Radioactive Waste 328 - United Kingdom Having Problems Finding A Site For A Geological Repository

Radioactive Waste 328 - United Kingdom Having Problems Finding A Site For A Geological Repository

            One of the biggest problems with nuclear power is disposing of the spent nuclear fuel. Thirty nations are running nuclear power reactors and spent nuclear fuel is piling up in all of them. While there have been test geological repositories built, there is no commercial storage for high-level nuclear waste such as spent fuel anywhere in the world. In the U.S., it is unlikely that there will be a geological storage for such waste until 2050 at the earliest. The United Kingdom is currently working on the creation of a geological repository but there have been problems with siting.

        It is estimated that the U.K. has over eight hundred thousand cubic yards of nuclear waste generated by nuclear power plants and the production of nuclear weapons. They have decided that a geological repository would be the best and cheapest way to deal with the backlog of nuclear waste as well as nuclear waste that will be generated. There are five new nuclear power reactors being constructed or planned which will add their own waste to the total. It is estimated that the U.K. geological repository will cost about seventeen billion dollars. This will be considerably cheaper than continuing to store the waste at the current thirty sites.

        The Institute of Directors is a U.K. business organization for company directors, senior business leaders and entrepreneurs. It was founded in 1903 and is the oldest organization for professional leaders. A representative said that “Running costs for a geological disposal facility storing the waste 1,000 yards below the surface would be significantly lower,” than surface storage.

        In 2013, the U.K. embarked on a search for a site for the proposed geological repository. They narrowed it down to Copeland and Allerdale borough councils in Cumbria and Shepway District Council in Kent. Unfortunately, all three of these locations ultimately rejected the opportunity to host the geological repository.

        The U.K. decided to try to convince some community to take the waste for one and a half million dollars a year that could be applied to such things as skill training or apprenticeships. The payments could rise to three and a half billion dollars as communities considered the proposal. It is expected that the payments would last for up to five years.

        Local communities around England, Wales and Northern Ireland will be offered the money to host the proposed geological repository. A test of public support would be necessary in order for the proposal to go forward. One such test would be a local referendum at a proposed location to ensure that a majority of the citizens in that area actually wanted to have the geological repository nearby. Local authorities, labor unions and businesses have welcomed the new plan to site the repository.

       The U.K. Minister of Energy said: “We owe it to future generations to take action now to find a suitable permanent site for the safe disposal of our radioactive waste. And it is right that local communities have a say.”

        The chief scientist of Greenpeace in the U.K. said “Having failed to find a council willing to have nuclear waste stored under their land, ministers are resorting to the tactics from the fracking playbook - bribing communities and bypassing local authorities.”

      The U.K. Minister of Energy said: “We owe it to future generations to take action now to find a suitable permanent site for the safe disposal of our radioactive waste. And it is right that local communities have a say.”

        The chief scientist of Greenpeace in the U.K. said “Having failed to find a council willing to have nuclear waste stored under their land, ministers are resorting to the tactics from the fracking playbook - bribing communities and bypassing local authorities.” “With six new nuclear plants being planned, the waste problem is just going to get much worse. Since there is no permanent solution for the disposal of spent nuclear fuel, the responsible thing to do would be to stop producing more of it instead of just passing the radioactive buck to future generations.”