Past and present status of

initiatives to promote cooperation

at the back-end of the fuel cycle

Charles McCombie President, Arius Association

Secretariat ERDO-Working Group

Switzerland

INPRO Dialogue Forum

Cooperative Approaches to the Back End of the Nuclear Fuel Cycle

26th-29th May 2015,

IAEA, Vienna

Outline

Brief History of Multinational Initiatives: Disposal (and Storage)

Status of some current activities:

IFNEC – CFS, NTI/CSIS, AAAS

EC Initiatives (IGD-TP, PLANDIS, JOPRAD)

ERDO-WG

Arius

Key Challenges to Moving Forward

Why do we need multinational

solutions for geological disposal?

Nuclear safety, security must be assured - globally

Spent fuel, HLW, long lived radioactive wastes should not end up in numerous scattered locations around the globe

Geological disposal

The only feasible ultimate solution – for all NFCs and for

all NPP

Long timescales to implement, difficult to site, expensive – especially for small inventories

Small nuclear nations may not have suitable locations, adequate financing or sufficient technical know-how

INPRO

2012

Interest in International

or Regional Solutions

Nations without NPPs

Nations with NPPs

Support for Multinational

Cooperation in RWM IAEA

Joint Convention

2005 MNA Report to Director General

Reports on Multinational Storage and Disposal

INPRO

EC

Support of Parliament and Commission

Support of Arius, SAPIERR , ERDO-WG, IGD-TP

Waste Directive

Other Organisations

US Foundations (Hewlett, Sloan); NTI, AAAS, NAS, AAEA; BRC in USA; UK Royal Society

Some Past Initiatives (see also Tecdoc 1413)

Early IAEA Work 1973-1980

IAEA Reports 1998-2011 (see list)

Pangea Project (1997-2002)

Sapierr EC Projects (2003-2006)

NFC Proposals (2005-2008)

Issues Discussed 1973-1980

• Diversion by National Governments

• Diversion by Non-Governmental Organisations

• Nuclear Power – a Trojan Horse for Terrorists

• Internationalisation of the Nuclear Fuel Cycle

• International Storage of Spent Fuel Elements

• A nuclear Fuel Cycle Pool or Bank

• Regional Planning of the Nuclear Fuel Cycle

• Multinational Arrangements for Enrichment and

Reprocessing

IAEA reports addressing multilateral issues

1998

2004

2005

2005

2011

2006

Institutional

Considerations

in the

Development of

a Multinational

Repository

2015

A Technocratic Approach:

Global Optimisation e.g. Pangea High Isolation Concept

13

Stable geology

Flat topography

Horizontally bedded

sedimentary strata

Stable arid climate

Low permeability

host rock

Old saline groundwater

Stratified salinity

Reducing geochemical

conditions

Absence of Karst

conditions (limestone

solution cavities)

Low population density

No resource conflicts

Pangea Geology Regions

Access Economics forecasts that over 40 years the

Pangea project will create approx.:

$200 billion in revenue

$90 billion to governments through royalty payments,

payroll

and company taxes

Direct employment during construction of 23 000

Direct employment during operation of 2 000 plus

jobs associated with the continuous

manufacture of ships, transport casks and

disposal containers

Benefits to Australia

24

12 NFC Proposals

7. Nuclear Threat Initiative: USA

8. Enrichment Bonds: United Kingdom

9. International Uranium Enrichment Centre at Angarsk

10. Multilateralising the Nuclear Fuel Cycle: Germany

11. Multilateralisation of the Nuclear Fuel Cycle: Austria

12. Nuclear Fuel Cycle European Union (EU).

IAEA Bulletin 2008

Only these addressed the back-end

- and not very successfully

12 NFC Proposals

IAEA Bulletin 2008

1. Reserve of nuclear fuel: USA 2005

2. Russian Federation (GNPI) 2006

3. Global Nuclear Energy Partnership (GNEP): USA.2006

4. WNA 2006

5. Proposal of France, the Federal Republic of Germany, the Netherlands, Russian Federation, UK and USA

6. IAEA Standby Arrangements System : Japan

Current MNA Activities 1/2

IAEA

Report on “Institutional Considerations …”

