Can Repository Scientists and Social Scientists Work Together to Find Solutions to Nuclear Waste Management Problems? A Repository Scientist's Perspective

Abstract

One of the exigent issues moving towards the development and implementation of acceptable and enduring nuclear waste management solutions is ensuring that the attendant social, economic, and political factors are given due consideration as part of the process of evaluating and eventually selecting a preferred alternative. To date, the relevant literature on the subject of social and political aspects of nuclear waste management has, by and large, presented social scientists' perspectives, and only rarely represented the perspective of the physical scientists that have been involved in addressing the technical aspects of nuclear waste management. We present the perspective of a small subset of repository scientists that individually and collectively have many years of experience in geologic repository programs. We offer our view on how repository scientists and social scientists can work together constructively. As observed by both repository scientists and social scientists, issues related to social and political concerns have been a major contributor to the lack of progress in implementing an acceptable solution to the disposal of nuclear wastes. Therefore, it is critically important that repository scientists and social scientists work together towards finding solutions that can be demonstrated to provide the requisite level of safety and be socially and politically acceptable. Current U.S. circumstances influencing the management of nuclear wastes will likely result in a new or revised national policy. We assume that some kind of geologic disposal of nuclear wastes will be needed independent of what new options may be implemented for the nuclear fuel cycle. Implementation of a new or revised policy will present ample opportunities for repository scientists and social scientists to collaborate towards the common goal of finding technically and socially responsible solutions. This paper presents some suggestions using a fairly narrow set of circumstances as a means for starting the dialog on how to forge a workable relationship between the two groups.

Down the Line: Assessing the Trajectory of Energy Policy Research Development

“…Social, economic, and political factors are all relevant in the evaluation and selection of UNF management options, and sociopolitical issues in particular have the ability to affect the complexity of repository sitings and the development of new national policy for more permanent storage of nuclear waste (Bonano et al, ). A working relationship between repository and social scientists can contribute considerably to the successful identification, evaluation, and resolution of issues related to public confidence and acceptance of a repository (Bonano et al, ). Social scientists can also assist in communications regarding the technical aspects of UNF storage to the public and help to “frame policy in terms and values that matter most to the public” (Bonano et al, , p. 13).…”

“…A working relationship between repository and social scientists can contribute considerably to the successful identification, evaluation, and resolution of issues related to public confidence and acceptance of a repository (Bonano et al, ). Social scientists can also assist in communications regarding the technical aspects of UNF storage to the public and help to “frame policy in terms and values that matter most to the public” (Bonano et al, , p. 13). As nuclear energy issues move from being centered on technical knowledge to encompassing social and ethical implications, collaborations between policymakers and social scientists become more salient (Solomon et al, ).…”

Socio-technical multi-criteria evaluation of nuclear waste management strategies: Introducing the method

“…Yet, support from local communities is not sufficient to achieve public acceptance as nuclear waste management straegies necessarily involve larger regions, namely the state (Ramana, 2018). In fact, because of a specific political structure, in the U.S., local autonomy often conflicts with state control over reporitory siting and selection of transport routes (Bonano et al, 2011). In fact, state-level actors often exhibit diverging perceptions and preferences over proposed solutions as compared with local communities and federal agencies (Diaz-Maurin and Ewing, 2020a).…”

“…This situation means that spent fuel management is no longer limited to a discussion among experts and scientists who advise the federal government on the "best" technical and policy choices to be approved by Congress and regulators. Rather, the scope of the discussion and decision-making must be broadened to consider both technical and societal dimensions (Bonano et al, 2011;Ramana, 2019;US NWTRB, 2015). In addition, there has been an expansion in the number and diversity of sociotechnical actors, at the level of local communities, Native American tribes and states, willing to participate in the debates over the future of spent fuel stranded at or near reactor sites across the country (US DOE, 2016a).…”

Social Scientist on Board in Long-Term Management of High Level and/or Long-Lived Radioactive Waste in Belgium

“…According to many authors [9,10,11,12], the role of the social scientist is usually unclear especially since he must endorse various research goals at the same time. The different categories proposed in the literature to classify those various roles vary a great deal.…”