DOCSLIB.ORG

RD&D-Programme 98 Treatment and Final Disposal Of

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
RD&D-Programme 98 Treatment and Final Disposal Of SE9900147 RD&D-Programme 98 Treatment and final disposal of nuclear waste Programme for research, development and demonstration of encapsulation and geological disposal September 1998 Svensk Karnbranslehantering AB Swedish Nuclear Fuel and Waste Management Co Box 5864 SE-102 40 Stockholm Sweden Tel 08-459 84 00 +46 8 459 84 00 Fax 08-661 57 19 +46 8 661 57 19 30-17 RD&D-Programme 98 Treatment and final disposal of nuclear waste Programme for research, development and demonstration of encapsulation and geological disposal September 1998 NEXT PAGE(S) left BLANK Foreword The Nuclear Activities Act requires a programme for the comprehensive research and development and other measures that are required to manage and dispose of nuclear waste in a safe manner and to decommission and dismantle the nuclear power plants. To meet this requirement, SKB is now presenting RD&D-Programme 98. RD&D Research, The programme provides a basis for the safety work and for evaluating and Development and judging different methods for taking care of the nuclear fuel. SKB's plan is to Demonstration implement deep disposal of the fuel in an initial stage, while holding open the option of using other alternatives. In the RD&D-Programme we describe our activities and planning for this line of action. The review of the programme can offer valuable viewpoints from the outside. Regulatory authorities and the Government can clarify how they look upon different parts of the programme and stipulate guidelines for the future. Municipalities and other stakeholders can, after studying the programme, offer their viewpoints to SKB, the regulatory authorities or the Government. A concrete interim goal in our plan for implementing deep disposal is to be able to choose at least two sites for site investigations by 2001. Achieving this goal puts heavy demands on SKB, but also other parties: • SKB must present a body of material of high quality and work in an open and clear fashion. • The regulatory authorities and the Government should make clear their views regarding SKB's main method, i.e. deep disposal in accordance with KBS-3. Based on the analysis of various methods we have now completed, it should be possible to take a clear stand on whether the method chosen by SKB represents the right strategy. • Concerned municipalities and regions must be given the resources to enable them to participate fully in the siting process, participate in discussions and safeguard their interests. In support of coming siting applications for an encapsulation plant and a deep repository, SKB will prepare environmental impact statements (EISs) based on environmental impact assessments (EIAs). EIA consultations have been initiated locally, regionally and nationally. In this context we view the RD&D-Programme and its subsequent review as a part of the EIA work. Stockholm, September 1998 Swedish Nuclear Fuel and Waste Management Company Peter Nygdrds Claes Thegerstrom President Executive Vice President in charge of Siting Reading instructions RD&D-Programme 98 is intended to provide an overview of SKB's Structure of RD&D- activities and plans. The detailed research programme is presented in a Programme 98 separate background report. In parallel with RD&D-Programme 98, SKB is publishing a number of reports that provide a more thorough RD&D- background and a more detailed account, particularly on those issues Programme 98 Background that the Government mentioned in its decision regarding RD&D- Execution Programme 95. Background report The programme is divided into two parts: Background and Execution. Detailed programme for research and The background part begins with a chapter on the basic premises development (Chapter 1). It deals with general principles, laws and the properties of the waste. The facilities that exist today for dealing with the nuclear waste are also described in the introductory chapter. The two following Main references chapters have to do with the choice between different methods for • System disposing of nuclear waste (Chapter 2) and with the KBS-3 method, account R-98-10 which SKB has chosen as its main alternative (Chapter 3). These two • Alternative chapters provide a broader account of both the KBS-3 method and methods R-98-11 • Criteria for different alternative methods than