INPRO (2012 - )

EC

IGD-TP

PLANDIS

JOPRAD

(COMS-WD)

Current MNA Activities 2/2

USA driven

IFNEC Consolidated Fuel Services (2012 -)

NTI Spent Fuel Strategies (2012 - 2015)

AAAS – Global Nuclear Future (2012 -)

ERDO-WG (2006 -)

See below

Arius (2002 -)

See below

2014/5 - Institutional Considerations in the Development of a Multinational Repository

Focuses on one of three basic IAEA concepts:

Cooperation scenario – partner countries cooperate in developing a repository jointly, one of them becomes a hosting country or each country takes one type of waste

Add-on scenario – the host country has already implemented a national repository and offers to dispose of imported waste from other countries

International or supranational scenario – repository fully in the hands of international or supranational body, the host country effectively cede the control of the siting area

New IAEA Report

2014/5 - Institutional Considerations in the

Development of a Multinational Repository

12 Risk Management in the Multinational Project

12.1 Principles of risk management

12.2 Risks in an MN Project

12.3 Technical Risks

12.4 Financially based Risks

12.5 Institutionally based Risks

Includes tables of

risks-consequences- mitigation measures

Past and current involvement with ERDO-WG

Austria Bulgaria Denmark Ireland Italy

Lithuania Netherlands

Poland Romania Slovakia Slovenia

National Solutions

and Potential

Regional Solutions

The EC Waste Directive of 2011

“Some Member States consider that the sharing of facilities for spent fuel and radioactive waste management, including disposal facilities, is a potentially beneficial, safe and cost-effective option …”

Article 4.4: Radioactive waste shall be disposed of in the Member State in which it was generated, unless at the time of shipment an agreement ….. has entered into force between the Member State concerned and another Member State or a third country to use a disposal facility in one of them.

European Repository Development

Organisation – Working Group

MISSION STATEMENT

“The ERDO-WG comprises European countries with a potential interest in developing shared radioactive waste management facilities. Our aim is to work together to address the common challenges of safely managing the long-lived radioactive wastes in our countries.

The ERDO-WG will encourage cooperation in all relevant areas; these include maintaining national radioactive waste inventories, dealing with legacy wastes, developing safety cases for disposal facilities, communicating with stakeholders and developing joint projects.

The ultimate objective of the Working Group is to carry out all the necessary groundwork to enable the establishment of a European Repository Development Organisation (ERDO) as a working entity.”

2011: ERDO-WG Submission to Governments of

the EU Member States

Current EC RWM Cooperation 1/2

IGD-TP

Focus on advanced programmes( cf. Vision Statement)

Primarily for MS with large amounts of radioactive waste

Aimed at Geological Disposal

Advanced topics (e.g. Demonstration Experiments)

PLANDIS

Explicitly on R&D

Current EC RWM Cooperation 2/2

JOPRAD

Joint programming

… but not joint facilities?

COMS-WD

Includes MS with no NPPs and MS less advanced in geological disposal

Include all predisposal issues; ultimate possible option - multinational disposal facility

The Arius Association

Arius is a non-profit Association established in Switzerland in 2002 to promote the interests of its Members

Arius Members are both organisations and individuals

Mission:

To promote concepts for socially acceptable, international and regional solutions for environmentally safe, secure and economic storage and disposal of long-lived radioactive wastes

Arius has led projects to achieve this mission with the involvement of organisations from many European countries: e.g. the SAPIERR I or II projects

*countries whose governments have nominated representatives to participate in the ERDO-WG

Austria* Belgium Bulgaria* Czech Rep

Estonia Hungary Ireland* Italy*

Latvia Lithuania* Netherlands* Poland*

Romania* Slovakia* Slovenia* Spain

Switzerland UK

Existing and potential new nuclear power nations: can

the ERDO model be adapted for use in other regions?

