人間環境デザインスタジオ
Human Environmental Design Studio

              1:00-4:15 pm
June 24, July 1, July 8, and July 15, 2008
    ...
Who am I?
• Professor, Dept. of Nuclear Engineering, UC Berkeley

•   BS, NE, Todai, 1981 (Prof. Iwata)
•   MS, NE, Todai,...
Objective of the class
• This series of lectures introduces
  – fundamental technical facts about
    environmental issues...
Syllabus
• June 24 – Technical basis for nuclear environmental
  issues
   – Nuclear fuel cycle and the environment
   – G...
Format of class
• Prerequisites
  – Fundamental knowledge about nuclear fission
  – Fundamental knowledge about chemical r...
Do you know these?
•   Isotope                     •   McCabe Thiele diagram
•   Half life, decay constant   •   PUREX
•  ...
Week 1 (6/24):
Technical basis for nuclear
  environmental issues

 Nuclear fuel cycle and the environment
           Geol...
Nuclear fuel cycle
      and
the environment
Fuel consumption and waste generation from various
     electricity generation sources for 1GWe.year

            Fuel con...
Comparison with Fossil Fuels
  Chemical reaction
                          12
                               C + O2 → CO2 ...
Uranium
• Uranium is mined as U3O8.
• It is composed of;
    – 99.3% by weight 92U238
    – 0.7% by weight 92U235
•   92 U...
Uranium Ores
Uranium mining technologies
                                         Underground
Open Cast Mining                         ...
Uranium Resources (million ton)
             Known Conventional &           Undiscovered Resources
             Identified...
Global Uranium Resources & Production
                 Uranium Production
               (total 41.360 tU in 2005)
       ...
Nuclear Fuel Cycle and Waste Generation
                                                       LLW 1,000 drums
           ...
Yellow cake
Mill tailings pile in Utah
Uranium enrichment
uranium mines, enrichment plants,
      and Yucca mountain repository




                                    Portsmouth, ...
Presently, 704,000 tons of DU stored in
          UF6 form in the US.
Nuclear Fuel Cycle and Waste Generation
                                                              LLW 1,000 drums
    ...
Interim Storage of Spent Fuel
Spent Fuel Accumulation in US



YMR
capacity      September 2007
Repository Availability in US
• Repository capacity, 63,000 ton SF.
• Assume that:
   – The present annual electricity gen...
Reprocessing of Spent Nuclear Fuel

Step 1: Decladding and          Step 3: Extraction of U and Pu
        Chopping       ...
Treatment of spent fuel with
      reprocessing

                               High
                               Level
...
COMMERCIAL SPENT URANIUM OXIDE FUEL REPROCESSING PLANTS
         IN OPERATION AND UNDER CONSTRUCTION IN THE WORLD

       ...
Storage of High-Level Waste solidified with
            Borosilicate Glass




               Storage pit at R7 COGEMA (Fr...
Radioactivity of HLW

• Fission Products
   – Sr-90, Cs-137, Cs-135, I-
     129, Tc-99, ...
• Trans-uranic + U, and
  the...
Geologic disposal
Yucca Mountain
                                                 HUMBOLDT                         ELKO
                    ...
Yucca Mountain
• Geology:
  Composed of
  ash tuff
  deposited 10
  million years ago
• Elevation: 4950
  ft. at crest
• C...
Yucca Mountain Repository




63,000 ton HM for CSNF
7,000 ton HM for Defense wastes
         4,500 ton HM equivalent HLW
...
Yucca Mountain Repository Design
Three Types of Waste Packages




                 Number of packages
CSNF                            7886
       Co-disp ...
Program Key Milestones
•   Design for License Application
    – Completed December 1, 2007
•   License Support Network Cer...
Program Key Milestones (cont’d)
•   Start Nevada Rail Construction - October 2009
    – Delayed - Inadequate funding to pr...
Waste Isolation Pilot Plant (WIPP),
              Carlsbad, NM
•    The world's first underground
     repository licensed...
$ 410,000 per TRUPACT-II
Waste package located in WIPP




                                Inside the package
Geologic Disposal Concept in
              Sweden/Finland

• water-saturated
  granite
• LWR spent fuel
• copper canister
...
HLW Geologic Disposal Concept in Japan




    Tunnel type
    water-saturated granite
    Vitrified waste
    carbon-stee...
Functional requirements for Geologic Disposal
                    (OECD, 1989)
•   The goal of final disposal is to protec...
Week 2 (7/1):
Performance assessment of
     geologic disposal
      Performance assessment
   Can the environmental impac...
Performance assessment
Performance Assessment (PA) ,
 Total System Performance Assessment (TSPA),
               Safety Assessment




• PA: meth...
Annual Dose as the repository performance
                measure
                                                        ...
Barriers Evaluated in the Analysis
• Surficial soils and topography
• Unsaturated rock layers overlying the
  repository
•...
Emplacement Drift




            Emplacement drifts
               5.5 m diameter
               50-90 drifts, each ~ 1 k...
The Emplacement Environment at
       Yucca Mountain
Thermal hydraulic conditions
 around emplacement drifts
Thermal Design Goals
    Requirement                     Description

Tclad < 350°C     Limit to prevent clad failure by i...
Natural System of Yucca Mountain
            Repository located:
             ~1,000 ft. Below
                 Surface
  ...
Estimating Dose to Hypothetical
        Future Humans
Total System Performance
 Assessment Architecture
Total System Performance Assessment Results
     Total Mean and Median Annual Dose
      (Draft Supplemental EIS, Oct. 200...
Total Expected Dose: 10,000 years
 (Draft Supplemental EIS, Oct. 2007)
Radionuclides Contributing to Total Mean Dose at
                 10,000 Years
      (Draft Supplemental EIS, Oct. 2007)
Summary of 10,000-year Results
       (Draft Supplemental EIS, Oct. 2007)
• Total mean dose determined by contribution
  f...
Total Expected Dose: 1 million years
  (Draft Supplemental EIS, Oct. 2007)
Radionuclides Contributing to Total Mean Dose at
                1 million Years
      (Draft Supplemental EIS, Oct. 2007)
Summary of 1 million-year Results
         (Draft Supplemental EIS, Oct. 2007)
• Total mean dose determined by occurrence ...
Steps for TSPA
            Detail models –– A
            calculation typically
            includes only a subset
       ...
Evolution of Previous TSPAs
Model Development for TSPA
                   Abstraction



                    Process
                     Model



   ...
Two Major Issues with Geologic
             Disposal
• Repository Capacity for future nuclear-
  power utilization
• Uncer...
Types of uncertainty
• Aleatory:
   – arises from an inherent randomness
   – Stochastic, irreducible, Type A
• Epistemic:...
Regulatory uncertainty
• How can “repository performance” be
  measured?
• How can a technical safety case be
  justified ...
Congress, EPA, NRC, DOE
         1980-85 1985-90 1990-95                        1995-00 2000-05 2005-10
                  ...
Nuclear Waste Policy Act
             (1982)
• Set the schedule for siting 2 repositories.
• EPA was charged with issuing ...
NWPA Amendment Act (1987)
• Only Yucca Mountain be characterized to
  evaluate its suitability as a repository.
• No site-...
10CFR60 (1983)
• Waste-package lifetime > ~1000 yr
• Radionuclide fractional release rate from
  EBS < 1/100,000 of its 1,...
40CFR191 (1985)
• Disposal systems shall be designed so that
  for 10,000 years the following limits will not
  be exceede...
Energy Policy Act (1992)
• Mandated a separate process for setting a
  standard specifically for YMR.
• Required EPA to ar...
Recommendations by
              NAS Report (1995)
•   Denial of release limits, i.e., 1000 incremental fatalities over 10...
10 CFR Part 63 was rejected by the
 federal appeals court due to a lawsuit
     by Nevada State, July 2004.
• Post Closure...
Nominal Performance case with
proposed standard (TSPA-VA)
                 350mrem/year