previous RD&D-programmes. The site evaluation R-98-20 background part concludes with a chapter about the long-term safety • North-south/ of the deep repository (Chapter 4). Coast-interior R-98-16 The second part, Execution, begins with an overview of SKB's strategy Other references and the main features of the programme, both for the next few years • County general and farther in the future (Chapter 5). The plans for siting (Chapter 6), siting studies technology (Chapter 7) and safety assessment (Chapter 8) are then • Feasibility study presented in greater detail. This is followed by an overview of our plans reports for supportive research and development, including continued R&D on • Other SKB reports other methods than the KBS-3 method (Chapter 9). The programme • Research results concludes with a chapter on decommissioning of nuclear facilities and investigations (Chapter 10). from other organizations An important part of the ongoing and planned work is consultation on environmental impact assessments (EIAs). A first draft of the contents of future environmental impact statements (EISs) is therefore provided in an appendix. By attaching it to RD&D-Programme 98, SKB wishes to give all reviewing bodies an opportunity to offer their viewpoints at an early stage on what future EISs are to include. Abbreviations BIOMOVS Biosphere Model Validation Study BIOMASS Biosphere Modelling and Assessment BWR Boiling Water Reactor CLAB Central Interim Storage Facility for Spent Nuclear Fuel EIA Environmental Impact Assessment EIS Environmental Impact Statement EQUIP Evidence from Quaternary Infills for Palaeohydrogeology FEBEX Full-scale Engineering Barriers Experiment in Crystalline Host Rock GPS Global Positioning System HRL Hard Rock Laboratory ILW Intermediate-level waste LILW Low and intermediate-level waste LLW Low-level waste HLW High-level waste HRL Hard Rock Laboratory IAEA International Atomic Energy Agency KASAM Statens rad for karnavfallsfragor (Swedish National Council for Nuclear Waste) KBS Karnbranslesakerhet = Nuclear Fuel Safety KTH Kungliga Tekniska Hogskolan (Royal Institute of Technology) MLH Medium Long Holes MSEK Millions of Swedish kronor NEA Nuclear Energy Agency NPP Nuclear Power Plant OECD Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development PAGEPA PAlaeohydrogeology and GEoforecasting for Performance Assessment PWR Pressurized Water Reactor P&T Partitioning and Transmutation RD&D Research, Development and Demonstration REX Redox Experiment on detailed scale RPV Reactor Pressure Vessel RVS Rock Visualization System SAFE Safety Assessment of Final Repository for Radioactive Operational Waste SEK Swedish kronor SFR Final Repository for Radioactive Operational Waste SGU Geological Survey of Sweden SKB Svensk Karnbranslehantering AB (Swedish Nuclear Fuel and Waste Management Co) SKI Statens karnkraftinspektion (Swedish Nuclear Power Inspectorate) SKN Statens karnbranslenamnd (National Board for Spent Nuclear Fuel) SSI Statens stralskyddsinstitut (National Radiation Protection Institute) SFR Final repository for radioactive operational waste TRUE Tracer Retention Understanding Experiments TBM Tunnel Boring Machine TDS Total Dissolved Solids VDH Very Deep Holes VLH Very Long Holes VSP Vertical Seismic Profiling ZED EX Zone of Excavation Disturbance Experiment Contents Page Summary 11 Part I - Background 1 Premises 27 1.1 Waste 27 1.2 What does the law say? 28 1.2.1 Division of responsibility 28 1.2.2 Financing 29 1.2.3 Rules for licensing 30 1.2.4 Regulations concerning safety and radiation protection 31 1.3 Previous decisions 31 1.4 Existing facilities 32 1.4.1 Final Repository for Radioactive Operational Waste, SFR 32 1.4.2 Central Interim Storage Facility for Spent Nuclear Fuel, CLAB 32 1.4.3 Transportation system 32 1.5 Knowledge base 34 1.6 What remains to be done? 34 2 Method selection 35 2.1 Three principles for management of hazardous waste 35 2.2 Different modules in waste management 36 2.2.1 Supervised storage - interim storage 37 2.2.2 Geological disposal 38 2.2.3 Ultimate removal 40 2.2.4 Reprocessing and recycling 40 2.2.5 Transmutation 41 2.3 Selecting a main alternative 42 2.3.1 Two main questions 42 2.3.2 Aspects of the problem 43 2.3.3 Four possible strategies 43 2.4 The Swedish main alternative 45 2.5 Historical background 46 2.5.1 Overview 46 2.5.2 Chronological summary of important inquiries 47 3 Deep disposal method 53 3.1 Planned deep disposal system 53 3.1.1 Waste 