DOCSLIB.ORG

THE WORLD NUCLEAR WASTE REPORT 2019 Focus Europe. PARTNERS & SPONSORS

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
THE WORLD NUCLEAR WASTE REPORT 2019 Focus Europe. PARTNERS & SPONSORS THE WORLD NUCLEAR WASTE REPORT 2019 Focus Europe. PARTNERS & SPONSORS Bürgerinitiative Umweltschutz Lüchow-Dannenberg This report would have not been possible without the generous support of a diverse group of friends and partners, in particular – listed in alphabetical order – the Altner-Combecher Stiftung, Bäuerliche Notgemeinschaft Trebel, Bund für Umwelt und Naturschutz (BUND), Bürgerinitiative Umweltschutz Lüchow-Dannenberg e.V., Climate Core and Green/EFA MEPs Group in the European Parliament, Heinrich-Böll-Stiftung (HBS) and its offices in Berlin, Brussels, Paris, Prague, and Washington DC, KLAR! Schweiz, Annette und Wolf Römmig, and the Swiss Energy Foundation. Thank you all for making this possible! THE WORLD NUCLEAR WASTE REPORT — 2019 3 FOREWORD More than 40 years ago in my home region, the forest near the village of Gorleben was chosen as the location for the German National Nuclear Waste Disposal Center. The site, which is now at the country’s center but at the time was located directly on the border between East and West Germany, was meant to host all facilities for reprocessing, treatment, storage, and a deep geological repository. The company responsible (which has long since closed) intended to open the repository for spent fuel in the salt dome named Gorleben-Rambow in 1999. After Fukushima, the German government decided to phase out nuclear energy for the second time. The experience of the nuclear catastrophe in Japan in 2011 also set in motion the review of the plans for the repository at Gorleben. After around 40 years of debating and fighting over Gorleben, the German government and parliament decided in favor of a new participatory site selection process for the repos- itory for high-level nuclear waste. Looking back at the last 40 years and forward over the many decades until a repository might be available illustrates the difficulties for humankind to cope with the eternal legacies of nuclear energy. Considering the 40-year history of attempted disposal at Gorleben, and the many problems and challenges we now know about, it is unrealistic to expect the commissioning of a repository before the second half of this century. Germany is not the only country in search of a suitable repository or facing difficult decisions about nuclear waste. For the last 15 years, as a member of the European Parliament, I followed the attempts at phasing out nuclear energy in and outside of the European Union. An important initiative came from Mycle Schneider, Paris, who suggested refuting the fairytale of a global nuclear renaissance. He and his team of authors release the yearly World Nuclear Industry Status Report, which proves that renewable energy is defeating nuclear power both because of tremendous risks of nuclear technology, and because of its high price. During the presentation of the status report in recent years, we had more and more questions about the absence of the nuclear waste issues, especially since these issues are also a factor for the costs of nuclear power. In the past years I also followed the European Commission’s efforts to establish a better overview and a common framework for decommissioning, nuclear waste management, disposal, and financial provisions. The recurring questions and the disappointing outcome of the European Commission’s initiative moti- vated me to tackle this challenge with the idea of the WORLD NUCLEAR WASTE REPORT (WNWR). In this first edition our team of European experts describes the technologies, strategies, preparatory processes, and financial provisions for disposal. We are convinced that information from national con- texts should be both better accessible and comparable. In spite of international conventions on nuclear waste, even categories for waste classification differ from country to country. Deep geological disposal is one of the most ambitious and most difficult tasks on earth. The specific risks of nuclear waste require a safe enclosure for one million years. In addition, disposal strategies promise the possibility of retrieval and recovery at least for a limited period. The carelessness and the hubris in the nuclear industry and in pro-nuclear governments around the risks of nuclear waste have created mistrust rather than confidence among citizens. We face a difficult task ahead: the search THE WORLD NUCLEAR WASTE REPORT — 2019 4 for the best possible and most responsible solution. Addressing this task demands from society, politi- cians, citizens, science and industry to be more open and patient, money, and willing to admit mistakes and failures and to rethink approaches and strategies. This applies to all countries which have used nuclear energy or which are nuclear arms states. This first edition of the WNWR covers a broad range of key issues on the topic and grew much longer than initially planned; yet it is obviously not fully comprehensive. Funding limits define