The Nuclear Energy Debate and the Importance of Radioactive Waste Management

Abstract

The preparation of this special issue dedicated to the topic of radioactive waste management coincides with some notable milestones. The year 2004 marks the 50th anniversary of the world’s first nuclear power plant in the town of Obnisk, near Moscow, which initiated the use of nuclear energy for civilian applications by providing power to residences and businesses. This year also marks the 25th anniversary of the Three Mile Island accident, which occurred at a nuclear power plant near Harrisburg, Pennsylvania, and effectively halted any new nuclear power plant considerations in the United States. A clean and sustainable energy source is nearly universally accepted as a necessity for our future, and the issues of radioactive waste management and permanent disposal solutions are inextricably linked to the exploration of nuclear power as a viable energy option. The actual and perceived risks associated with nuclear energy as well as radioactive waste—its generation, transportation, and disposal—pervade every aspect of the nuclear debate. Nearly all debate participants can concur with the commonly referenced mission of radioactive waste management programs: protection of the environment and human health and safety. However, structuring such programs and successfully executing them is a complex and lengthy process generally spanning several decades. For example, in the U.S., achieving operational status for the Waste Isolation Pilot Plant (WIPP), a deep geologic repository for the permanent disposal of transuranic wastes, involved more than four decades from concept to completion. The regulations governing the permanent disposal of radioactive waste at WIPP require demonstration of safe repository performance for a period of 10,000 years. A defining characteristic of the complexity associated with radioactive waste management programs is the wide spectrum of participants involved, each with strongly anchored and unique perspectives. Technical debate and discussion alone cannot resolve the divergent viewpoints and convictions of the various stakeholders, which may be grounded in technical, social, political, economic, or cultural backgrounds and interests. As an example, with respect to the disposition of radioactive waste, scientific and technical communities generally agree that radioactive waste can be disposed of by deep burial in suitable geologic formations that safely isolate the waste for time-frames of tens of thousands of years. An obvious challenge to scientists and engineers is defining the logic by which long-term predictions of geologic and weather conditions, groundwater behavior, and human activity covering these time-frames can be made and evaluated for repository performance. The inherent uncertainty associated with such predictive science complicates the public acceptance of