          15mrem/year
Total System Performance Assessment Results
     Total Mean and Median Annual Dose
      (Draft Supplemental EIS, Oct. 200...
Some thoughts about geologic
             disposal
• Retrievability of wastes from a repository
   – Final disposal vs. in...
Some thoughts about performance
       assessment (PA)
• Performance assessment is:
   – based on scientific facts and abs...
Can the environmental impact
  be reduced by recycling?
Nuclear Fuel Cycle

               System parameters
              d1, d2, p2, αf, γ1,γ2, … Solidification
               ...
Generation of long-lived FPs in LWRs
   (3410 MWt, 33,000 MWD/MT, 150-day cooling)
Half-lives         fraction (%)   nucli...
Generation of minor actinides (MA) per year

      Nuclide                      3410 MWt PWR
                         3 yr...
Partitioning and Transmutation of HLW
• By destruction of long-lived radionuclides in HLW,
   – Radioactivity and radiotox...
Processes for P-T
•   Partitioning
     – Conventional PUREX process + additional chemical partitioning process
         e...
P&T benefits
Toxicity Index
                                   λ i Ni
          Toxicity index        =Σ                        [m3]
  ...
P-T flow sheet
Geologic disposal and P&T (1)
• 1970s
  – Several disposal concepts were investigated and compared from
    scientific vie...
UCBNE4176, 1990 by Pigford
  (In the framework of 40CFR191)
1. By recycling actinides, the length of time that
   needs to...
Geologic disposal and P&T (2)
•   1990s
    – Demonstration of geologic disposal concepts (more site specific studies)
   ...
Results of Swedish
repository-performance study
                       Dose limit
                       (0.15mSv/y)




 ...
Water-Saturated repository
   (Japanese repository concept, H12)
                                 4
                      ...
Effects of P&T in terms of
              exposure dose rate (H12)
              1.0E+00

              1.0E-01

          ...
Repository performance is
 insensitive to P/T application
-- L. D. Ramspott, et al., “Impacts of New Developments in
Parti...
So, can the environmental impact
      be reduced by recycle?
• Yes, it can.
• However, whether reduction is meaningful or...
Week 3 (7/8):
Societal and ethical issues of
     geologic disposal
   Development of societal agreement
         for geol...
Development of societal
agreement for geologic disposal
The Repository World

•   Disposal in a geologic repository remains the preferred ultimate
    solution, with or without r...
Some Highlights and Lowlights

• National programs have been abandoned or siting
  stopped
   – France, U.K., Canada, Germ...
An (Optimistic) Current Snapshot
• Countries with candidate sites
   – Finland, Sweden, U.S.A., France


• Countries with ...
The Seaborn Panel Conclusions (1998)
            --Canada--
• “From a technical perspective, safety of the AECL
  concept ...
NWMO Techniques for Broad Engagement
“Choosing a Way Forward”:
        The Foundation
• “…this generation of citizens which has enjoyed
  the benefits of nucle...
“Choosing a Way Forward”:
 Some Key Recommendations
• Sequential decision-making and flexibility in the pace
  and manner ...
What makes nuclear waste
        management special?
• The technical challenge
   – Performance over geological time
   – ...
Virtues of a Repository
•   Passive
•   Occurrences will be slow
•   No inherent energy to release materials
•   Retrievab...
Some Key Enduring Features
• Core, stable goal
• Roles and responsibilities clear
• Clear, open, and transparent decision ...
Some Potential Lessons Learned
• Take the necessary time - go slow in order to go fast
• Assign importance to the societal...
Ethics of geologic disposal
three main virtues that have
    withstood the test of time

• Humility
• Charity
• Veracity
Humility
Humility means you should treat yourself fully as one,
  but not more than one.

• How does this apply when you h...
Charity
Charity means that you should treat others as fully one,
  just the same as you treat yourself.

• Should the grou...
Veracity
Veracity simply means telling the truth.

• It has already proven successful for some countries
  to be completel...
Consequentialism (帰結主義)
G.E.M. Anscombe, quot;Modern Moral Philosophyquot; (1958)

• Actions are evaluated based on the re...
Utilitarianism(功利主義)
John Stuart Mill's essay Utilitarianism (1861)
• “the greatest good for the greatest
  number”(最大多数の最...
Deontology(義務論)
• Actions are evaluated based on the
  motivation behind them.
• Deontology derives the rightness or
  wro...
Kant’s three significant formulations
   of the categorical imperative
           (deontological)
• Act only according to ...
Conflicting motives
• Consequentialism seeks the best
  outcome, despite the action.
• Deontology seeks the best action,
 ...
ANS Code of Ethics
            http://www.ans.org/about/coe/

1. We hold paramount the safety, health, and
   welfare of t...
ANS Code of Ethics
             http://www.ans.org/about/coe/
3. We act in accordance with all applicable laws
   and thes...
ANS Code of Ethics
             http://www.ans.org/about/coe/

6. We continue our professional development
   and maintain...
ANS Code of Ethics
            http://www.ans.org/about/coe/

8. We disclose to affected parties, known or
    potential c...
ANS Code of Ethics
             http://www.ans.org/about/coe/

12. We accept responsibility for our actions; are
    open ...
Ethics in Nuclear Engineering
• ANS Code of Ethics reflects a Deontological approach of
  obeying a set of rules or princi...
Yucca Mountain
• Yucca Mountain seemingly contradicts two tenets
  of the ANS Code of Ethics:
   – 1) welfare of the publi...
Week 4 (7/15):
International aspects of nuclear
        power utilization
    (Introductory summary for nuclear
          ...
(Introductory summary for
  nuclear activities in India
by Dr. R. K. Dayal, IGCAR)
Topics to be Discussed in This Week

• As Asian economy expands rapidly, so
  does energy demand in Asia.
  – Why is this ...
http://www.peakoil.net/ (Association for the Study of Peak Oil & Gas)
Chinese Development Plan of Nuclear Power
              Units to 2020

                                    NPPs in operati...
Scenarios for Total Installed Power
        Capacity in India
(DAE-2004 and Planning Commission-2006 studies)
       1600
...
Electricity growth rate – a scenario
                                                   Primary              Electricity
 ...
GDP/capita vs. kWh/capita
                                                                                           US (2...
By Increase in Energy
        Consumption in Asia ....
• Global Environment
  – CO2, SOx, NOx emissions
     • Greenhouse ...
The Global Nuclear Energy Partnership Objectives are
      Stated in The National Security Strategy

• The United States “...
GNEP Process
Spent fuel accumulation in South
             Korea
                                 90
Spent Fuel Accumulation (ktHM)
Acc...
(Comparative discussions
among Japan, US, and India)
Discussion topics
• Developed vs. developing countries
  – Resources
  – Global environment
  – Proliferation resistance –...
Lectures On Nuclear technology and Environment(2008 07@The University of Tokyo)
Lectures On Nuclear technology and Environment(2008 07@The University of Tokyo)
Lectures On Nuclear technology and Environment(2008 07@The University of Tokyo)
Lectures On Nuclear technology and Environment(2008 07@The University of Tokyo)
Lectures On Nuclear technology and Environment(2008 07@The University of Tokyo)
Lectures On Nuclear technology and Environment(2008 07@The University of Tokyo)
Upcoming SlideShare
Loading in …5
×