its scope in part. But it is also due to the fact that we did not have access to full data and qualified authors for all coun- tries. We plan the WNWR as a periodical that should be regularly updated, expanding on new themes and covering more countries in the future. Future issues could include important and under-researched issues like bottlenecks of interim storage and the comparison of immediate dismantling versus safe confinement after the final shutdown of nuclear power plants. The latter question emerges when large nuclear power plants are decommissioned without available storage and disposal capacities, as is the case in Germany. In all countries the amount of nuclear waste is growing, the capacities for storage are limited, final disposal is not yet available and the costs for managing the waste are rising. Some govern- ments respond to this challenge by weakening standards for the industry, for example lowering the lev- els for when waste from decommissioning must be classified as radioactive. This clearance of fractions of the waste by free measurement should be also an issue of the next volume. Among our current group of authors, the majority favors deep geological disposal for high-level waste if it is tied to clear and ambitious conditions for the site selection, exploration, and approval processes. There is a strong consensus that the current research and the scientific debate and exchange with pol- iticians and involved citizens is severely insufficient. In spite of the support for deep geological disposal we are convinced that the debate on alternatives should not be avoided and that this issue deserves more attention, likely in the next volume. Currently there is no guarantee for the feasibility of the in- tended deep geological repositories. All in all, while the work on this first edition of the World Nuclear Waste Report is completed, I see many issues to be addressed in future volumes. After working on nuclear waste issues and the German site selection process since 1975, I have to as- sume that it will take still several generations before a repository which is based on the best available solutions could be opened and operating. That is why I think it is our duty to pass to the next generation some experience and knowledge which we as critics of nuclear power have gained so far. It is the next generations which will bear the responsibility for finding a solution for nuclear waste, the eternal legacy of the short nuclear age. In the making of this report I see the cooperation of old and young as a valuable contribution to the generational change. A critical debate and reflection must be integrated part of the search for the best available and feasible solution for disposal of nuclear waste. The process must always be focused on solutions. We can phase out nuclear power, but we cannot phase out the nuclear waste and its eternal risks. My thanks and appreciations go to all our authors, contributors and all those who supported us with work, knowledge, and funds. Dickfeitzen, Wendland, not far from Gorleben in July 2019 REBECCA HARMS THE WORLD NUCLEAR WASTE REPORT — 2019 5 ACKNOWLEDGMENTS The WORLD NUCLEAR WASTE REPORT (WNWR) is a common project by a group of renowned experts who want to draw more attention to radioactive waste as a significant and growing challenge with no long-term solutions yet available. The project was initiated by Rebecca Harms, and the original outline was produced by Wolfgang Neumann, Mycle Schneider and Gordon MacKerron. The core team of the WNWR project (Rebecca Harms, Mycle Schneider, Arne Jungjohann, and Anna Turmann) has been working since mid-2018 to win partners and raise funds for the project, to identify contributors, and to publish the report. Rebecca Harms took on the overall project lead. Arne Jungjohann served as the lead editor and project coordinator. Anna Turmann provided invaluable coordi- nation, organization, editing, and budget planning. Mycle Schneider and Gordon MacKerron contributed effective and thoughtful advice in shaping the project. We are very grateful for the excellent work delivered by the contributors, a diverse group of international experts, who each drafted one or more chapters: Manon Besnard, Marcos Buser, Ian Fairlie, Gordon MacKerron, Allison Macfarlane, Eszter Matyas, Yves Marignac, Edvard Sequens, Johan Swahn, and Ben Wealer. A list of bios can be found in the back of the report. The WNWR greatly benefitted from partial or comprehensive proofreading, edits and comments by Andrew Blowers, Craig Morris, Mycle Schneider, Marcos Buser, Gordon MacKerron, Johan Swahn, and Markku Lehtonen. Silvia Weko served as an invaluable help with precise proofreading, editing tables and footnotes, and developing the author styleguide. We would like to thank the Berlin-based Agency for Renewable Energies and in particular Andra Kradolfer for developing the design and the successful implementation of graphs and tables. The WNWR project’s website is www.worldnuclearwastereport.org and was designed by Arne Jungjohann. It includes more information and possible future updates.
