Nuclear Waste Management Decision-Making Support with MCDA

Abstract

The paper proposes a multicriteria decision analysis (MCDA) framework for a comparative evaluation of nuclear waste management strategies taking into account different local perspectives (expert and stakeholder opinions). Of note, a novel approach is taken using a multiple-criteria formulation that is methodologically adapted to tackle various conflicting criteria and a large number of expert/stakeholder groups involved in the decision-making process. The purpose is to develop a framework and to show its application to qualitative comparison and ranking of options in a hypothetical case of three waste management alternatives: interim storage at and/or away from the reactor site for the next 100 years, interim decay storage followed in midterm by disposal in a national repository, and disposal in a multinational repository. Additionally, major aspects of a decision-making aid are identified and discussed in separate paper sections dedicated to application context, decision supporting process, in particular problem structuring, objective hierarchy, performance evaluation modeling, sensitivity/robustness analyses, and interpretation of results (practical impact). The aim of the paper is to demonstrate the application of the MCDA framework developed to a generic hypothetical case and indicate how MCDA could support a decision on nuclear waste management policies in a "small" newcomer country embarking on nuclear technology in the future. Application ContextFrom a formal point of view, the decision problem formulation is a triplet consisting of (1) a set of potential alternatives which describe the possible actions that a decision-maker can undertake, (2) a set of points of view under which the potential actions are analyzed, evaluated, and compared, including different scenarios for the future, and (3) the problem statement. This section describes the problem application context.It should be noted that assessment of the technical performance and safety of repository sites is a very complex R&D problem. Therefore, the technical aspects of "repository" options will be only reviewed and briefly discussed within the confines of the paper. General criteria and metrics (indicators) which are in this case rather dynamic (time frame-dependent), are, however, addressed.In practice, the extent of R&D efforts is dependent on specific national conditions, for instance, available geological formations (rock medium) for final HLW disposal in a country and appropriate assessment of characteristics of nuclear waste that is necessary for designing a HLW repository. Thus the technology-holding countries have already established expert organizations responsible for final high-level waste disposal and conducting R&D activities on safety assessment studies, on minimization of the impact on the environment, and on site robustness tests (predictable performance response in the face of uncertainties).In order to construct an objective hierarchy tree, IAEA basic principles are therefore used. These principles for nuclear waste management st...

National Options for a Sustainable Nuclear Energy System: MCDM Evaluation Using an Improved Integrated Weighting Approach

“…However, it should be noted that the MCDM study can only help the DMs to select a relatively preferable option from the existing candidate pool. The resultant option enables reflecting the DMs' timely preference priorities, rather than ensuring providing an absolutely correct or permanent solution to the problem [17]. Meanwhile, the input information of which MCDM study underlying is always associated with uncertainties (e.g., the identified evaluation criteria, the weights assigned to each criterion, and the selected MCDM techniques).…”

Elaboration of approach to nuclear energy systems assessment by criterion of sustainable development

“…3. The suggested dynamic approach to the assessment of index of NES sustainable development supplements the conventional methodologies of comparison of NES options on the basis of methods of discrete analysis of solutions (for example, Kviatkovskii et al 2017, Kuznetsov et al 2014, Schwenk-Ferrero and Andrianov 2017, Schwenk-Ferrero and Andrianov 2017a, Kuznetsov et al 2015. Indicator of sustainable development for Option A1 simulating NES with once-through nuclear fuel cycle grows approximately from the middle of the century due to the replacement of reactors of generations 2 and 3 with reactors of generation 3 + with improved safety characteristics, optimization of economic performance of use of nuclear fuel, construction of intermediate SNF storage facilities and implementation of other measures within the framework of evolution approach.…”

Mission Impossible? Socio-Technical Integration of Nuclear Waste Geological Disposal Systems

“…The need for an evaluation of the overall system is generally recognized [5,6]. For instance, efforts have been made for building unified information systems of radioactive materials at the point of waste generation [7][8][9], integrating the back-end of the nuclear fuel cycle in the U.S. [10,11], and conducting multi-criteria performance assessments of various nuclear fuel cycle options [12,13]. However, there has been no formalization of disposal systems from an integrated perspective, beyond the conventional risk-based systems approach of engineering assessments [14][15][16][17][18].…”