53 3.1.2 CLAB 54 3.1.3 Encapsulation plant 54 3.1.4 Deep repository 54 3.2 System analysis 55 3.2.1 Safety 56 3.2.2 Freedom of choice 57 3.2.3 Long-term storage in CLAB - the zero alternative 58 3.2.4 Safeguards and physical protection 58 4 Safety 59 4.1 Safety principles for a deep repository 59 4.2 Isolation - the primary function of the repository 60 4.3 Retardation - the secondary function of the repository 60 4.4 Safety assessments 62 Contents 7 Part II - Execution 5 Programme overview 65 5.1 What does SKB want? 65 5.1.1 Method 65 5.1.2 Timetable 65 5.1.3 Siting 66 5.1.4 Democratic consensus and community support 66 5.1.5 Research, development and demonstration 66 5.2 Goals of the work of the next few years 67 5.3 How will SKB achieve its goals? 68 5.3.1 Siting and establishment 68 5.3.2 Technology
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Submission to the Nuclear Power Debate Personal Details Kept Confidential
    Submission to the Nuclear power debate Personal details kept confidential __________________________________________________________________________________________ Firstly I wish to say I have very little experience in nuclear energy but am well versed in the renewable energy one. What we need is a sound rational debate on the future energy requirements of Australia. The calls for cessation of nuclear investigations even before a debate begins clearly shows that emotion rather than facts are playing a part in trying to stop the debate. Future energy needs must be compliant to a sound strategy of consistent, persistent energy supply. This cannot come from wind or solar. Lets say for example a large blocking high pressure weather system sits over the Victorian, NSW land masses in late summer- autumn season. We will see low winds for anything up to a week, can the energy market from the other states support the energy needs of these states without coal or gas? I think not. France has a large investment in nuclear energy and charges their citizens around half as much for it than Germany. Sceptics complain about the costs of storage of waste, they do not suggest what is going to happen to all the costs to the environment when renewing of derelict solar panels and wind turbine infrastructure which is already reaching its use by dates. Sceptics also talk about the dangers of nuclear energy using Chernobyl, Three Mile Island and Fuklushima as examples. My goodness given that same rationale then we should have banned flight after the first plane accident or cars after the first car accident.
    [Show full text]
  • Civilian Nuclear Waste Disposal
    Civilian Nuclear Waste Disposal (name redacted) Specialist in Energy Policy January 11, 2016 Congressional Research Service 7-.... www.crs.gov RL33461 Civilian Nuclear Waste Disposal Summary Management of civilian radioactive waste has posed difficult issues for Congress since the beginning of the nuclear power industry in the 1950s. Federal policy is based on the premise that nuclear waste can be disposed of safely, but proposed storage and disposal facilities have frequently been challenged on safety, health, and environmental grounds. Although civilian radioactive waste encompasses a wide range of materials, most of the current debate focuses on highly radioactive spent fuel from nuclear power plants. The United States currently has no disposal facility for spent nuclear fuel. The Nuclear Waste Policy Act of 1982 (NWPA) calls for disposal of spent nuclear fuel in a deep geologic repository. NWPA established the Office of Civilian Radioactive Waste Management (OCRWM) in the Department of Energy (DOE) to develop such a repository, which would be licensed by the Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC). Amendments to NWPA in 1987 restricted DOE’s repository site studies to Yucca Mountain in Nevada. DOE submitted a license application for the proposed Yucca Mountain repository to NRC on June 3, 2008. The state of Nevada strongly opposes the Yucca Mountain project, citing excessive water infiltration, earthquakes, volcanoes, human intrusion, and other technical issues. The Obama Administration “has determined that developing the Yucca Mountain repository is not a workable option and the Nation needs a different solution for nuclear waste disposal,” according to the DOE FY2011 budget justification. As a result, no funding for Yucca Mountain, OCRWM, or NRC licensing was requested or provided for FY2011 or subsequent years.