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Advanced Reactors with Innovative Fuels
    Nuclear Science Advanced Reactors with Innovative Fuels Workshop Proceedings Villigen, Switzerland 21-23 October 1998 NUCLEAR•ENERGY•AGENCY OECD, 1999. Software: 1987-1996, Acrobat is a trademark of ADOBE. All rights reserved. OECD grants you the right to use one copy of this Program for your personal use only. Unauthorised reproduction, lending, hiring, transmission or distribution of any data or software is prohibited. You must treat the Program and associated materials and any elements thereof like any other copyrighted material. All requests should be made to: Head of Publications Service, OECD Publications Service, 2, rue AndrÂe-Pascal, 75775 Paris Cedex 16, France. OECD PROCEEDINGS Proceedings of the Workshop on Advanced Reactors with Innovative Fuels hosted by Villigen, Switzerland 21-23 October 1998 NUCLEAR ENERGY AGENCY ORGANISATION FOR ECONOMIC CO-OPERATION AND DEVELOPMENT ORGANISATION FOR ECONOMIC CO-OPERATION AND DEVELOPMENT Pursuant to Article 1 of the Convention signed in Paris on 14th December 1960, and which came into force on 30th September 1961, the Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD) shall promote policies designed: − to achieve the highest sustainable economic growth and employment and a rising standard of living in Member countries, while maintaining financial stability, and thus to contribute to the development of the world economy; − to contribute to sound economic expansion in Member as well as non-member countries in the process of economic development; and − to contribute to the expansion of world trade on a multilateral, non-discriminatory basis in accordance with international obligations. The original Member countries of the OECD are Austria, Belgium, Canada, Denmark, France, Germany, Greece, Iceland, Ireland, Italy, Luxembourg, the Netherlands, Norway, Portugal, Spain, Sweden, Switzerland, Turkey, the United Kingdom and the United States.
    [Show full text]
  • Radioactive Waste Management Programmes in OECD/NEA Member Countries – Overview
    Cov-Eng-Pochette 2005 21/09/05 15:04 Page 1 Australia Radioactive Waste Belgium Canada Management Programmes Czech Republic Finland in OECD/NEA Member France Countries Germany Hungary Italy Japan Korea Mexico Netherlands Norway Slovak Republic Spain Sweden Switzerland United Kingdom United States NUCLEAR•ENERGY•AGENCY 1-OVERVIEW.qxp 16/11/05 17:18 Page 1 Radioactive waste management programmes in OECD/NEA member countries – Overview International co-operation at the OECD/NEA concerning the management of radioactive waste and materials The role of the NEA Radioactive Waste Management Committee (RWMC) Radioactive waste and materials exist in countries Strategies with and without nuclar power programmes and need In particular, the RWMC facilitates the elaboration to be managed in a manner that is responsible to pres- of strategies for waste management and decommis- ent and future generations. Significant progress has sioning, including regulatory approaches, at the been achieved and considerable experience is avail- national and international levels by: able in NEA member countries on waste and mate- ● reviewing strategies adopted by member countries rials processing, conditioning, storage, transport and with a view to identify and analyse emerging tech- disposal. An important experience and knowledge nical, policy and regulatory issues and to forge base has also been developed as regards decommis- consensus views; sioning and dismantling nuclear installations. Special ● reviewing regulatory bases, requirements and efforts are being expended in the area of long-term criteria, and licensing processes, in addition to management of radioactive waste in order to continue proposing regulatory approaches; to integrate technical advances and societal demands ● in decision making as well as to understand and developing methodologies for evaluating long-term develop consensus views on regulatory and policy safety; ● issues.
    [Show full text]
  • Challenges for Decommissioning Policies
    IAEA SAFETY RELATED PUBLICATIONS IAEA SAFETY STANDARDS Under the terms of Article III of its Statute, the IAEA is authorized to establish or adopt standards of safety for protection of health and minimization of danger to life and property, and to provide for the application of these standards. The publications by means of which the IAEA establishes standards are issued in the IAEA Safety Standards Series. This series covers nuclear safety, radiation safety, transport safety and waste safety, and also general safety (i.e. all these areas of safety). The publication categories in the series are Safety Fundamentals, Safety Requirements and Safety Guides. Safety standards are coded according to their coverage: nuclear safety (NS), radiation safety (RS), transport safety (TS), waste safety (WS) and general safety (GS). Information on the IAEA’s safety standards programme is available at the IAEA Internet site http://www-ns.iaea.org/standards/ The site provides the texts in English of published and draft safety standards. The texts of safety standards issued in Arabic, Chinese, French, Russian and Spanish, the IAEA Safety Glossary and a status report for safety standards under development are also available. For further information, please contact the IAEA at P.O. Box 100, 1400 Vienna, Austria. All users of IAEA safety standards are invited to inform the IAEA of experience in their use (e.g. as a basis for national regulations, for safety reviews and for training courses) for the purpose of ensuring that they continue to meet users’ needs. Information may be provided via the IAEA Internet site or by post, as above, or by email to [email protected].
