Revival of Nuclear Plants Raising Worries Over Waste
February 01, 2009
International Herald Tribune
As France presses ahead with building more next-generation
nuclear reactors, new evidence emerged Friday to suggest that industry and governments may be unprepared to handle the increasingly toxic
waste that will result.
Highlighting the importance of the technology in France, both as
its main source of electricity and as a major export industry,
President Nicolas Sarkozy of France announced late Thursday that
Electricite de France, Europe's biggest power producer, was awarded
the contract to develop a second atomic reactor using next- generation
technology.
EDF beat competition from the gas and power company GDF Suez to
lead the construction at an existing nuclear site at Penly in northern
France.
Areva, the company based in Paris that designed the so-called
EPR, says the new system will generate far more electricity more
safely than previous reactors, is easier to construct, and will last
longer.
Areva, the world's biggest reactor maker, also says the EPR -
which is expected to generate more than 1,600 megawatts, making it
more powerful than any other reactor in commercial use - will use
about 15 percent less uranium and produce 30 percent less waste.
But an anti-nuclear group said that information it gleaned from
industry reports - publicly available but which have received little
attention so far - show that waste from the EPR will be more
radioactive by a factor of seven because more uranium is burned up.
That will make it more expensive to handle and store safely, according
to Greenpeace, which provided the details on Friday to the
International Herald Tribune.
"Despite the French government's global marketing of the EPR as
cheap and safe, the evidence proves otherwise," said Rianne Teule, an
international nuclear campaigner for Greenpeace who is based in
Amsterdam.
The next wave of reactors "poses an ever-increasing burden on
people's budgets and danger to their health, now and far into the
future," Teule said.
Patricia Marie, a spokeswoman for Areva, said the claim by
Greenpeace was "grossly inaccurate." She said the waste would be 15
percent more radioactive at the most.
There are currently 58 reactors in operation in France. There are
no EPRs in operation anywhere in the world, but the first is under
construction at Olkiluoto, an island in the West of Finland, and the
second in Flamanville, in northern France.
Teule said the evidence about the radioactivity of the waste was
drawn from a report by Posiva, a waste disposal company owned by
Finnish nuclear operators, and from the Swiss organization Nagra,
which oversees management of nuclear waste.
Teule said the waste would pose greater dangers to workers from
higher radiation doses during transfer and storage than current waste.
She also said the waste would need to be stored for longer in areas
above ground, where it is potentially exposed to terrorists.
Those factors, among others, would increase the overall cost of
nuclear energy - costs that Teule said were not properly accounted for
by industry and governments.
There are no long-term facilities for disposing or burying
high- level nuclear waste anywhere in the world, although Posiva is digging a
tunnel at Olkiluoto in anticipation of final approval for storing
waste a quarter of a mile underground.
U.S. authorities have sought to put high-level waste inside Yucca
Mountain, in Nevada, but that plan is foundering because of local
opposition.
Spokeswomen for Posiva and Nagra said they were unable to give
any immediate comment about the reports.
Hans Riotte, the head of the Radiological Protection and
Radioactive Waste Management Division at the OECD Nuclear Energy
Agency in Paris, said waste from the EPR, although smaller in volume,
would be more radioactive than existing forms of high-level waste
because it would be denser.
But Riotte was unable to say whether it would be more radioactive by a
factor of seven, as Greenpeace contends.
Riotte conceded the waste would have to be stored above ground
longer to cool, but said that waste-handling and storage procedures
could be adapted to deal with much more toxic waste without much added
expense.
"Any financial impacts are likely to be relatively small," Riotte
said.
Marie, the spokeswoman for Areva, said the company "was confident
that all costs have been taken into account" for construction and
operation of EPR reactors.
Greenpeace has vowed to oppose construction of the new plant in
France, but has not said how it would pursue that goal.
Areva reported rising sales this week for 2008 as its uranium
mining and reactor construction businesses benefited from increasing
demand for nuclear power.
But any reports about the cost, or safety, of its EPR model still
are a sensitive matter for the company, which is competing to become
the designer of reactors for the next generation of nuclear plants in
the United States and elsewhere.
Problems at the EPR site in Finland mean the reactor already is
badly overdue and vastly over budget, even though it was designed to
have a shorter construction period than previous models.
The site has been plagued by water-logged concrete, faulty welds
and flawed pipes, delaying the reactor start date by at least three
years and raising costs by roughly 50 percent.
Two more EPR reactors, called Taishan 1 and 2, are slated for
construction in China. Areva said the design was also being used by
Electricite de France and the large German utility, E.ON, bidding to
refurbish the fleet of aging reactors in Britain.
Areva also is vying sell the technology to the United Arab
Emirates as part of a project led by Total and GDF Suez.