    [Show full text]
  • Three Mile Island : a Nuclear Crisis in Historical Perspective Pdf, Epub, Ebook
    THREE MILE ISLAND : A NUCLEAR CRISIS IN HISTORICAL PERSPECTIVE PDF, EPUB, EBOOK J. Samuel Walker | 314 pages | 28 Jan 2006 | University of California Press | 9780520246836 | English | Berkerley, United States Three Mile Island : A Nuclear Crisis in Historical Perspective PDF Book Friday, March "Going to Hell in a Handbasket" 7. Three Mile Island. Related articles in Google Scholar. Search Menu. Wednesday March 28 This Is the Biggie. This is the price excluding shipping and handling fees a seller has provided at which the same item, or one that is nearly identical to it, is being offered for sale or has been offered for sale in the recent past. The nuclear crisis at the Daiichi Nuclear Power Plant in Fukushima, km from Tokyo, has been getting a lot of attention in the media lately but fears expressed for dangerous levels of radiation reaching areas further than 30km from the stricken nuclear facilities are unfounded and need to be put into perspective. See all 7 - All listings for this product. Berkeley, California. Sign up for email notifications and we'll let you know about new publications in your areas of interest when they're released. Prior accounts pale in comparison to this work. Arriving on the third day after the accident as the nrc on-site operative, only Harold Denton, whom President Jimmy Carter wisely designated his personal representative, emerged as a spokesman whose judgment all parties and the public trusted. Stock photo. The accident started early in the morning on March 28, The terrorist attacks of September 11, , for example, raised critical questions about the resilience and safety of nuclear power plants in the event of sabotage or attack.
    [Show full text]
  • Natural Resources Defense Council, Inc
    Natural Resources Defense Council, Inc. 1725 I STREET, N,W. SUITE 600 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20006 202 223-8210 New Yorll. Offiu WesternOfJit:e 122 EAST 42ND STREET 25 KEARNY STREE.T NEW YORI<, N.Y. 10017 SAN FRANCISCO,CALIF. 94108 212 949-0°49 415 4U-6S61 Secrecy and Public Issues Related to Nuclear Power by Thomas B. Cochran A Paper Presented Before The American physical Society 1980 Spring Meeting Washington, D.C. April 30, 19BO •••• 75 l 00% Recycled Paper In 1954 atomic power first emerged from the wraps of military secrecy. Rather than a destroyer of-men, the peaceful uses of atomic energy would be a bountiful provider for social progress. There was already beginning public awareness of the dangers of radiation, and Congress recognized that development of this new power source could continue only if there was public acceptance. In the Atomic Energy Act, it was stated that: The dissemination of scientific and technical information relating to atomic energy should be permitted and encouraged so as to provide that free interchange of ideas and criticism which is essential to scientific and industrial progress and pUblic understanding and to enlarge the fund of technical information. IAtomic Energy Act of 1954, Sec. 141.b. j emphasi.s supplied. ] "The dissemination of infgrmation • • • to provide free interchange of ideas and criticism • essential to . • public understanding" ech'o-es"a~tenet of our society: clearly, in a-democratic society, an essential and minimum ingredient for meaningful exchange of ideas and criticism --for ~ aod ~~te is access by all parties to all relevant facts.
    [Show full text]
  • Feasibility Studies – Östhammar, Nyköping, Oskarshamn, Tierp, Hultsfred and Älvkarleby Summary Report Technical Report TR-01-16
    Feasibility Studies – Östhammar, Nyköping, Oskarshamn, Tierp, Hultsfred and Älvkarleby Summary Report Technical Report TR-01-16 Feasibility Studies – Östhammar, Nyköping, Oskarshamn, Tierp, Hultsfred and Älvkarleby Summary Report Svensk Kärnbränslehantering AB June 2001 Svensk Kärnbränslehantering AB Swedish Nuclear Fuel and Waste Management Co Box 5864 SE-102 40 Stockholm Sweden Tel 08-459 84 00 +46 8 459 84 00 Fax 08-661 57 19 +46 8 661 57 19 ISSN 1404-0344 Graphium Norstedts Tryckeri, 2001 gggggg Feasibility Studies – Östhammar, Nyköping, Oskarshamn, Tierp, Hultsfred and Älvkarleby Summary Report Svensk Kärnbränslehantering AB June 2001 2 Preface Svensk Kärnbränslehantering AB (Swedish Nuclear Fuel and Waste Management Com- pany), SKB, has carried out feasibility studies on a municipal scale as a part of the siting programme for the deep repository for spent nuclear fuel. Final reports describing the results of the six feasibility studies in Östhammar, Nyköping, Oskarshamn, Tierp, Älv- karleby and Hultsfred were submitted during the autumn and winter of 2000/2001. With this as a basis, the siting work can now proceed to the next phase – site investigations. In this stage, investigations that include test drilling will be conducted on at least two sites. In December 2000, SKB published the report “Integrated account of method, site selec- tion and programme prior to the site investigation phase,” in which SKB stipulates where they want to conduct site investigations and how they will be carried out. The report is being reviewed by the Swedish Nuclear Power Inspectorate during the first half of 2001. Before the site investigations can be initiated, the go-ahead is required from the national safety authorities, the Government, and concerned municipalities and landowners.