    [Show full text]
  • IAEA Nuclear Energy Series Managing the Unexpected in Decommissioning No
    IAEA Nuclear Energy Series IAEA Nuclear No. NW-T-2.8 No. IAEA Nuclear Energy Series Managing the Unexpected in Decommissioning Managing the Unexpected No. NW-T-2.8 Basic Managing the Principles Unexpected in Decommissioning Objectives Guides Technical Reports INTERNATIONAL ATOMIC ENERGY AGENCY VIENNA ISBN 978–92–0–103615–5 ISSN 1995–7807 @ 15-40561_PUB1702_cover.indd 1,3 2016-03-30 10:56:45 IAEA Nuclear Energy Series IAEA Nuclear IAEA NUCLEAR ENERGY SERIES PUBLICATIONS STRUCTURE OF THE IAEA NUCLEAR ENERGY SERIES No. NW-T-2.8 No. Under the terms of Articles III.A and VIII.C of its Statute, the IAEA is authorized to foster the exchange of scientific and technical information on the peaceful uses of atomic energy. The publications in the IAEA Nuclear Energy Series provide information in the areas of nuclear power, nuclear fuel cycle, in Decommissioning Managing the Unexpected radioactive waste management and decommissioning, and on general issues that are relevant to all of the above mentioned areas. The structure of the IAEA Nuclear Energy Series comprises three levels: 1 — Basic Principles and Objectives; 2 — Guides; and 3 — Technical Reports. The Nuclear Energy Basic Principles publication describes the rationale and vision for the peaceful uses of nuclear energy. Nuclear Energy Series Objectives publications explain the expectations to be met in various areas at different stages of implementation. Nuclear Energy Series Guides provide high level guidance on how to achieve the objectives related to the various topics and areas involving the peaceful uses of nuclear energy. Nuclear Energy Series Technical Reports provide additional, more detailed information on activities related to the various areas dealt with in the IAEA Nuclear Energy Series.
    [Show full text]
  • Atomic Energy of Canada Limited ADVANCED HWR POWER PLANTS
    Atomic Energy of Canada Limited ADVANCED HWR POWER PLANTS DL-11O by W. BENNETT LEWIS Paper presented at the American Nuclear Society Power Division Conference Atlantic City, New Jersey 22-24 August, 1972 Chalk River Nuclear Laboratories Chalk River, Ontario November 1972 AECL-4304 PL-110 ATOMIC ENERGY OF CANADA LIMITED ADVANCED HWR POWER PLANTS by W. Bennett Lewis Paper presented at the American Nuclear Society Power Division Conference Atlantic City, New Jersey 22-24 August, 1972 Chalk River, Ontario November 1972 AECL-4304 DL-110 ADVANCED HWR POWER PLANTS1 by W. Bennett Lewis ABSTRACT Heavy-water reactors that are near-breeders can be alternatives for fast breeder reactors with the capability of meeting all the world's needs for power for many centuries. The Canada Deuterium Uranium (CANDU) and Steam-Generating Heavy-Water (SGHW) reactors are the only types of heavy-water reactor established for high-power generating stations. Those CANDU reactors now operating and under construction in large unit sizes are fuelled with natural uranium and cooled and moderated with D20, meeting the requirements of utilities desiring a minimum of enrichment together with an attractive capital cost. Possible modifications to design are the use of boiling light water as coolant, organic coolant, and thorium fuel cycles. Heavy-water reactors have a worldwide distribution. They can be classified as follows: 1) zero energy lattice and reactor physics research reactors; 2) high flux materials test, neutron beam and isotope production reactors; 3) engineering test reactors with high temperature loops; 4) demonstration power reactors; 5) prototype power reactors; and 6) commercial power reactors.
    [Show full text]
  • Highly Enriched Uranium: Striking a Balance" (Report)
    Department of Energy Washington, DC 20585 February 2, 2006 Mr. Stephen Aftergood Federation of American Scientists 1717 K Street, NW, Suite 209 Washington, D.C. 20036 Dear Mr. Aftergood: Weare writing in regard to your Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) request and subsequent appeal for the draft report entitled "Highly Enriched Uranium: Striking a Balance" (Report). The Department of Energy (Agency) issued a final determination to withhold in its entirety the draft Report on January 24, 2005. On March 7, 2005, the Department of Energy Office of Hearings and Appeals granted your Appeal (Case Number TF A-0088) in part and denied it in all other aspects as set forth in the reference decision and order. Pursuant to the decision by the Office of Hearings and Appeals the Office of Security and Safety Performance Assurance, in conjunction with other offices, conducted a further review of the draft Report. The Agency has prepared a redacted version of the Report following this review. FOIA requires that "any reasonable segregable portion of a record shall be provided to any person requesting such record after deletion of the portions which are exempt." 5 U.S.c. 552(b). As a result, the Agency is releasing all reasonably segregable information contained within the Report pursuant to the March 7, 2005, DECISION and ORDER. The Agency is withholding information pursuant to Exemption 5 and Exemption 2(high) of the FOIA. FOIA Exemption 5 covers interagency, deliberative, predecisional materials containing information unavailable to other parties. Information redacted consists of deliberative material reflecting the process of commenting, recommending and revising procedures governing certain defense agreement exchanges with the United Kingdom.
