Skip to main content

Currently Skimming:

5 Lessons from Nuclear Waste Siting
Pages 45-50

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 45...
... The 1977 Nuclear Stipulation Act stated that new reactors must include a plan for handling spent fuel, and a proposal to bury copper storage canisters in canyons was approved. When the Three Mile Island accident occurred shortly thereafter, anti-nuclear sentiment rose around the world, and in Sweden this ultimately led to a public referendum, passed in 1980, which declared that only the 12 reactors currently in use or under construction could operate, and all should be phased out by 2010.
From page 46...
... After some four decades of preparation, including numerous meetings with community leaders, careful examination of the plans by funded anti-nuclear organizations, and final statements from the nuclear industry, regulating authorities, regional and local communities, critical researchers, and environmental organizations, the court ultimately asked for further investigation of the durability of the copper canister design. As a result, construction of the waste facility has not yet begun.
From page 47...
... In Belgium, a densely populated country with no remote siting options, Bergmans's team was asked to help project organizers lead a community engagement siting initiative that married the social and technical aspects. They recommended framing the problem as finding the best disposal solution for each proposed site in conjunction with the local community.
From page 48...
... Giving Up Power to Gain Trust Noting that engineers and designers may feel threatened by the prospect of ceding power to local communities, Macfarlane asked whether it is necessary to give up some power during siting negotiations. Kaijser replied that it is better to view it not as giving up power, but negotiating with informed critics.
From page 49...
... Kaijser answered that in Sweden, SKB contacted a lot of municipalities and sometimes met strong resistance; other times, they got quite far until residents voted against a waste facility in local referenda. SKB only found success with areas that already hosted a nuclear facility, where many locals worked and therefore already had a high level of trust in the industry.
From page 50...
... Even those who were staunchly opposed to the idea ultimately backed down, and the project is on track to start storing spent fuel in copper canisters within 10 years. He added that there is an ongoing conversation in Finland about new reactors and their waste, however, which is unresolved and could become contentious.

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.