Lectures On Nuclear technology and Environment(2008 07@The University of Tokyo)

1,533 views
1,433 views

Published on

Published in: Education, Technology, Business
0 Comments
2 Likes
Statistics
Notes
  • Be the first to comment

No Downloads
Views
Total views
1,533
On SlideShare
0
From Embeds
0
Number of Embeds
0
Actions
Shares
0
Downloads
107
Comments
0
Likes
2
Embeds 0
No embeds

No notes for slide

Lectures On Nuclear technology and Environment(2008 07@The University of Tokyo)

  1. 1. 人間環境デザインスタジオ Human Environmental Design Studio 1:00-4:15 pm June 24, July 1, July 8, and July 15, 2008 at Graduate School of Frontier Sciences The University of Tokyo Joonhong Ahn Department of Nuclear Engineering University of California, Berkeley
  2. 2. Who am I? • Professor, Dept. of Nuclear Engineering, UC Berkeley • BS, NE, Todai, 1981 (Prof. Iwata) • MS, NE, Todai, 1983 (Prof. Kiyose/Suzuki) • PhD, NE UCB, 1988 (Prof. Pigford) • D. Eng, NE, Todai, 1989 (Prof. Suzuki) • JSPS Junior fellow, 1988-1990 • Lecturer, Todai, 1990-1993 • Assoc. Prof., Tokai U., 1993-1995 • UCB since 1995 • third generation Japan-born Korean
  3. 3. Objective of the class • This series of lectures introduces – fundamental technical facts about environmental issues with nuclear power utilization. – discussions on long-term environmental safety of geologic disposal, including • How engineers have established technologies for securing and assessing long-term safety, and • How societal agreement has (not?) been developed, particularly in US.
  4. 4. Syllabus • June 24 – Technical basis for nuclear environmental issues – Nuclear fuel cycle and the environment – Geologic disposal • July 1 – Performance assessment of geologic disposal – Performance assessment – Can the environmental impact be reduced by recycling? • July 8 – Societal and ethical issues of geologic disposal – Development of societal agreement for geologic disposal – Ethics in/of geologic disposal • July 15 – International aspects of nuclear power utilization – (Introductory summary for nuclear activities in India) – (Comparative discussions among Japan, US, and India)
  5. 5. Format of class • Prerequisites – Fundamental knowledge about nuclear fission – Fundamental knowledge about chemical reactions • Each topic consists of: – ~ 1 hour lecture for summarizing basic facts – discussion • Reading materials/text books: – Relevant reading materials will be given to supplement class discussions upon request. • Grading: – ?? (Ask Prof. Iwata!)
  6. 6. Do you know these? • Isotope • McCabe Thiele diagram • Half life, decay constant • PUREX • Radioactivity • TBP • Uranium, plutonium • Retardation factor • E=mc2 • Darcy’s law • Fission • Aquifer • Fission products • Biosphere • Thermal neutrons • Fast neutrons • Cross sections • Light-water reactors
  7. 7. Week 1 (6/24): Technical basis for nuclear environmental issues Nuclear fuel cycle and the environment Geologic disposal
  8. 8. Nuclear fuel cycle and the environment
  9. 9. Fuel consumption and waste generation from various electricity generation sources for 1GWe.year Fuel consumption [ton] Waste generation [ton] CO2 5,000,000 Crude oil 1,400,000 SO2 40,000 NOx 25,000 dust, particles, ashes 25,000 CO2 6,000,000 Coal 2,200,000 SO2 120,000 NOx 25,000 dust, particles, ashes 300,000 (Uranium) (28.8) Nuclear 30 (Plutonium) (0.3) Fission products 0.9
  10. 10. Comparison with Fossil Fuels Chemical reaction 12 C + O2 → CO2 + 4 eV 12 y 200MeV Nuclear Fission 0n 1 x 2.43 92U 235 94Pu 239 92U 238 0n 1 per atom [eV] per gram [W•hr] 92U 235 Carbon ~4 ~ 10 Uranium ~ 2E8 ~ 2E7
  11. 11. Uranium • Uranium is mined as U3O8. • It is composed of; – 99.3% by weight 92U238 – 0.7% by weight 92U235 • 92 U235 is fissionable with slow neutrons, i.e., thermally fissile. Light-water reactors (Current fleet of commercial reactors) • 92 U238 is fissionable with only fast neutrons. – However, 92U238 is a “fertile” isotope, generating 239 (thermally fissile). 94Pu Reprocessing and recycle of spent U fuel
  12. 12. Uranium Ores
  13. 13. Uranium mining technologies Underground Open Cast Mining Mining Production per Method (%) as in 2003 (total 35 772 t U) Co-/By- product ISL m ining 20% 11% 28% 41% Open pit Deep In-Situ Leach (ISL) m ining underground m ining Mining
  14. 14. Uranium Resources (million ton) Known Conventional & Undiscovered Resources Identified Resources Cost range Reasonably Inferred Prognosticat Speculative (US$/kgU) Assumed ed Resources (RAR) < 80 2.64 1.16 1.70 80 – 130 0.66 0.28 0.82 >130 4.56 Unassigned 2.98 Subtotal 3.30 1.44 2.52 7.54 Total 4.74 10.06 14.80 IAEA Red Book 2005
  15. 15. Global Uranium Resources & Production Uranium Production (total 41.360 tU in 2005) USA Other 2% 9% Uzbekistan 6% Canada 28% Namibia 7% Russian Federation Identified (RAR+Inferred) Uranium Resources below $130 /kgU (total=4 743 000 t in 2005) 8% Other Niger Uzbekistan 2% 20% A ustralia 8% A ustralia 24% Russian Kazakhstan 22% Federation 10% 4% Niger 5% Kazakhstan’s large resource is Kazakhstan planned to be utilized by in-situ 17% leaching. Brazil 6% Namibia 6% USA Canada 7% 9%
  16. 16. Nuclear Fuel Cycle and Waste Generation LLW 1,000 drums ~0.2 ton U 27.3 ton 26 ton U 27.5 ton 0.95 ton FP 0.27 ton Ac 0.24 ton Pu 26 ton ~ 0.5 ton U TRU/LLW < 0.26 ton U 165 ton 0.95 ton FP (0.3%U-235) 167 ton 0.27 ton Ac 100,000 ton ore 1 GWe, LWR, 1 year Reprocessing scheme 0.2% U3O8 Thermal efficiency 0.325 ~ 1 ton U = 181 ton U Capacity factor 0.8 Mill tailings U7% Ra, Th Airborne Rn Th-230 100%, Ra 98%
  17. 17. Yellow cake
  18. 18. Mill tailings pile in Utah
  19. 19. Uranium enrichment
  20. 20. uranium mines, enrichment plants, and Yucca mountain repository Portsmouth, OH Oak Ridge, TN Parducah, KY Yucca Mountain Repository
  21. 21. Presently, 704,000 tons of DU stored in UF6 form in the US.
  22. 22. Nuclear Fuel Cycle and Waste Generation LLW 1,000 drums ~0.2 ton U 27.3 ton 26 ton U 27.5 ton 0.95 ton FP 0.27 ton Ac 0.24 ton Pu 26 ton ~ 0.5 ton U TRU/LLW < 0.26 ton U 165 ton 0.95 ton FP (0.3%U-235) 167 ton 0.27 ton Ac 100,000 ton ore 1 GWe, LWR, 1 year Reprocessing scheme 0.2% U3O8 Thermal efficiency 0.325 ~ 1 ton U = 181 ton U Capacity factor 0.8 Mill tailings U7% Ra, Th Airborne Rn Th-230 100%, Ra 98%
  23. 23. Interim Storage of Spent Fuel
  24. 24. Spent Fuel Accumulation in US YMR capacity September 2007
  25. 25. Repository Availability in US • Repository capacity, 63,000 ton SF. • Assume that: – The present annual electricity generation (G = 70 GWy/year) is maintained (no growth). – The spent fuel generation per GWy is calculated by W = 38,000 ton SF/1420 GWy = 27 ton/ GWy. – The electricity generation C supported by this capacity: C = 63000/27=2330 GWy • The YM repository availability is obtained as – C/G = 2330/70 = 33 years. • 3 YM repositories will be necessary for one century.
  26. 26. Reprocessing of Spent Nuclear Fuel Step 1: Decladding and Step 3: Extraction of U and Pu Chopping by Tri Butyl Phosphate Step 2: Dissolution into HNO3 (TBP) Step 4: Pu Recovery from TBP to Aqueous phase
  27. 27. Treatment of spent fuel with reprocessing High Level Waste
  28. 28. COMMERCIAL SPENT URANIUM OXIDE FUEL REPROCESSING PLANTS IN OPERATION AND UNDER CONSTRUCTION IN THE WORLD Capacity Country / Company Facility / Location Fuel Type (tHM/year) 1700 France, COGEMA UP2 and UP3, La Hague LWR 1200 UK, BNFL Thorp, Sellafield LWR, AGR 1500 UK, BNFL B205 Magnox Magnox GCR RT-1 / Tcheliabinsk-65 Russian Federation, Minatom Mayak 400 VVER 400 90 Japan, JNC Tokai-Mura LWR, ATR Rokkasho-Mura Japan, JNFL (under construction) LWR 800 PREFRE-1, Tarapur PHWR 100 India, BARC PREFRE-2, Kalpakkam PHWR 100 China, CNNC Diowopu (Ganzu) LWR 25-50
