Hostname: page-component-78c5997874-g7gxr Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-14T18:05:01.425Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Scientific Arguments for New – Deterministic Approach to HLLLW Management

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  01 February 2011

Marko M. Ninkovic  and
Jagos J. Raicevic
Marko M. Ninkovic
Affiliation:
Institute of Nuclear Sciences- Vinca, Belgrade, P. O. Box 522, 11001 Belgrade, Serbia and Montenegro (Former Yugoslavia)
Jagos J. Raicevic
Affiliation:
Institute of Nuclear Sciences- Vinca, Belgrade, P. O. Box 522, 11001 Belgrade, Serbia and Montenegro (Former Yugoslavia)
Get access

Abstract

One of the greatest challenges in the use of nuclear energy is the high radioactive long-lived waste which is generated during production. It must be dealt with safely and effectively. While technical solutions exist, including deep geological repositories, progress in the disposal of radioactive waste has been influenced, and in many cases delayed, by public perceptions about the safety of the technology. One of the primary reasons for this is the long life of many of radionuclides, actinides and fission products, with half-lives on the order of a hundred thousand to a millions years. Problems of perceptions could be reduced significantly, according to our and many others author's opinion, if there were a way to burn or destroy the most toxic long-lived radioactive wastes. As there are no industrial methods for waste destroying today, in this paper it was suggested a new hybrid, deterministic approach: instead of final waste disposal, long-termed but yet temporal storage only, striving towards final destruction once the appropriate conditions are maintained. This new or modified old approach could affect current HLLLW management and related activities in: changes of processing technology; prolonging the time period of waste storage at temporal depositories; increasing the investment into research regarding the methods and technologies for destructions of these materials, and slowing down the investments into the very expensive final disposal repositories. It is authors' opinion that such deterministic, conceptual approach would contribute the reviving interest in nuclear energy, all over the world and especially in small and developing countries.

Type
Research Article
Information
MRS Online Proceedings Library (OPL) , Volume 807: Symposium Scientific Basis for Nuclear Waste Management XXVII , 2003 , 925
Copyright
Copyright © Materials Research Society 2004

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

REFERENCES

1. Nilson, L., Modem Power Systems 1, 7, 41–47 (1981).Google Scholar
2. Weinberg, A. M., Nuclear Engineering 39, 483, 28–30 (1994).Google Scholar
3. Mitenkov, F. M., Atomnaya Energiya 77, 2, 153–154 (1994).Google Scholar
4. Adamov, Y., Nuclear Europe Worldscan 11–12, 6 (1998).Google Scholar
5. Zhaobo, C., “The present and future of nuclear power in China”, Transactions 1 (International Nuclear Congress - Atom for Energy, October 2 – 6, Lyon, France) 174–179 (1994).Google Scholar
6. Ninkovic, M. M., Raicevic, J. J., Plecas, I., “Long term storage or disposal of HLW -dilemma”, Proceedings (International Symposium on Nuclear Energy - Nuclear Safety, October 20 – 21, Bucharest, Romania) 22 – 26 (1995).Google Scholar
7. Hufschmied, P., Wildi, W., Aebersold, M., Appel, D., Buser, M., Dermange, F., Eckhardt, A., Keusen, H-R, “Monitored long-term geological disposal - a new approach to the disposal of radioactive waste in Switzerland”, Proceedings (European Nuclear Conference and Exhibition ENC 2002 - Scientific Seminars, October 6 – 9, Lille, France) 1 – 13 (2002).Google Scholar
8. Ravier, J., Ahlstrom, P. E., Baetsle, L., Gruppelar, H., Hesketh, K., Kuisters, H., Landeyro, P. A., and Sagev, M., Nuclear Europe Worldscan 1–2, 17–19 (1994).Google Scholar
9. Salvatores, M., Zaetta, A., 1997, “High-Level Nuclear Waste Management: How Physics Can Help”, Mat. Res. Soc. Symp. Proc. 506, (Scientific Basis for Nuclear Waste Management XXI, eds.: McKinley, I.G. and McCombie, C.) 3–10 (1997).Google Scholar
10. Cadell, N., Cottone, G., Orlowski, S., Bertozzi, G., Girardi, F., Saltelli, A., Performance assessment of geological isolation system for radioactive waste - PAGIS, Commission of the European Communities, Brussele - Luxembourg (1988).Google Scholar
11. Larsson, A., IAEA Bulletin 31, 4, 18–25 (1989).Google Scholar
12. Kautsky, U., Hedin, A., Lindstrom, F., Moren, L., “The Safety Assessment of High Level Waste in Sweden - SR97”, Proceedings (The 10th International Congress of the International Radiation Protection Association, May 14–19, Hiroshima, Japan) 1–5 (2000).Google Scholar
13. Jensen, M., Hott, P., Nuclear Europe Worldscan 1–2, 60–61 (1994)Google Scholar
14. International Atomic Energy Agency, IAEA, Safety Series No. 115, Vienna (1996).Google Scholar
15. Mukaiyama, T., Takano, H., Takizuki, T., “Higher actinides transmutation using higher actinides burner reactors”, Proceedings 1 (International Conference on the Physics of reactors: operation, design, and computation, April, Marsell, France) 97–107 (1990).Google Scholar
16. Kulikov, G. G., Shmelov, A. N., V. A., , “Transmutation in fast reactors of micro actinides and technetium-99 extracted from the radiowastes”, Transactions 1 ( International Nuclear Congress - Atoms for Energy, October 2–6, Lyon, France) 117–124 (1994).Google Scholar
17. Zaharov, V. P., Atomnaya Energiya 75, 2, 162–163.(1993).Google Scholar
18. Hulet, E., Lougheed, R., Landrum, J., Phys. Rev. C, 21, 3, 966 (1980).Google Scholar
19. Hulet, E., Wild, J., Lougheed, R., Phys. Rev. Lett. 26, 26, 253 (1971).Google Scholar
20. Yang, F., Hamilton, J. H., “Modern Atomic and Nuclear Physics”, McGraw - Hill, New York (1996).Google Scholar
21. Kase, T., Kanashi, K., Nucl. Sci. Eng., 118, 153–159. (1994).Google Scholar