    [Show full text]
  • THE WORLD NUCLEAR WASTE REPORT 2019 Focus Europe. PARTNERS & SPONSORS
    THE WORLD NUCLEAR WASTE REPORT 2019 Focus Europe. PARTNERS & SPONSORS Bürgerinitiative Umweltschutz Lüchow-Dannenberg This report would have not been possible without the generous support of a diverse group of friends and partners, in particular – listed in alphabetical order – the Altner-Combecher Stiftung, Bäuerliche Notgemeinschaft Trebel, Bund für Umwelt und Naturschutz (BUND), Bürgerinitiative Umweltschutz Lüchow-Dannenberg e.V., Climate Core and Green/EFA MEPs Group in the European Parliament, Heinrich-Böll-Stiftung (HBS) and its offices in Berlin, Brussels, Paris, Prague, and Washington DC, KLAR! Schweiz, Annette und Wolf Römmig, and the Swiss Energy Foundation. Thank you all for making this possible! THE WORLD NUCLEAR WASTE REPORT — 2019 3 FOREWORD More than 40 years ago in my home region, the forest near the village of Gorleben was chosen as the location for the German National Nuclear Waste Disposal Center. The site, which is now at the country’s center but at the time was located directly on the border between East and West Germany, was meant to host all facilities for reprocessing, treatment, storage, and a deep geological repository. The company responsible (which has long since closed) intended to open the repository for spent fuel in the salt dome named Gorleben-Rambow in 1999. After Fukushima, the German government decided to phase out nuclear energy for the second time. The experience of the nuclear catastrophe in Japan in 2011 also set in motion the review of the plans for the repository at Gorleben. After around 40 years of debating and fighting over Gorleben, the German government and parliament decided in favor of a new participatory site selection process for the repos- itory for high-level nuclear waste.
    [Show full text]
  • The Swiss Nuclear Installations Annual Report 1994
    W W V I ^ Bundesamt fur Energiewrtsehaft (Schwe:) Olice federal de I energit (Suisse) UHICIO federate deU'energia (Svtzrera) Federal Ottice ol Energy (Switzerland) Hauptabteilung fur die Sicherheit der Kemanlagen Division principale de la Securite des Installations Nucleaires e Divisione principale delta Sicurezza degli Impianti Nucleari Swiss Federal Nuclear Safety Inspectorate HSK-AN-2816 KSA-AN-1839 The Swiss Nuclear Installations Annual Report 1994 June 1995 This dcriment is also available in German and French. Contents Page Introduction and Summary 1 1. Nuclear Power Plant Beznau 2 1.1 Operational data and results 2 1.2 Plant installation safety 3 1.3 Radiation protection 6 1.4 Personnel and organization 7 1.5 Overall judgement by HSK 9 2. Nucleai Power Plant Muhleberg 10 2.1 Operational data and results 10 2.2 Plant installation safety 10 2.3 Radiation protection 14 2.4 Personnel and organization 16 2.5 Compliance with mandatory requirements 16 2.6 Overall judgement by HSK 17 3. Nuclear Power Plant Gosgen 18 3.1 Operational data and results 18 3.2 Plant installation safety 18 3.3 Radiation protection 22 3.4 Personnel and organization 23 3.5 Overall judgement by HSK 24 4. Nuclear Power Plant Leibstadt 25 4.1 Operational data and results 25 4.2 Plant installation safety 25 4.3 Radiation protection 30 4.4 Personnel and organization 31 4.5 Overall judgement by HSK 32 5. Research Installations 33 5.1 Paul Scherrer Institute (PSI), Villigen/Wurenlingen 33 5.2 Swiss Federal Institute of Technology Lausanne (EPFL) 43 5.3 University of Basel 43 5.4 Experimental reactor at Lucens (VAKL) 43 6.