  29. 29. Storage of High-Level Waste solidified with Borosilicate Glass Storage pit at R7 COGEMA (France)
  30. 30. Radioactivity of HLW • Fission Products – Sr-90, Cs-137, Cs-135, I- 129, Tc-99, ... • Trans-uranic + U, and their decay daughters – Am-243, Am-241, Np-237, Pu-239, Pu-240, Pu-242, Cm-245, Cm-244, ... • Activated materials – H-3, C-14, Zr-95, Ni-63, Fe-55, Co-60, ...
  31. 31. Geologic disposal
  32. 32. Yucca Mountain HUMBOLDT ELKO COUNTY COUNTY • Location: 100 WASHOE COUNTY miles NW of Las PERSHING COUNTY COUNTY LANDER EUREKA COUNTY Vegas in Nye CHURCHILL COUNTY County CARSON CITY LYON STOREY WHITE PINE COUNTY • Withdrawal Area: DOUGLAS NYE MINERAL 230 sq. miles COUNTY COUNTY (150,000 acres) ESMERALDA COUNTY NELLIS LINCOLN • Distance: 14 miles AIR FORCE COUNTY RANGE NV from nearest year- TEST SITE CLARK round population YUCCA COUNTY MOUNTAIN INYO COUNTY CALIFORNIA LAS VEGAS 1 acre = 4,046.86 m2 = 1,224坪
  33. 33. Yucca Mountain • Geology: Composed of ash tuff deposited 10 million years ago • Elevation: 4950 ft. at crest • Climate: receives less than 7.5 inches rain annually • Resources: none of commercial value
  34. 34. Yucca Mountain Repository 63,000 ton HM for CSNF 7,000 ton HM for Defense wastes 4,500 ton HM equivalent HLW 2,500 ton HM SNF (15 categories)
  35. 35. Yucca Mountain Repository Design
  36. 36. Three Types of Waste Packages Number of packages CSNF 7886 Co-disp 3564 DW Naval 300
  37. 37. Program Key Milestones • Design for License Application – Completed December 1, 2007 • License Support Network Certification – October 19, 2007 (two months earlier than schedule) – Recertification: June 3, 2008 • Supplemental EIS – Draft issued October 2007/hearings completed • License Application – Submitted to NRC on June 3, 2008 – Submittal included 208 references – Will be “docketed” within 90 days (8/31) from the submittal date – Review by NRC will be completed within 3 years (2011).
  38. 38. Program Key Milestones (cont’d) • Start Nevada Rail Construction - October 2009 – Delayed - Inadequate funding to proceed with design • YM Construction Authorization - September 2011 – Depends on NRC decision • Operating License Submittal - March 2013 – Predicated on funding and construction schedule • Rail Line Operational - June 2014 – 2016 is achievable only if adequate funding is provided • Begin Receipt - March 2017 (Best Achievable Date) – Currently under evaluation due to FY 07 and 08 actual funding shortfalls and expected near term funding limitations – Firm date cannot be set until funding issue resolved
  39. 39. Waste Isolation Pilot Plant (WIPP), Carlsbad, NM • The world's first underground repository licensed to permanently dispose of transuranic (TRU) waste left from the research and production of nuclear weapons. • After more than 20 years of scientific study, public input, and regulatory struggles, WIPP began operations on March 26, 1999. • Located in the remote Chihuahuan Desert of Southeastern New Mexico • undertaken by DOE • disposal rooms mined 2,150 feet • Waste from defense activities underground in a 2,000-foot thick salt formation that has been stable • Exempted from NRC regulation for more than 200 million years. (EPA Certificate) • Transuranic waste is currently • Bedded salt stored at 23 locations nationwide. • 176,000 m3 Contact-Handled • Over a 35 year period, WIPP is (CH)TRU, expected to receive about 19,000 • 71,000 m3 Remote-Handled shipments. (RH)TRU
  40. 40. $ 410,000 per TRUPACT-II
  41. 41. Waste package located in WIPP Inside the package
  42. 42. Geologic Disposal Concept in Sweden/Finland • water-saturated granite • LWR spent fuel • copper canister (lined with titanium) • bentonite buffer
  43. 43. HLW Geologic Disposal Concept in Japan Tunnel type water-saturated granite Vitrified waste carbon-steel overpack bentonite buffer
  44. 44. Functional requirements for Geologic Disposal (OECD, 1989) • The goal of final disposal is to protect human health and the environment and to limit the burdens on future generations. • The waste must not be released to the biosphere at concentrations deemed to present an unacceptable hazard. – Health risks and effects on the environment from waste disposal, at any time in the future, shall be low and not greater than would be acceptable today. The judgment of the acceptability of a disposal option shall be based on radiological impacts irrespective of any national boundaries. • The waste must be removed and isolated from the effects of human activity or catastrophic natural events, • the technology to implement disposal must be readily available as well as achievable at a reasonable cost, • The burden on future generations shall be limited by implementing “at an appropriate time” a final disposal option which does not rely for its safety on long-term institutional controls or remedial actions. – in some countries, the retrieval of some types of disposed nuclear wastes must be technologically and economically feasible, if so desired by future generations, • The processes which control safe performance of nuclear waste disposal must be well-characterized by modeling. • Sufficient, relevant data should be obtained and used in such models to demonstrate predicted performance reliably.
  45. 45. Week 2 (7/1): Performance assessment of geologic disposal Performance assessment Can the environmental impact be reduced by recycling?
  46. 46. Performance assessment
  47. 47. Performance Assessment (PA) , Total System Performance Assessment (TSPA), Safety Assessment • PA: method for evaluation system, subsystem or component performance • TSPA: a system-level PA; subsystems and components are linked into a single analysis • Safety Assessment: if the result of TSPA is compared with a safety standard and judgment is made, TSPA is called safety assessment. (For YMR, TSPA = SA)
  48. 48. Annual Dose as the repository performance measure Biosphere Biosphere Annual dose, dose conversion BiCi mrem/yr factor, Bi (mrem/yr)/(Ci/m3) Repository well Geosphere Plum Release, Local nuclide e of r Fi(t) adion concentration, Ci(r,t) u clide s Near field Far field
  49. 49. Barriers Evaluated in the Analysis • Surficial soils and topography • Unsaturated rock layers overlying the repository • Drip shield • Waste package • Spent fuel cladding • Waste form / concentration limits • Drift invert • Unsaturated rock layers below repository • Tuff and alluvial aquifers
  50. 50. Emplacement Drift Emplacement drifts 5.5 m diameter 50-90 drifts, each ~ 1 km long
  51. 51. The Emplacement Environment at Yucca Mountain
  52. 52. Thermal hydraulic conditions around emplacement drifts
  53. 53. Thermal Design Goals Requirement Description Tclad < 350°C Limit to prevent clad failure by increase in creep rupture. TDW < 200°C Prevents alteration of rock crystalline structure. Tcenter < 96°C Pillar Drainage requirement, creates flow path for water.
  54. 54. Natural System of Yucca Mountain Repository located: ~1,000 ft. Below Surface ~1,000 ft. Above Water Table Desert Environment Unsaturated Overburden Unsaturated Host Rock Repository Horizon Underlying Unsaturated Rock Deep Water Table
  55. 55. Estimating Dose to Hypothetical Future Humans
  56. 56. Total System Performance Assessment Architecture
  57. 57. Total System Performance Assessment Results Total Mean and Median Annual Dose (Draft Supplemental EIS, Oct. 2007)