    [Show full text]
  • Anomalous Diffusion in Anisotropic Media Felix Kleinschmidt
    Anomalous Diffusion in Anisotropic Media Inauguraldissertation zur Erlangung der Doktorw¨urde der Fakult¨at f¨urChemie, Pharmazie und Geowissenschaften der Albert-Ludwigs-Universit¨at Freiburg im Breisgau vorgelegt von Felix Kleinschmidt aus Freiburg im Breisgau 5. April 2005 ”Il faut avoir ´etudi´ebeaucoup pour savoir peu.” Montesquieu (1689-1755) Pens´ees, Nr. 1116 Œuvres compl`etes,Paris 1950 Vorsitzender des Promotionsausschusses: Prof. Dr. G. Schulz Dekan: Prof. Dr. H. Hillebrecht Referentin: Prof. Dr. C. Schmidt Korreferent: Prof. Dr. H. Finkelmann Betreuerin der Arbeit: Prof. Dr. C. Schmidt Tag der m¨undlichen Pr¨ufung:09.05.2005 Die vorliegende Arbeit entstand in der Zeit von April 2001 bis April 2005 am Institut f¨urMakromolekulare Chemie der Albert-Ludwigs-Universit¨at Freiburg im Breisgau. Publications and Presentations Publications Kay Saalw¨achter, Felix Kleinschmidt and Jens-Uwe Sommer, Swelling Hetero- geneities in End-Linked Model Networks: A Combined Proton Multiple-Quantum NMR and Computer Simulation Study, Macromolecules 2004, 37, 8556-8568 Felix Kleinschmidt, Markus Hickl, Claudia Schmidt and Heino Finkelmann: Smec- tic Liquid Single Crystal Hydrogels (LSCH): Hygroelastic and 2H NMR Diffusion Measurements, in preparation Felix Kleinschmidt and Claudia Schmidt: Multilamellar Vesicles from C10E3/D2O; NMR Line Shape and Pulsed Gradient Diffusion Measurements, in preparation Scientific Talks Felix Kleinschmidt, Patrick Becker, Laurence Noirez and Claudia Schmidt: Side- Chain Liquid Crystal Polymers under Shear Flow, Meeting
    [Show full text]
  • Kiejziewicz the Nuclear Technology Debate Returns
    TRANSMISSIONS: THE JOURNAL OF FILM AND MEDIA STUDIES 2017, VOL.2, NO. 1, PP. 117-131. Agnieszka Kiejziewicz Jagiellonian University The nuclear technology debate returns. Narratives about nuclear power in post-Fukushima Japanese films Abstract The presented article revolves around the widespread debate on the Fukushima catastrophe in Japanese cinematography and the artists’ responses to the incident. They give the viewers clues on how to understand the reasons and results of the Fukushima nuclear disaster, as well as how to perceive nuclear technology after the catastrophe. The author analyses the chosen post-Fukushima films, points out the recurring depictions, and deliberates on the ways of presenting nuclear power. The analysis starts with a brief comparison of post-Hiroshima and post-Fukushima cinematography. The author then focuses on activists’ art in the form of anti-nuclear agitation (Nuclear Japan, 2014 by Hiroyuki Kawai) and pictures that can be classified as shōshimin-eiga: Kebo no kuni (The Land of Hope, 2012) and Leji (Homeland, 2014). The third part of the article puts emphasis on the description of the catastrophe as a “new beginning”, as Takashi Murakami presents it in Mememe no kurage (Jellyfish Eye, 2013). The debate on nuclear technology also appears in the remake of the story about the best-known Japanese monster, Godzilla, reactivated by Hideaki Anno in the post-Fukushima film Shin Gojira (New Godzilla, 2016). The last part of the paper presents the Western point of view and covers analysis of films such as Alain de Halleux’s Welcome to Fukushima (2013), Doris Dörrie’s Grüße aus Fukushima (Fukushima, My Love, 2016) or Matteo Gagliardi’s Fukushima: A Nuclear Story (2015).