Sources: IAEA, NEA, WNA, IEA, et. al., 2008

from www.ncitd.org Arius runs a pilot project, supported by US charitable foundations, to

explore the potential interest and adaptability of the concept in some of these regions

Central and South America

N. Africa

Arabian Gulf

S.E. Asia

ERDO

Middle East and North Africa: Iran, UAE, Bahrain, Oman, Kuwait, Saudi Arabia, Yemen, Israel, Syria, Jordan, Egypt, Tunisia, Sudan, Libya, Algeria, Morocco

Scope for

Collaboration!

Regional Initiatives

with Arius Input EUROPE – ERDO-WG – see previous slides

IAEA Reports

Multinational Repositories (Tecdoc 1413); Regional Storage (Tecdoc 1482); Viability (Tecdoc 1658); New nuclear nations report (NW-T-1.24)

South East Asia: ASEAN

IAEA Consultancies Sep 2010 and Feb 2011

AAAS and NTI Initiatives

Middle East and North Africa: GCC and MENA

Workshops in UAE and Tunisia

GCC contacts in Riyadh

Outline

Brief History of Multinational Initiatives: Disposal (and Storage)

Status of Current Initiatives:

IAEA Doc on “Institutional considerations…”

Arius

ERDO-WG

Key Challenges to Moving Forward

Obstacles to

Multinational Initiatives

Lack of urgency relative to enrichment and

reprocessing concerns

Public/political opposition to hosting repositories

Lack of positive support from national programmes

Lack of “take back” options

Funding problems for small and new nuclear

programmes

Conclusions Stefan Mayer; IAEA, Waste Technology Section

RWM and disposal has demonstrated significant progress and achievements worldwide.

Of paramount interest/importance:

Licensing and construction of first geological repositories

Establishing sound RWM policies and strategies in all MSs

Ensuring all MSs fully understand their national back-end responsibilities, obtain the needed support and can provide the needed resources to address them

Preventing a “wait and see” approach and a “the international community will take care of it” approach to RWM

Developments focused on regional/multinational/international approaches to disposal should remain consistent with these

Ingredients for success:

any multinational option!

Recognition (or acceptance) of the role that nuclear energy will continue to play globally

Confidence in the safety of extended surface storage and of final geological disposal

Recognition of the global security benefits of multinational cooperation

Commitment by international organisations to support specific multilateral projects.

Ingredients for success:

add-on option

Potential host must gain national political and public acceptance of spent fuel and radwaste imports

Potential host must be internationally trusted (especially by the USA)

Agreement between host and supplier countries on economic issues (prices, benefits), liabilities, etc.

Agreement by the host to allow oversight by a supranational organisation such as the IAEA

Ingredients for success:

shared solution option

Recognition of a common need

A number of countries that are openly interested in being potential users of a common facility

A number of countries (possibly including any or all of the above) that are prepared to consider hosting a shared facility

Agreement on economic issues, liabilities etc.

The Biggest Challenge - Siting

1. Open recognition of a common need for a repository (by users and non-users)

2. Transparent specification of ALL requirements to be fulfilled

3. Documentation and discussion of pros and cons of hosting a facility

4. Establishment of TRUST in the potential implementing organisation

Siting an international repository will face the same problems as a national repository – in both cases it is NOT something you do at the start of a programme. Firstly one needs:

Next Steps??

Re-affirm the feasibility and necessity of geological disposal (and long-term storage)

Create formalised, stable groupings of countries interested in cooperating of back-end issues (bottom up) and in pursuing a dual track approach to disposal (and storage)

Strengthen support of international organisations, large national programmes and nuclear supplier organisations

The End – Thank you!