Skip to main content

Currently Skimming:

2. Principal Findings and Conclusions
Pages 20-39

The Chapter Skim interface presents what we've algorithmically identified as the most significant single chunk of text within every page in the chapter.
Select key terms on the right to highlight them within pages of the chapter.


From page 20...
... In many countries these materials are stored temporarily at or near the facility that produced them. While the committee believes that this practice is not generally sustainable in view of the growing inventory,2 security concerns, and the decommissioning of many currently operating nuclear power reactors during the next several decades, the committee recognizes that radioactive waste management is a matter of national decision in each country.
From page 21...
... Nevertheless, uncertainties remain, and some scientists feel that it is premature to commit fully to disposal. The biggest challenges to initiating geological disposition, however, are societal: there is a clear lack of public confidence and support in many countries for proceeding with siting and construction of geological repositories.
From page 22...
... TODAY'S GROWING INVENTORY OF HEW REQUIRES ATTENTION BY NATIONAL DECISION MAKERS The present situation in the management of radioactive wastes worldwide is one in which- with some important, mainly defense-related, exceptions safety and security are being achieved by storage on or near the surface. This safe and secure storage is feasible technically as long as adequate resources and political attention are devoted to it.
From page 23...
... Safety refers to the risk of radiation doses to present or future generations because of inadequate isolation of radioactive waste from the biosphere. Most attention is paid in the technical analyses to potential releases of radionuclides from storage and disposal facilities, but other issues such as transportation safety also are relevant, and they are especially important to the public.
From page 24...
... For all of the above reasons, the committee concludes that the challenge of achieving safe and secure disposition of HLW in a manner that is technically sound and publicly acceptable requires attention by national decision makers. THE FEASIBLE OPTIONS ARE MONITORED STORAGE ON OR NEAR THE EARTH'S SURFACE AND GEOLOGICAL DISPOSITION The presently feasible options for HLW management are monitored storage on or near the earth's surface, or geological disposition in a mined repository that can become the sitefor geological disposal, if a decision is taken that the repository refilled, closed, and sealed.
From page 25...
... The isolation of HLW from the environment in deep formations can help to assure security and safety by limiting human access. The initial capital costs of geological repositories are higher than those for surface storage facilities, although the final economic balance between options will depend strongly on financial assumptions.
From page 26...
... Selecting a disposition option should be done only when these different types of uncertainties have been compared and the preferred option has been chosen, based on an evaluation of the level of risk and public acceptance of each. The growing inventory in temporary storage raises equity and ethical issues that influence the choice of socially acceptable methods to assure safety and security.
From page 27...
... Nevertheless, the committee believes that it is not prudent to pursue only storage, without further development of the geological disposition option unless a society believes it can credibly commit to permanent maintenance of its storage facilities. Storage leaves a potentially serious safety and security hazard on the surface; geological disposal is intended to do otherwise.
From page 28...
... This is extremely important, because misuse of fissile materials that can be extracted from some types of radioactive waste may be the greatest hazard that radioactive waste presents to society. GEOLOGICAL DISPOSAL IS SCIENTIFICALLY AND TECHNICALLY SOUND, BUT IMPORTANT CHALLENGES REMAIN The scientific and technical basis for geological disposal is well advanced, but significant challenges remain for the characterization and performance assessment of specific sites.
From page 29...
... , and the European Commission (NEA, l991b) , the feasibility of performing assessments of sufficient quality to support decisions on implementation of geological disposition is accepted by technical experts within the waste management community.
From page 30...
... Such changes include initiating decision processes that maintain choice and that are open, transparent, and collaborative with independent scientists, critics, and the public. A complex of factors drives the high levels of public concern and lack of confidence in radioactive waste management programs apparent in most countries.
From page 31...
... Today, significant gaps in knowledge exist concerning such central questions as why public confidence is apparently so low in the radioactive waste management area compared to other equally or even more risky human activities, how to best define and measure public confidence, how conflicts among ethical imperatives might be resolved, whether there are more effective means for engaging members of the public, and how institutions might best rebuild societal trust. Beyond this, compared to the physical sciences, there has been relatively little formalized social science expert overview and peer review of assumptions and institutional processes in the waste area.
From page 32...
... In Canada, decisions about if and when to implement geological disposition are formally open. France passed a law specifying that no national decision on geological disposition versus continued surface storage should be made before 2006.
From page 33...
... This is also the case for many other technologies employed by today's civilization. For waste management, the long time scales give an added dimension, especially since the actions of future societies- particularly those in the distant future cannot be predicted.
From page 34...
... Such steps taken by the regulator to enhance practicability do not relieve scientists of their responsibilities to consider all credible information in the safety analysis. Living with unresolvable uncertainties is inevitable in long-term radioactive waste management.
From page 35...
... The goal of this process is to secure a high degree of public confidence concerning the fairness and appropriateness of the decisions, including support from the communities that will host the facilities. A key aspect increasingly acknowledged in recent years is that this goal is more likely to be achieved if waste management programs develop in stepwise fashion, with midcourse corrections at each stage as needed.
From page 36...
... In its 1990 report, Rethinking High-Level Radioactive Waste Disposal, the Board of Radioactive Waste Management of the U.S. National Research Council (NRC, 1990)
From page 37...
... Although how a country manages its waste is a national decision, the committee found that international cooperation is a significant asset to national programs. It is not necessary that every country tackle every problem independently or have national facilities for all waste management activities.
From page 38...
... For long-term management of wastes, an international context is even more appropriate because the time scales in question exceed those for which the stability of any national border can be guaranteed. The IAEA Convention on the Safety of Spent Fuel and on the Safety of Radioactive Waste Management accordingly contains explicit requirements for adjacent countries (IAEA, 1997a)
From page 39...
... Some issues (e.g., those concerned with safeguarding fissile materials) demand a high degree of international conformity to agreed procedures.


This material may be derived from roughly machine-read images, and so is provided only to facilitate research.
More information on Chapter Skim is available.