International Herald Tribune
As France presses ahead with building more next-generation
nuclear reactors, new evidence emerged Friday to suggest that industry and governments may be unprepared to handle the increasingly toxic
waste that will result.
Highlighting the importance of the technology in France, both as
its main source of electricity and as a major export industry,
President Nicolas Sarkozy of France announced late Thursday that
Electricite de France, Europe's biggest power producer, was awarded
the contract to develop a second atomic reactor using next- generation
technology.
EDF beat competition from the gas and power company GDF Suez to
lead the construction at an existing nuclear site at Penly in northern
France.
Areva, the company based in Paris that designed the so-called
EPR, says the new system will generate far more electricity more
safely than previous reactors, is easier to construct, and will last
longer.
Areva, the world's biggest reactor maker, also says the EPR -
which is expected to generate more than 1,600 megawatts, making it
more powerful than any other reactor in commercial use - will use
about 15 percent less uranium and produce 30 percent less waste.
But an anti-nuclear group said that information it gleaned from
industry reports - publicly available but which have received little
attention so far - show that waste from the EPR will be more
radioactive by a factor of seven because more uranium is burned up.
That will make it more expensive to handle and store safely, according
to Greenpeace, which provided the details on Friday to the
International Herald Tribune.
"Despite the French government's global marketing of the EPR as
cheap and safe, the evidence proves otherwise," said Rianne Teule, an
international nuclear campaigner for Greenpeace who is based in
Amsterdam.
The next wave of reactors "poses an ever-increasing burden on
people's budgets and danger to their health, now and far into the
future," Teule said.
Patricia Marie, a spokeswoman for Areva, said the claim by
Greenpeace was "grossly inaccurate." She said the waste would be 15
percent more radioactive at the most.
There are currently 58 reactors in operation in France. There are
no EPRs in operation anywhere in the world, but the first is under
construction at Olkiluoto, an island in the West of Finland, and the
second in Flamanville, in northern France.
Teule said the evidence about the radioactivity of the waste was
drawn from a report by Posiva, a waste disposal company owned by
Finnish nuclear operators, and from the Swiss organization Nagra,
which oversees management of nuclear waste.
Teule said the waste would pose greater dangers to workers from
higher radiation doses during transfer and storage than current waste.
She also said the waste would need to be stored for longer in areas
above ground, where it is potentially exposed to terrorists.
Those factors, among others, would increase the overall cost of
nuclear energy - costs that Teule said were not properly accounted for
by industry and governments.
There are no long-term facilities for disposing or burying
high- level nuclear waste anywhere in the world, although Posiva is digging a
tunnel at Olkiluoto in anticipation of final approval for storing
waste a quarter of a mile underground.
U.S. authorities have sought to put high-level waste inside Yucca
Mountain, in Nevada, but that plan is foundering because of local
opposition.
Spokeswomen for Posiva and Nagra said they were unable to give
any immediate comment about the reports.
Hans Riotte, the head of the Radiological Protection and
Radioactive Waste Management Division at the OECD Nuclear Energy
Agency in Paris, said waste from the EPR, although smaller in volume,
would be more radioactive than existing forms of high-level waste
because it would be denser.
But Riotte was unable to say whether it would be more radioactive by a
factor of seven, as Greenpeace contends.
Riotte conceded the waste would have to be stored above ground
longer to cool, but said that waste-handling and storage procedures
could be adapted to deal with much more toxic waste without much added
expense.
"Any financial impacts are likely to be relatively small," Riotte
said.
Marie, the spokeswoman for Areva, said the company "was confident
that all costs have been taken into account" for construction and
operation of EPR reactors.
Greenpeace has vowed to oppose construction of the new plant in
France, but has not said how it would pursue that goal.
Areva reported rising sales this week for 2008 as its uranium
mining and reactor construction businesses benefited from increasing
demand for nuclear power.
But any reports about the cost, or safety, of its EPR model still
are a sensitive matter for the company, which is competing to become
the designer of reactors for the next generation of nuclear plants in
the United States and elsewhere.
Problems at the EPR site in Finland mean the reactor already is
badly overdue and vastly over budget, even though it was designed to
have a shorter construction period than previous models.
The site has been plagued by water-logged concrete, faulty welds
and flawed pipes, delaying the reactor start date by at least three
years and raising costs by roughly 50 percent.
Two more EPR reactors, called Taishan 1 and 2, are slated for
construction in China. Areva said the design was also being used by
Electricite de France and the large German utility, E.ON, bidding to
refurbish the fleet of aging reactors in Britain.
Areva also is vying sell the technology to the United Arab
Emirates as part of a project led by Total and GDF Suez.