2 minute read
Key Insights
WASTE MANAGEMENT CONCEPTS
• No country in the world has a deep geological repository for spent nuclear fuel in operation. Finland is the only country currently constructing a permanent repository.
• Despite multiple failed selection procedures and abandoned repositories, a preference for geological disposal remains. There is a strong consensus that the current state of research and exchange with civil society is inadequate for the challenges faced.
• With deep geological repositories not available for decades to come,
the risks are increasingly shifting to interim storage facilities which are
running out of capacity: for example, storage capacity for spent fuel in
Finland has reached 93 percent saturation.
QUANTITIES OF NUCLEAR WASTE
• Over 60,000 tons of spent nuclear fuel are in storage across Europe (excluding Russia and Slovakia), most of which in France. Spent nuclear fuel is considered high-level waste and makes up the vast bulk of radioactivity. As of 2016, 81 percent of Europe’s spent fuel has been moved into wet storage, which comes with its own safety risks.
• Around 2.5 million m³ of low- and intermediate-level waste has been generated in Europe. Around 20 percent of this waste (0.5 million m³) has been stored; 80 percent (close to 2 million m³) has been disposed of.
• Decomissioning Europe’s reactors may generate at least another 1.4 million m³
of low- and intermedaite level waste.
• Over its lifetime, European nuclear reactors may produce around 6.6 million m³ of nuclear waste. If stacked in one place, this would fill up a football field 919 meters high, 90 meters higher than the tallest building in the world, the Burj
Khalifa in Dubai. Four countries account for over 75 percent of this waste: France (30 percent), the UK (20 percent), Ukraine (18 percent), and Germany (8 percent).
• Apart from Russia, which is still produces uranium, Germany and France have
the largest inventory of nuclear waste from uranium mining in Europe.
KEY INSIGHTS
COSTS AND FINANCES
• Governments do not apply the polluter-pays-principle consistently.
While operators are liable for the costs of managing, storing, and disposing of nuclear waste, costs may end up being borne by taxpayers.
• Governments fail to properly estimate the costs for decommissioning, storage, and disposal of nuclear waste due to underlying uncertainties. Many governments base their cost estimates on overly optimistic discount rates and outdated data, leading to serious funding gaps for waste management costs.
• Overall, no country has both estimated costs precisely and closed the gap
between secured funds and cost estimates.
ORIGINS AND CLASSIFICATIONS
• Countries differ significantly in how they define and categorize nuclear waste and in how they report about generated amounts of nuclear waste. All countries publish regularly information, yet not all report in a thorough way.
• Despite international efforts to establish common safety principles and practices, such inconsistencies remain and make comparison very complex. The different national approaches reflect a lack of coherency in how countries manage nuclear waste.
RISKS FOR THE ENVIRONMENT AND HUMAN HEALTH
• Nuclear waste constitutes a health hazard due to routine gaseous and liquid waste emissions from nuclear facilities and the global collective doses from reprocessing.
• Reprocessing of spent nuclear fuel poses increased challenges, including proliferation risks, high exposures to humans, and contamination of the environment.
• Overall, there is a lack of comprehensive, quantitative and