  58. 58. Total Expected Dose: 10,000 years (Draft Supplemental EIS, Oct. 2007)
  59. 59. Radionuclides Contributing to Total Mean Dose at 10,000 Years (Draft Supplemental EIS, Oct. 2007)
  60. 60. Summary of 10,000-year Results (Draft Supplemental EIS, Oct. 2007) • Total mean dose determined by contribution from seismic scenario class – Probability of damage to co-disposed waste packages within 10,000 yr < 0.2 • Largest contribution to mean dose from 99Tc • Magnitude of mean dose determined by – Probability of events (seismic, igneous) – Diffusion of radionuclides through cracks in waste package outer barrier • Total estimated peak mean annual dose for 10,000 years: 0.24 mrem/yr – Well below regulatory limit of 15 mrem/yr
  61. 61. Total Expected Dose: 1 million years (Draft Supplemental EIS, Oct. 2007)
  62. 62. Radionuclides Contributing to Total Mean Dose at 1 million Years (Draft Supplemental EIS, Oct. 2007)
  63. 63. Summary of 1 million-year Results (Draft Supplemental EIS, Oct. 2007) • Total mean dose determined by occurrence of igneous events, seismic damage and general corrosion • Major contributors to dose are 99Tc, 129I, 239Pu, 242Pu, 226Ra, and 237Np • Waste package outer barrier has primary influence on releases of technetium and iodine • Chemistry influences release of plutonium from waste package • Total estimated peak median annual dose for 1 million years: 0.96 mrem/yr – Well below proposed regulatory limit of 350 mrem/yr
  64. 64. Steps for TSPA Detail models –– A calculation typically includes only a subset of the repository system. The calculation produces predictions that can be compared with laboratory or field data. System models ––A calculation produces assessment of regulatory performance measures and the uncertainty in the performance measures caused by the parameter and model uncertainties in the analysis.
  65. 65. Evolution of Previous TSPAs
  66. 66. Model Development for TSPA Abstraction Process Model Data
  67. 67. Two Major Issues with Geologic Disposal • Repository Capacity for future nuclear- power utilization • Uncertainty and Confidence building in long-term performance assessment
  68. 68. Types of uncertainty • Aleatory: – arises from an inherent randomness – Stochastic, irreducible, Type A • Epistemic: – Derives from a lack of knowledge about the appropriate value to use for a quantity that is assumed to have a fixed value. – Subjective, reducible, Type B • Examples – Regulatory uncertainty (Epistemic) – Conceptual-model uncertainty (Epistemic) – Model parameter uncertainty (Epistemic) – Stochastic uncertainty (Aleatory)
  69. 69. Regulatory uncertainty • How can “repository performance” be measured? • How can a technical safety case be justified within the regulatory framework? – Safety criteria are themselves uncertain.
  70. 70. Congress, EPA, NRC, DOE 1980-85 1985-90 1990-95 1995-00 2000-05 2005-10 EnPA NWPA NWPAA 1992 VA Report for Cong- 1982 1987 1996 Site Rec 2nd repository By Energy Sec. ress WIPPLWA 2002 2008-10 1992 40CFR 40CFR194 40CFR197 Part 191 WIPP DENIAL 1985 40CFR191 1998 EPA amended 2004 Mass of stored SF (Standard) 40CFR191 1993 40CFR197 40CFR197 Exceeds YMR YMR proposal DENIAL capacity 2001 2005 1987 2014 10CFR60 10CFR60 10CFR60 Procedure Un-satu’d Pre-closure 10CFR63 NRC 1981 1985 1996 YMR (Regulation) 10CFR60 10CFR60 2001 Technical NEPA 1983 1989 TSPA TSPA 10CFR963 1991 1995 2001 DOE 10CFR960 TSPA-VA License (Guideline) 1984 TSPA Application 1998 1993 TSPA-SR And review 2001 2008-2011
  71. 71. Nuclear Waste Policy Act (1982) • Set the schedule for siting 2 repositories. • EPA was charged with issuing generally applicable limits on radioactivity releases to the environment. (40CFR191) • NRC was directed to develop regulations and criteria for construction, operation, and closure. (10CFR60) • 1986: 9 sites ––> 5 sites ––> 3 sites – Deaf Smith, Hanford, Yucca Mountain
  72. 72. NWPA Amendment Act (1987) • Only Yucca Mountain be characterized to evaluate its suitability as a repository. • No site-specific work for a second repository. • Nullified the DOE proposal for MRS at the Clinch River, TN. • Site Characterization Plan for YM (1988)
  73. 73. 10CFR60 (1983) • Waste-package lifetime > ~1000 yr • Radionuclide fractional release rate from EBS < 1/100,000 of its 1,000 yr inventory • Groundwater travel time > 1,000 yr • Overall performance: radionuclide release to the accessible environment (40CFR191).
  74. 74. 40CFR191 (1985) • Disposal systems shall be designed so that for 10,000 years the following limits will not be exceeded at the accessible environment with the likelihood of – < 1 chance in 10 of exceeding the limit, and – < 1 chance in 1000 of exceeding 10 times the limit. • Release limits are set on the basis of 1,000 MTHM. – I-129: 100 Ci, Sr-90: 1000 Ci, – Np-237: 100 Ci, Th-230: 10 Ci
  75. 75. Energy Policy Act (1992) • Mandated a separate process for setting a standard specifically for YMR. • Required EPA to arrange for an analysis by National Academy of Sciences (NAS). – Can scientifically justifiable analyses of repository behavior over many thousands of years in the future be made? • EPA reissued revised 40CFR191 in 1993.
  76. 76. Recommendations by NAS Report (1995) • Denial of release limits, i.e., 1000 incremental fatalities over 10,000 years – The use of a standard that sets a limit on the risk to individuals of adverse health effects from releases from the repository is recommended. – The critical-group approach should be used. • Extension of time frame from 10,000 yr to a million yr – The compliance with the standard measured at the time of peak risk, within the limits imposed by the long-term stability of the geologic environment, which is of the order of one million years. • Denial of risk-based calculation of the adverse effect of human intrusion into the repository – The consequence of an intrusion should be calculated to assess the resilience of the repository to intrusion.
  77. 77. 10 CFR Part 63 was rejected by the federal appeals court due to a lawsuit by Nevada State, July 2004. • Post Closure Performance Assessment – Computer simulation of repository performance over 10,000 years to: • Consider geologic and engineered barriers • Determine capabilities and time period to prevent or retards movement of water and radionuclides • Calculate radiological dose at 18 km (using lab and field evidence for simulations) – DOE must demonstrate using performance assessment, that for 10,000 years the “reasonably, maximally exposed individual” receives no more than 15 mrem per year from all pathways releases of undisturbed YM disposal system.
  78. 78. Nominal Performance case with proposed standard (TSPA-VA) 350mrem/year 15mrem/year
  79. 79. Total System Performance Assessment Results Total Mean and Median Annual Dose (Draft Supplemental EIS, Oct. 2007)
  80. 80. Some thoughts about geologic disposal • Retrievability of wastes from a repository – Final disposal vs. interim storage • Fairness/Equity to future generations – Who are “future generations”? • Fairness/Equity to the local community around the repository site – Why Nevada, where no nuclear power plants exist? • “Natural Barrier” – May we contaminate rocks? • Relationship with recycle/reprocessing – Is recycle effective in improving repository performance?
