountain?
19
Why Yucca Mountain?
– Located on the Nevada Test Located on the Nevada Test Site, a Department of Energy Site, a Department of Energy facility, where over 800 facility, where over 800 nuclear weapons tests have nuclear weapons tests have occurredoccurred
– Far from major population Far from major population centers -- 100 miles centers -- 100 miles northwest of Las Vegasnorthwest of Las Vegas
– Located in a closed Located in a closed hydrologic basinhydrologic basin
•Natural features that suggest it Natural features that suggest it may be a suitable site:may be a suitable site:
–Arid climateArid climate
–Extremely deep water tableExtremely deep water table
–Relative stability over the past Relative stability over the past million yearsmillion years
•Remote and Remote and controlledcontrolled location location
20
Repository Reference Design Concept
Repository Concept
N
Waste Handling Building
Waste TreatmentBuilding
TransporterMaintenance
Building
Surface Layout Waste Receiving
North Portal Entrance
Alcove #1
Enhanced Characterization Repository Block Drift
Subsurface LayoutWaste Emplacement
To accommodate 70,000 metric tons, the proposed repository would include
approximately 36 miles of tunnels which would hold approximately 10,000 waste packages.
21
Reference Waste Package Design Concept
Inner Shell Lid (316 NG)
Lower Trunnion Collar Sleeve(Alloy 22)
Inner Shell Support Ring(Alloy 22)
Outer Shell(Alloy 22)
Inner Shell(316 NG)
Basket Assembly
Inner Shell Lid(316 NG)
Outer Shell Extended Closure Lid (Alloy 22)
Inner Shell Lid Lifting Feature (316 NG)
Outer Shell Lid Lifting Feature (Alloy 22)
Outer Shell Lid Lifting Feature(Alloy 22)
Upper Trunnion Collar Sleeve(Alloy 22)
Outer ShellFlat Closure Lid(Alloy 22) Trunnion Collar
21-PWR Waste Package AssemblyConfiguration
Outer Shell Flat Lid(Alloy 22)
Waste packages contain canisters of defense high-level waste, commercial and DOE spent nuclear fuel, and dispositioned surplus plutonium.
21-PWR commercial SNF waste package
Emplacement drift segment
Co-Disposal Waste PackageOuter Barrier
Inner Barrier
DOE SNF Canister
Vitrified HLW Canisters
Note: Engineering enhancements underway.
Co-Disposal Waste Package
Immobilized plutonium and
high-level waste canister
22
23
Design Must Demonstrate Compliance to Strict Radiation
Protection Standards
Preliminary Base Case
Time (years)1000 10000 100000
Do
se Ra
te (mrem
/yr)
10-3
10-2
10-1
100
101
102
103
104
This information was prepared for illustrative purposes only and is subject to revision; not appropriate for assessing regulatory compliance.
95th PercentileMeanMedian5th Percentile
Proposed ComplianceTimeframe = 10,000 years 15 mrem Proposed Individual
Protection Standard
360 mrem Average U.S. Individual Exposure
Common Sources of Radiation Exposure
150 mrem Cosmic Radiation in Denver
10 mrem One Chest X-Ray
5 mrem N.Y. to L.A. Flight
7 mrem Exposure from Living in a Brick House
4 mrem EPA Groundwater Policy (equivalent to eating a banana a day for a year).
80 mrem Exposure from Working in Capitol
110 mrem CAT Scan
24
Spent Fuel Transportation• Excellent safety record
• Public anxiety nonetheless
• WIPP helped establish cooperative planning and coordination w/ States
• Yucca would start no sooner than 2017 and continue 24 yrs
• Yucca would include emergency response training and $ CSGMW
• Balance public info & security
25
Nuclear Waste Legislation• Not a good track record
• S. 2589/H.R. 5360– Land withdrawal for the site– Lift the 70,000 MT statutory cap– Reform the NWF appropriation process– Provide licensing, transportation and
other regulatory improvements
• Inhofe Multi-stage Licensing (S. 2551)
• Reid “take title” proposal (S. 784)
26
Nuclear Waste Fund Balance (in millions of dollars, based on FY 2009 Budget)
Balance at start of year $21,542
Receipts
Fee payments from utilities 764
Earnings on “investments” 1,173
Total receipts and collections 1,937
Appropriations from NWF for Yucca 247 (32 pct of fees paid)
Other related salaries and expenses 41
Balance at end of year $ 23,191
27
Why NWF Reform is Needed• Projected fee revenue $750 M
• FY 2008 appropriation 187 M*
• “Line loss” 563 M
The balance is credited to the NWF but in reality is either gone (spent) or inaccessible
* Defense adds $199M for total $387M in FY 2008
28
HLW Options and Possibilities*
*AFCI-2005
29
30
Reprocessing Basics• Banned in U.S. by Ford, Carter
• Done in UK, RU, FR, JA
• Present methods separate plutonium
• Economics not apparent, $ of U↑
• Decades away in US
• Likely siting and transport concerns
• Requires different waste storage
• Still need at least one repository
31
New Nuclear Plant Storage• NWPA still applies
– New Standard Contract needed– Fee for power sold still required
• COL will require a spent fuel management plan
• Likely to have more pool capacity
• Some utilities consider lack of disposal a dealbreaker; others don’t
• Reprocessing still a question
32
For More Information
• NARUC– Brian O’Connell 202-898-2215 [email protected]– www.naruc.org
• DOE– www.rw.doe.gov www.ymp.gov– www.gnep.energy.gov
• NRC– www.nrc.gov
• NEI– www.nei.org
33
Questions