    [Show full text]
  • Regulatory Framework for Nuclear Fuel Management
    SE0100130 Technical Report TR-01-03 Integrated account of method, site selection and programme prior to the site investigation phase Svensk Karnbranslehantering AB December 2000 Svensk Karnbranslehantering AB Swedish Nuclear Fuel and Waste Management Co Box 5864 SE-102 40 Stockholm Sweden Tel 08-459 84 00 +46 8 459 84 00 Fax 08-661 57 19 +46 8 661 57 19 PLEASE BE AWARE THAT ALL OF THE MISSING PAGES IN THIS DOCUMENT WERE ORIGINALLY BLANK Integrated account of method, site selection and programme prior to the site investigation phase Svensk Karnbranslehantering AB December 2000 Preface The purpose of the ongoing siting process is to find a site on which it is possible to build a deep repository for encapsulated spent nuclear fuel that will be safe in the long term. This report summarizes the material SKB has gathered as a basis for the decisions that need to be made in order for SKB to commence site investigations for a deep repository. SKB's plan is that the investigations, which include test drilling, shall be initiated in 2002. The report contains the supplementary accounts which the Government request- ed in its decision on RD&D-Programme 98 regarding alternative methods, FUD material for site selection, and programme for the site investigations. Research, Development and SKB considers it urgent that the competent authorities and the Government Demonstration clarify in connection with their critical review whether the background material we present here can serve as a basis for: 1. adhering to the KBS-3 method as the most suitable alternative for Sweden and thereby a fundamental premise for the work in the site investigation phase, 2.
    [Show full text]
  • Nuclear Power in Perspective*
    •T\Q.Ki ^OS00£72^ NUCLEAR POWER IN PERSPECTIVE* A.E. RINGWOOD Research School of Earth Sciences Australian National University Canberra, A.C.T. 2600, Australia This paper contains the text of a public lecture given in the series "Energy and Australia" at the Australian National University on April 2, 1980. An abbreviated version was given at the 50th ANZAAS Congress in Adelaide on May 14, 1980. Publication No. 1437, 1980 Research School of Earth Sciences, A.N.U. PROFESSOR RINGWOOD was born in Melbourne in 1930 and attended Melbourne University where he took a Ph.D. in geochemistry in 1956. After a period as research fellow at Harvard, he joined the Australian National University in 1958 and is now Director of the Research School of Earth Sciences at that University. He was elected to the Australian Academy of Science in 1966 and was Vice-President in 1971-72. He has also been elected Fellow of the Royal Society; Foreign Associate of the National Academy of Sciences, U.S.A.; Fellow of the American Geophysical Union; Commonwealth and Foreign Member of the Geological Society of London, and Honorary Member of the All-Union Mineralogical Society, U.S.S.R. Among his many honours are the Matthew Flinders Lecture and Medal, Australian Academy of Science; the Bowie Medal, American Geophysical Union; the Brittanica Australia Award for Science; the Arthur L. Day Medal, Geological Society of America; the Rosenstiel Award, Ani. Assoc. Adv. Sci­ ence; the William Smith Lecture, Geological Society of London; the Werner Medaille, German Mineralogical Societ«; the Vernadsky Lecture, U.S.S.R.