  81. 81. Some thoughts about performance assessment (PA) • Performance assessment is: – based on scientific facts and abstracted reality, and – used as a tool for objective and optimized societal decision. – a good way to communicate with the public? • Annual dose as the performance measure for judgment of long-term “environmental” safety. – Should be understood as a “stylized” measure. • The biosphere part of PA model is based on hypothetical assumptions. • This is actually not a measure for environmental safety, but radiological safety. – What kind of (technical) information needs to be provided by PA for societal decision-making?
  82. 82. Can the environmental impact be reduced by recycling?
  83. 83. Nuclear Fuel Cycle System parameters d1, d2, p2, αf, γ1,γ2, … Solidification Fuel cycle Matrix M System parameters Reactor v, D, C*, ε, εp, d, Uranium Process L, R, K, N, … Loss waste Fuel Separation Fabrication Process Repository Nuclear system “IMPACT” Environment
  84. 84. Generation of long-lived FPs in LWRs (3410 MWt, 33,000 MWD/MT, 150-day cooling) Half-lives fraction (%) nuclides < 1 yr 4.8 1 to 10 yr 1.3 Ru-106, Sb-125, Cs-134, Pm-147, Eu-154, Eu-155 10 to 30 yr 5.3 Kr-85 (11 yr), Sr-90 (29 yr), Cs-137 (30 yr) 30 to 100 yr 0.03 Sm-151 100 to 10,000 yr 0.0 N.A. 1E4 to 5E9 yr 6.6 Se-79, Zr-93, Tc-99 (2.1E5), Pd-107, Sn-126, I-129(1.6E7) Cs-135 (2.3E6) > 5E9 yr 7.6 Rb-87, In-115, Ce-142, Nd-144, Sm-147, Sm-148, Sm-149 Stable 78.1 Total 100.0
  85. 85. Generation of minor actinides (MA) per year Nuclide 3410 MWt PWR 3 yr cooling 10 yr cooling Np-237 57.9 % 41.3 Am-241 27.4 48.8* Am-243 11.9 8.33 Cm-243 0.03 0.02 Cm-244 2.67 1.44 Cm-245 0.15 0.10 Total 100 100 *Am-241 increases due to beta decay of Pu-241.
  86. 86. Partitioning and Transmutation of HLW • By destruction of long-lived radionuclides in HLW, – Radioactivity and radiotoxicity of long-lived HLW are reduced – risk for future recovery of nuclear weapons materials from a final repository is reduced – additional nuclear energy is gained by fissioning minor actinides • For P-T, – Reprocessing is a prerequisite – Total radiological hazard arising from nuclear energy production must be reduced. – Secondary wastes from P-T processes must be taken into account. – Net energy production is desirable. – System must be economical.
  87. 87. Processes for P-T • Partitioning – Conventional PUREX process + additional chemical partitioning process ex. for Np, TRUEX has been developed. – A process where separation of uranium and plutonium is combined with recovery of elements to be transmuted. ex. pyrochemical processing • Transmutation – Reactors • LWR, FBR for electricity generation + actinide burners • Th-U fuel cycle – Accelerator • high-energy proton spallation (n, fission), (n, gamma), (n, 2n), (n, p) reactions photo-nuclear reaction (gamma, n) – Fusion reactor
  88. 88. P&T benefits
  89. 89. Toxicity Index λ i Ni Toxicity index =Σ [m3] i Ci,k where Ci,k : radioactivity concentration limit for nuclide i in medium k (k = water or air) [Bq/m3], Ni: the number of atoms of nuclide I If more than one radionuclide is involved, a summation is performed over all the isotopes present in the mixture. Toxicity index is the volume of air or water with which the mixture of radionuclides must be diluted so that breathing the air or drinking the water will result in accumulation of radiation dose at a rate no greater than 0.5 rem/year.
  90. 90. P-T flow sheet
  91. 91. Geologic disposal and P&T (1) • 1970s – Several disposal concepts were investigated and compared from scientific viewpoints. – Geologic repository concept • 1977 Polvani Report (OECD/NEA) • 1977 Stripa Project in Sweden – Partitioning and Transmutation was proposed as an alternative to geologic disposal • 1980s – Scientific studies to demonstrate the safety of geologic disposal • OECD International Symposium on Safety assessment of radioactive waste repositories, Paris 1989 – Denial of P&T concepts as an alternative to geologic disposal • International Conference on Partitioning and Transmutation, Ispra, 1980 • UCBNE4176, Prof. T.H. Pigford, Paper presented at MIT conference • L. D. Ramspott, et al., “Impacts of New Developments in Partitioning and Transmutation on the Disposal of High-Level Nuclear Waste in a Mined Geologic Repository,” UCRL ID-109203, LLNL, March 1992.
  92. 92. UCBNE4176, 1990 by Pigford (In the framework of 40CFR191) 1. By recycling actinides, the length of time that needs to be considered for geologic disposal would not decrease from 100,000 yr to 1000yr, as claimed by P&T studies. 2. P&T is not necessary to satisfy 40CFR191 requirement for cumulative release of radionuclides to the environment at 10,000yr. 3. To have significant reduction of actinide inventory in a cycle, it will require more than 1000 yr of operation of P&T system to reach a steady state. Even in such a case, reduction better than 1/1000 is not possible.
  93. 93. Geologic disposal and P&T (2) • 1990s – Demonstration of geologic disposal concepts (more site specific studies) – Shifting from natural barrier to engineered barriers • TSPA studies in US for Yucca Mountain Repository • SKB report, Sweden, 1991 • H3 and H12 reports, Japan, 1991, 1999 – P&T to improve repository performance • EC/EU Framework • France: SPIN project • OECD/Japan OMEGA project • US Liquid metal cooled actinide burner with pyroprocessing at ANL • 2000s – Sites for repositories announced • YMR (US), Olkiluoto (Finland) – Repository capacity issue has emerged. – P&T and advanced fuel cycle • Generation IV • AFCI/GNEP
  94. 94. Results of Swedish repository-performance study Dose limit (0.15mSv/y) I-129
  95. 95. Water-Saturated repository (Japanese repository concept, H12) 4 10 3 10 Engineered Barrier System Calculated dose[μSv y -1] 2 Geosphere 10 1 Surface Environment 10 Lifestyle Total 0 10 Dose [ Sv/y] -1 10 Np-237 U-234 U-238 μ -2 10 -3 10 Th-229 -4 10 -5 10 -6 Se-79 Pb-210 10 -7 10 Cs-135 -8 10 100 101 102 103 104 105 106 107 108 Time after disposal [y] Time after disposal [y]
  96. 96. Effects of P&T in terms of exposure dose rate (H12) 1.0E+00 1.0E-01 1.0E-02 Reference case 総線量 [μSv/y] 1.0E-03 1.0E-04 1.0E-05 99% actinide removed 1.0E-06 1.0E-07 1.0E+03 1.0E+04 1.0E+05 1.0E+06 1.0E+07 1.0E+08 Time after emplacement in repository, year 処分後の時間 [y] Wakasugi, et al., Personal communications
  97. 97. Repository performance is insensitive to P/T application -- L. D. Ramspott, et al., “Impacts of New Developments in Partitioning and Transmutation on the Disposal of High-Level Nuclear Waste in a Mined Geologic Repository,” UCRL ID- 109203, LLNL, March 1992. All other things being equal, less inventory means less risk. However, the risk reduction benefits that P-T might offer depend on the release scenario involved, and in many cases, may not be as great as a 99.9% reduction in actinide inventory might suggest.
  98. 98. So, can the environmental impact be reduced by recycle? • Yes, it can. • However, whether reduction is meaningful or not depends on – combination of (a) waste form, (b) separation efficiency, and (c) performance measures, suitable for geo-hydrological and geochemical conditions of the repository. • Environmental impact reduction would not necessarily be the motivation for recycle; – U resource utilization and proliferation resistance of the repository could be more important. • Environmental impacts from other parts of the fuel cycle would directly be imposed on the current people, not those in 10,000 years in future. Thus, comparison or combination with other EI should be done carefully.
  99. 99. Week 3 (7/8): Societal and ethical issues of geologic disposal Development of societal agreement for geologic disposal Ethics of geologic disposal
