Technical and social problems of nuclear waste

Abstract

Despite decades of effort, the nuclear industry does not yet have a working solution for managing spent fuel and high level waste, the most radioactive products generated by nuclear power plants. Although many scientific and technical bodies have endorsed geological disposal as the preferred solution to this problem, there remain significant uncertainties about the long-term performance of repositories and behavior of the nuclear wastes to be stored in these facilities. Apart from a minority of countries, most countries have not chosen any sites for a repository. Further concerns about the long-term safety of repositories arise from the experiences of failures and accidents at pilot facilities. One reason for the absence of operating repositories decades after they were first proposed is widespread public opposition to such facilities. Polls have revealed that substantial majorities of people consider nuclear waste with dread and do not approve plans to dispose of radioactive wastes near them, or, often, far away either. Nuclear power advocates have typically dismissed public concerns as resulting from a lack of understanding of scientific facts but this explanation does not withstand scrutiny. Technical approaches to dealing with nuclear waste, such as reprocessing of spent fuel, mischaracterize the social concerns and therefore do not help gain public acceptance. Concern about radioactive waste has contributed to the failure of the propaganda effort by the nuclear industry to market nuclear power as a solution to climate change. The absence of a solution to waste negatively affects the future expansion of nuclear energy.

Public Preferences in a Shifting Energy Future: Comparing Public Views of Eight Energy Sources in North America’s Pacific Northwest

“…However, nuclear power is highly contentious amongst members of the public [36]. Intense controversies often develop around the siting of new nuclear facilities and waste repositories [37] as well as the environmental and public health risks borne by uranium mining and milling communities [38].…”

The Impact of Youth's Biospheric Interests on their Awareness and Expectations about Nuclear Power Technology in the United Arab Emirates

“…Several authors have indeed documented in other countries, the importance of public acceptance of nuclear power technology for its successful development as cleaner alternative and part of a nation's energy mix (Yoshida, 2015;Ramana, 2018;Fan, 2018;Wang et al, 2019). In the case of the UAE, we found that increased interest in ecosystem services and sustainability among present day adolescents leads to more awareness of, while conjointly reducing optimism towards the use of nuclear electrical power technology in the country.…”

A Global Review of PWR Nuclear Power Plants

“…According to Figure 19, starting in 2040, the PWR nuclear power plants will notably reduce their electrical capacity. This situation is likely to influence decisions about future investment and operating costs [71], as well as prospects for the decommissioning and management of high-level radioactive waste at current nuclear power plants [72][73][74][75][76][77]. Lastly, if no advances are made in R&D of new designs or in the use of the actual nuclear power plants in cogeneration systems for the production of hydrogen [78,79], in 2050 this technology will decrease its generation capacity to 50%, keeping 127 GWe and the number of operating rectors at 70%.…”