    [Show full text]
  • Nuclear Power: Government Policy and Public Opinion in the United States and Japan
    Nuclear Power: Government policy and public opinion in the United States and Japan Sustainable Energy May 1, 2001 Nadine van Zyl Abstract The United States and Japan are currently two of the world's top three nuclear energy producers, with both countries initiating strong commercial nuclear industries in the 1950s. Since that time, however, factors such as culture, economics and natural resource base have dictated very different experiences in this field. This paper compares the histories and present state of each country's nuclear industry, as well as the dominant influencing factors. One key distinction between the two countries is the American nuclear regulatory structure and lack of a nationally unified energy policy, contrasting Japan's clear energy policy and regularly updated nuclear energy Long Term Plan. Further, since Eisenhower's "Atoms for Peace" approach, the American government has not publicly supported nuclear power. The Nuclear Regulatory Commission's contribution to the American nuclear energy experience has increasingly shifted to hinder nuclear plants' competitiveness and advancement, although recent relaxing of rules may change this role. Japan's central government has always firmly supported and promoted nuclear power, primarily because domestic resources are scarce and this energy source provides hope for self- sufficiency. Increasing problems with public acceptance and nuclear related accidents have impeded Japan's goals of rapid advancement and expansion. It is likely that for the near future, the Americans and Japanese will continue on their respective paths, with the US government not addressing nuclear power explicitly even as it contributes significantly to the American electricity supply and public support is increasing.
    [Show full text]
  • Feasibility Studies - Osthammar, Nykoping, Oskarshamn, Tierp, Hultsfred and Alvkarleby
    SE0100208 Technical Report TR-01-16 Feasibility Studies - Osthammar, Nykoping, Oskarshamn, Tierp, Hultsfred and Alvkarleby Summary Report Svensk Karnbranslehantering AB June 2001 Svensk Karnbranslehantering AB Swedish Nuclear Fuel and Waste Management Co Box 5864 SE-102 40 Stockholm Sweden Tel 08-459 84 00 +46 8 459 84 00 Fax 08-661 57 19 +46 8 661 57 19 S 9 I 4 S PLEASE BE AWARE THAT ALL OF THE MISSING PAGES IN THIS DOCUMENT WERE ORIGINALLY BLANK Preface Svensk Karnbranslehantering AB (Swedish Nuclear Fuel and Waste Management Com- pany), SKB, has carried out feasibility studies on a municipal scale as a part of the siting programme for the deep repository for spent nuclear fuel. Final reports describing the results of the six feasibility studies in Osthammar, Nykoping, Oskarshamn, Tierp, Alv- karleby and Hultsfred were submitted during the autumn and winter of 2000/2001. With this as a basis, the siting work can now proceed to the next phase - site investigations. In this stage, investigations that include test drilling will be conducted on at least two sites. In December 2000, SKB published the report "Integrated account of method, site selec- tion and programme prior to the site investigation phase," in which SKB stipulates where they want to conduct site investigations and how they will be carried out. The report is being reviewed by the Swedish Nuclear Power Inspectorate during the first half of 2001. Before the site investigations can be initiated, the go-ahead is required from the national safety authorities, the Government, and concerned municipalities and landowners. SKB projects that the it will be possible to commence the site investigations in 2002.
    [Show full text]
  • Government Communication 2011/12:56 a Coordinated Long-Term Strategy for Roma Skr
    Government communication 2011/12:56 A coordinated long-term strategy for Roma Skr. inclusion 2012–2032 2011/12:56 The Government hereby submits this communication to the Riksdag. Stockholm, 16 February 2012 Fredrik Reinfeldt Erik Ullenhag (Ministry of Employment) Key contents of the communication This communication presents a coordinated and long-term strategy for Roma inclusion for the period 2012–2032. The strategy includes investment in development work from 2012–2015, particularly in the areas of education and employment, for which the Government has earmarked funding (Govt. Bill. 2011/12:1, Report 2011/12:KU1, Riksdag Communication 2011/12:62). The twenty-year strategy forms part of the minority policy strategy (prop. 2008/09:158) and is to be regarded as a strengthening of this minority policy (Govt. Bill 1998/99:143). The target group is above all those Roma who are living in social and economic exclusion and are subjected to discrimination. The whole implementation of the strategy should be characterised by Roma participation and Roma influence, focusing on enhancing and continuously monitoring Roma access to human rights at the local, regional and national level. The overall goal of the twenty-year strategy is for a Roma who turns 20 years old in 2032 to have the same opportunities in life as a non-Roma. The rights of Roma who are then twenty should be safeguarded within regular structures and areas of activity to the same extent as are the rights for twenty-year-olds in the rest of the population. This communication broadly follows proposals from the Delegation for Roma Issues in its report ‘Roma rights — a strategy for Roma in Sweden’ (SOU 2010:55), and is therefore also based on various rights laid down in international agreements on human rights, i.e.
    [Show full text]