  100. 100. Development of societal agreement for geologic disposal
  101. 101. The Repository World • Disposal in a geologic repository remains the preferred ultimate solution, with or without reprocessing • Much of the technical community has confidence in determining site suitability • A number of geologic media are being pursued • Most programs have experienced substantial difficulties • Siting remains the biggest hurdle • Increasing recognition of multi-disciplinary nature • Select ideas have become prominent, e.g. volunteer/veto, retrievability, monitoring, phased management • We will have storage for decades
  102. 102. Some Highlights and Lowlights • National programs have been abandoned or siting stopped – France, U.K., Canada, Germany, Spain, Switzerland, U.S.A. • National (re)reviews have been undertaken – Canada, France, U.K.,… • Schedules have been delayed – Almost everywhere • Some countries have moved forward and others have restarted – Finland, Sweden, U.S.A., France, Canada, Japan, U.K….
  103. 103. An (Optimistic) Current Snapshot • Countries with candidate sites – Finland, Sweden, U.S.A., France • Countries with programs underway – Canada, Belgium, Japan, U.K., Switzerland,… • Countries “thinking about it” – Spain, South Korea, China, India,… • Countries starting out – Argentina, Slovakia, Slovenia, South Africa,…
  104. 104. The Seaborn Panel Conclusions (1998) --Canada-- • “From a technical perspective, safety of the AECL concept has been on balance adequately demonstrated for a conceptual stage of development. But from a social perspective, it has not.” • “As it stands, the AECL concept for deep geological disposal has not been demonstrated to have broad public support. The concept in its current form does not have the required level of acceptability to be adopted as Canada’s approach for managing nuclear fuel wastes.”
  105. 105. NWMO Techniques for Broad Engagement
  106. 106. “Choosing a Way Forward”: The Foundation • “…this generation of citizens which has enjoyed the benefits of nuclear energy has an obligation to begin provision for managing that waste.” • “…our obligation is to give them (succeeding generations) a real choice and the opportunity to shape their own decisions while at the same time not imposing a burden which future generations may not be able to manage.”
  107. 107. “Choosing a Way Forward”: Some Key Recommendations • Sequential decision-making and flexibility in the pace and manner of implementation through “Adaptive Phased Management” • Ultimate centralized isolation in a deep geologic repository • Option for interim step of shallow underground storage at the central site • Program of continuous learning and R&D • Long-term monitoring with potential for retrievability • Seek an informed, willing community as host
  108. 108. What makes nuclear waste management special? • The technical challenge – Performance over geological time – “Proof” not possible – Central role of “ologists” • The institutional challenge – The extraordinary time frame – Siting – Linkage to other agendas – Values and ethics in conflict – Political implications – Nuclear stigma and fears » But there are unique advantages…
  109. 109. Virtues of a Repository • Passive • Occurrences will be slow • No inherent energy to release materials • Retrievable • Only a repository upon closure, when future generations are comfortable
  110. 110. Some Key Enduring Features • Core, stable goal • Roles and responsibilities clear • Clear, open, and transparent decision making process • Respect for fairness and societal consent apparent • Sequential decision-making and contingency planning • Possibility of altering or reversing course • Appropriate compensation
  111. 111. Some Potential Lessons Learned • Take the necessary time - go slow in order to go fast • Assign importance to the societal considerations as well as the technical ones • There are many ways to effectively engage the public and key stakeholders • Listening, respecting, and then responding can build trust and even advocacy, particularly with local community • Plan carefully and involve the right experts • Be prepared to respond in real time to unexpected events • Promise, then deliver, then do it again and again
  112. 112. Ethics of geologic disposal
  113. 113. three main virtues that have withstood the test of time • Humility • Charity • Veracity
  114. 114. Humility Humility means you should treat yourself fully as one, but not more than one. • How does this apply when you have a group of people (a corporation/government) that want to install a nuclear plant/geologic repository? • Is it considering that that group of people may have different priorities than the group of people that they are affecting by installing the plant? • Is it the mentality that installing a power plant will affect each person in their own situation differently? • How do we reconcile these differences?
  115. 115. Charity Charity means that you should treat others as fully one, just the same as you treat yourself. • Should the groups of people that run corporations consider the groups of people that are affected by their projects as equal to them? • Should the people that are affected consider the corporations equal? • Who’s right is it to decide whether a project should go forward? The people affected? Corporations? Government?
  116. 116. Veracity Veracity simply means telling the truth. • It has already proven successful for some countries to be completely open and honest with the people who will be affected by power plant projects. • It has been shown that when the company or government that is planning the project takes the time to sit down and discuss the plans with the people, they are more receptive to the project. • How important is it when it comes to these issues for corporations? The government?
  117. 117. Consequentialism (帰結主義) G.E.M. Anscombe, quot;Modern Moral Philosophyquot; (1958) • Actions are evaluated based on the results they achieve. • A morally right action is one that produces a good outcome, or consequence. • The ethical action is the one that maximizes overall good. • Such theories are labeled teleological(目的論的). • A consequentialist may argue that lying is wrong because of the negative consequences produced by lying — though a consequentialist may allow that certain foreseeable consequences might make lying acceptable.
  118. 118. Utilitarianism(功利主義) John Stuart Mill's essay Utilitarianism (1861) • “the greatest good for the greatest number”(最大多数の最大幸福) • the moral worth of an action is solely determined by its contribution to overall utility, that is, its contribution to happiness or pleasure as summed among all persons.
  119. 119. Deontology(義務論) • Actions are evaluated based on the motivation behind them. • Deontology derives the rightness or wrongness of an act from the character of the act itself. • A deontologist might argue that lying is always wrong, regardless of any potential quot;goodquot; that might come from lying.
  120. 120. Kant’s three significant formulations of the categorical imperative (deontological) • Act only according to that maxim by which you can also will that it would become a universal law. • Act in such a way that you always treat humanity, whether in your own person or in the person of any other, never simply as a means, but always at the same time as an end. • Act as though you were, through your maxims, a law-making member of a kingdom of ends.
