Decommissioning strategy selection
-
E. Warnecke
Abstract
At the end of their useful life nuclear facilities have to be decommissioned. The strategy selection on how to decommission a facility is a highly important decision at the very beginning of decommissioning planning. Basically, a facility may be subject to (a) immediate dismantling; (b) deferred dismantling after a period of “safe enclosure” or (c) entombment where a facility is turned into a near surface disposal facility. The first two strategies are normally applied. The third one may be accepted in countries without significant nuclear activities and hence without disposal facilities for radioactive waste. A large number of factors has to be taken into account when a decision on the decommissioning strategy is being made. Many of the factors cannot be quantified. They may be qualitative or subject to public opinion which may change with time. At present, a trend can be observed towards immediate dismantling of nuclear facilities, mainly because it is associated with less uncertainty, less local impact, a better public acceptance, and the availability of operational expertise and know how. A detailed evaluation of the various factors relevant to strategy selection and a few examples showing the situation regarding decommissioning strategy in a number of selected countries are presented in the following article.
Kurzfassung
Nuklearanlagen werden am Ende ihrer Betriebszeit stillgelegt und abgebaut. Die Auswahl der Stilllegungsstrategie stellt eine wichtige Entscheidung zu Beginn der Stilllegungsplanung dar. Grundsätzlich kann eine Anlage (a) direkt abgebaut werden, (b) nach einem sicheren Einschluss abgebaut werden oder (c) “begraben” werden, wobei die Anlage in ein oberflächennahes Endlager überführt wird. Die ersten beiden Strategien kommen normalerweise zur Anwendung. Die dritte Strategie kann für Länder ohne größere nukleare Aktivitäten und damit ohne Endlager für radioaktive Abfälle in Frage kommen. Bei der Entscheidung über eine Stilllegungsstrategie muss eine große Anzahl von Faktoren in Betracht gezogen werden. Viele dieser Faktoren lassen sich nicht quantifizieren und können qualitativ sein oder von einer sich mit der Zeit ändernden öffentlichen Meinung abhängen. Zur Zeit geht der Trend zum direkten Abbau von Nuklearanlagen, vor allem weil bei dieser Strategie weniger Unsicherheiten und weniger gravierende lokale Auswirkungen auftreten, eine bessere öffentliche Akzeptanz vorliegt und Betriebserfahrungen und Fachwissen zur Verfügung stehen. Im nachfolgenden Beitrag wird eine ausführliche Wertung der einzelnen, bei der Auswahl einer Stilllegungsstrategie relevanten Faktoren gegeben und es wird die derzeitige Situation zur Strategieentscheidung in ausgewählten Ländern dargestellt.
References
1 Joint Convention on the Safety of Spent Fuel Management and on the Safety of Radioactive Waste Management; Done at Vienna on 05 September 1997, International Atomic Energy Agency, Vienna (1997).Search in Google Scholar
2 International Atomic Energy Agency: Safe Decommissioning for Nuclear Activities; Proceedings of an International Conference, Berlin, Germany, 14–18 October 2002; IAEA, Vienna, 2003.Search in Google Scholar
3 OECD/Nuclear Energy Agency: Strategy Selection for the Decommissioning of Nuclear Facilities; Proceedings of an International Seminar, Tarragona, Spain, 01–04 September 2003; OECD, Paris2004.Search in Google Scholar
© 2005, Carl Hanser Verlag, München
Articles in the same Issue
- Contents/Inhalt
- Contents
- Summaries/Kurzfassungen
- Summaries
- Editorial
- Decommissioning of nuclear facilities
- Technical Contributions/Fachbeiträge
- Regulation of nuclear decommissioning
- Survey of decommissioning projects
- Decommissioning strategy selection
- Decommissioning technologies, including recent developments and special features of the dismantling of nuclear research and prototype facilities
- The role of clearance in Germany – release of materials, buildings and sites
- The decommissioning of light water reactors – experience
- Decommissioning of gas-cooled reactors
- Decommissioning of reactors after accidents
- Decommissioning and dismantling of the Siemens fuel cycle facilities
- Decommissioning of back-end nuclear facilities
- Decommissioning and rehabilitation of uranium and thorium production facilities
- German assistance for the dismantling of nuclear submarines in Russia
Articles in the same Issue
- Contents/Inhalt
- Contents
- Summaries/Kurzfassungen
- Summaries
- Editorial
- Decommissioning of nuclear facilities
- Technical Contributions/Fachbeiträge
- Regulation of nuclear decommissioning
- Survey of decommissioning projects
- Decommissioning strategy selection
- Decommissioning technologies, including recent developments and special features of the dismantling of nuclear research and prototype facilities
- The role of clearance in Germany – release of materials, buildings and sites
- The decommissioning of light water reactors – experience
- Decommissioning of gas-cooled reactors
- Decommissioning of reactors after accidents
- Decommissioning and dismantling of the Siemens fuel cycle facilities
- Decommissioning of back-end nuclear facilities
- Decommissioning and rehabilitation of uranium and thorium production facilities
- German assistance for the dismantling of nuclear submarines in Russia