  121. 121. Conflicting motives • Consequentialism seeks the best outcome, despite the action. • Deontology seeks the best action, despite the consequences.
  122. 122. ANS Code of Ethics http://www.ans.org/about/coe/ 1. We hold paramount the safety, health, and welfare of the public and fellow workers, work to protect the environment, and strive to comply with the principles of sustainable development in the performance of our professional duties. 2. We will formally advise our employers, clients, or any appropriate authority and, if warranted, consider further disclosure, if and when we perceive that pursuit of our professional duties might have adverse consequences for the present or future public and fellow worker health and safety or the environment. (veracity)
  123. 123. ANS Code of Ethics http://www.ans.org/about/coe/ 3. We act in accordance with all applicable laws and these Practices, lend support to others who strive to do likewise, and report violations to appropriate authorities. (veracity, humility) 4. We perform only those services that we are qualified by training or experience to perform, and provide full disclosure of our qualifications. (humility) 5. We present all data and claims, with their bases, truthfully, and are honest and truthful in all aspects of our professional activities. We issue public statements and make presentations on professional matters in an objective and truthful manner. (veracity)
  124. 124. ANS Code of Ethics http://www.ans.org/about/coe/ 6. We continue our professional development and maintain an ethical commitment throughout our careers, encourage similar actions by our colleagues, and provide opportunities for the professional and ethical training of those persons under our supervision. 7. We act in a professional and ethical manner towards each employer or client and act as faithful agents or trustees, disclosing nothing of a proprietary nature concerning the business affairs or technical processes of any present or former client or employer without specific consent, unless necessary to abide by other provisions of this Code or applicable laws.
  125. 125. ANS Code of Ethics http://www.ans.org/about/coe/ 8. We disclose to affected parties, known or potential conflicts of interest or other circumstances, which might influence, or appear to influence, our judgment or impair the fairness or quality of our performance. 9. We treat all persons fairly. (Charity) 10. We build our professional reputation on the merit of our services, do not compete unfairly with others, and avoid injuring others, their property, reputation, or employment. 11. We reject bribery and coercion in all their forms.
  126. 126. ANS Code of Ethics http://www.ans.org/about/coe/ 12. We accept responsibility for our actions; are open to and acknowledge criticism of our work; offer honest criticism of the work of others; properly credit the contributions of others; and do not accept credit for work not our own. (humility, veracity)
  127. 127. Ethics in Nuclear Engineering • ANS Code of Ethics reflects a Deontological approach of obeying a set of rules or principles. 9th point specifically mirrors Kant’s Categorical Imperative. • This contrasts, however, with the Consequentialism approach which is taken in the matter of waste disposal. • The potential for greater good for the greater number of people is considered more important than the action, which puts people at risk.
  128. 128. Yucca Mountain • Yucca Mountain seemingly contradicts two tenets of the ANS Code of Ethics: – 1) welfare of the public, and – 9) We treat all persons fairly • is it fair that Nevada gets a site when they have no nuclear power, and have been lied to in the past? • Utilitarianism is the basis for ethics (greatest good for the greatest #), but we still shouldn’t violate the code of ethics, (#9)? • In utilitarianistic consideration, is future generation included?
  129. 129. Week 4 (7/15): International aspects of nuclear power utilization (Introductory summary for nuclear activities in India) (Comparative discussions among Japan, US, and India)
  130. 130. (Introductory summary for nuclear activities in India by Dr. R. K. Dayal, IGCAR)
  131. 131. Topics to be Discussed in This Week • As Asian economy expands rapidly, so does energy demand in Asia. – Why is this so important to us (or the US)? • Nuclear Energy is an indispensable choice for Asian countries. – Are they ready for nuclear energy? – How will it influence the world in the future? – What is needed most there? And how can the US respond to such needs?
  132. 132. http://www.peakoil.net/ (Association for the Study of Peak Oil & Gas)
  133. 133. Chinese Development Plan of Nuclear Power Units to 2020 NPPs in operation and under construction 50000 Power Capacity (MWe) 45000 under construction 40000 in operation 35000 30000 25000 9,068MW 20000 7,860MW 1981-2007 15000 2004- 2014 10000 5000 0 19 1 1 1 1 2 2 2 2 2 8 2年 98 6年 99 0年 99 4年 99 8年 00 2年 00 6年 01 0年 01 4年 01 8年 26,000MW 2008- 2020 1.8% 4.0%
  134. 134. Scenarios for Total Installed Power Capacity in India (DAE-2004 and Planning Commission-2006 studies) 1600 1400 1200 1000 GWe 800 600 400 200 0 1990 2000 2010 2020 2030 2040 2050 2060 Year DAE PC_GDP-Growth 8% PC_GDP-Growth 9%
  135. 135. Electricity growth rate – a scenario Primary Electricity Period energy % annual % annual growth 2002-2022 growth 4.6 6.3 2022-2032 4.5 4.9 2032-2042 4.5 4.6 2042-2052 3.9 3.9 Per Capita Generation (kWh) 6000 5305 5000 3699 4000 3000 2454 2000 1620 1000 1000 613 0 2002 2012 2022 2032 2042 2052 Time period
  136. 136. GDP/capita vs. kWh/capita US (2006) ($44,000, 13,000 kWh) 10000 Singapore Brunei Japan From 1999 to 2006 Hong Kong South Korea Malaysia kWh/capita China Thailand 1000 Philippines India Indonesia Sri Lanka 100 100 1000 10000 100000 GDP/capita (US$)
  137. 137. By Increase in Energy Consumption in Asia .... • Global Environment – CO2, SOx, NOx emissions • Greenhouse effect, Acid Rain, etc. • Competition for Limited Resources • Nuclear Safety and Security • International System – If nuclear energy is developed on a large scale, restructuring of international organizations for safeguards will be necessary.
  138. 138. The Global Nuclear Energy Partnership Objectives are Stated in The National Security Strategy • The United States “will build the Global Nuclear Energy Partnership to work with other nations to develop and deploy advanced nuclear recycling and reactor technologies. • This initiative will help provide reliable, emission-free energy with less of the waste burden of older technologies and without making available separated plutonium that could be used by rogue states or terrorists for nuclear weapons. • These new technologies will make possible a dramatic expansion of safe, clean nuclear energy to help meet the growing global energy demand.”
  139. 139. GNEP Process
  140. 140. Spent fuel accumulation in South Korea 90 Spent Fuel Accumulation (ktHM) Accumulated SF Arisings (ktHM) 80 70 60 50 PWR 40 30 20 CANDU 10 0 2005 2015 2025 2035 2045 2055 2065 2075 2085 2095 Year
  141. 141. (Comparative discussions among Japan, US, and India)
  142. 142. Discussion topics • Developed vs. developing countries – Resources – Global environment – Proliferation resistance – Access to technologies • For whom? Why? • Current vs. future generations – Resources – Global environment • Nuclear vs. non-nuclear communities – Public perception and communication – Decision making processes

×