    [Show full text]
  • General Assembly GENERAL A/38/346 30 August 1983 ENGLISH ORIGINAL: ARABIC(ENGL ISH/ FRENCH/RUSSIAN/ SPANISH
    UNITED NATIONS A Distr. General Assembly GENERAL A/38/346 30 August 1983 ENGLISH ORIGINAL: ARABIC(ENGL ISH/ FRENCH/RUSSIAN/ SPANISH Thirty-eighth session Item 14 of the provisional agenda* REPORT OF THE INTERNATIONAL ATOMIC ENERGY AGENCY NOte by the secretarY-General 1. The twenty-seventh report of the International Atomic Energy Agency for the calendar year 1982 (GC(XXVII)/684) is submitted herewith to the General Assembly. ~ Major developments since this report was published will be covered by tbe annual statement of the Director-General of the Agency to the General Assembly. This report has been transmitted in accordance with the provision of article III, paragraph 1 (a), of the Agreement governing the relationship between the united Nations and the International Atomic Energy Agency (General Assembly resolution 1145 (XII), annex) • 2. As only a limited number of copies of this report is available, it has not been possible to make a full distribution. Delegations are therefore requested to have the copies transmitted to them available during the discussion of this item. * A/38/l50. ~ The International Atomic Energy Agency is solely responsible for the designations used in its annual report. Regarding the usage in the United Nations, it will be recalled that, by resolution 2758 (XXVI) of 25 October 1971, the General Assembly, inter alia, decided "••• to restore all its rights to the People's Republic of China and to recognize t.he representatives of its Government as the Jnly legitimate representatives of China to the United Nations, and to expel forthwith the representatives of Chiang Kai-shek from the place which they >nlawfully occupy at the United Nations and in all the organizations related to it".
    [Show full text]
  • Technical Reports Series No. 444
    Technical Reports SeriEs No. 444 Redevelopment of Nuclear Facilities after Decommissioning REDEVELOPMENT OF NUCLEAR FACILITIES AFTER DECOMMISSIONING The following States are Members of the International Atomic Energy Agency: AFGHANISTAN GREECE PANAMA ALBANIA GUATEMALA PARAGUAY ALGERIA HAITI PERU ANGOLA HOLY SEE PHILIPPINES ARGENTINA HONDURAS POLAND ARMENIA HUNGARY PORTUGAL AUSTRALIA ICELAND QATAR AUSTRIA INDIA REPUBLIC OF MOLDOVA AZERBAIJAN INDONESIA ROMANIA BANGLADESH IRAN, ISLAMIC REPUBLIC OF RUSSIAN FEDERATION BELARUS IRAQ SAUDI ARABIA BELGIUM IRELAND SENEGAL BENIN ISRAEL SERBIA AND MONTENEGRO BOLIVIA ITALY SEYCHELLES BOSNIA AND HERZEGOVINA JAMAICA SIERRA LEONE BOTSWANA JAPAN BRAZIL JORDAN SINGAPORE BULGARIA KAZAKHSTAN SLOVAKIA BURKINA FASO KENYA SLOVENIA CAMEROON KOREA, REPUBLIC OF SOUTH AFRICA CANADA KUWAIT SPAIN CENTRAL AFRICAN KYRGYZSTAN SRI LANKA REPUBLIC LATVIA SUDAN CHAD LEBANON SWEDEN CHILE LIBERIA SWITZERLAND CHINA LIBYAN ARAB JAMAHIRIYA SYRIAN ARAB REPUBLIC COLOMBIA LIECHTENSTEIN TAJIKISTAN COSTA RICA LITHUANIA THAILAND CÔTE D’IVOIRE LUXEMBOURG THE FORMER YUGOSLAV CROATIA MADAGASCAR REPUBLIC OF MACEDONIA CUBA MALAYSIA TUNISIA CYPRUS MALI TURKEY CZECH REPUBLIC MALTA UGANDA DEMOCRATIC REPUBLIC MARSHALL ISLANDS UKRAINE OF THE CONGO MAURITANIA UNITED ARAB EMIRATES DENMARK MAURITIUS UNITED KINGDOM OF DOMINICAN REPUBLIC MEXICO GREAT BRITAIN AND ECUADOR MONACO NORTHERN IRELAND EGYPT MONGOLIA UNITED REPUBLIC EL SALVADOR MOROCCO ERITREA MYANMAR OF TANZANIA ESTONIA NAMIBIA UNITED STATES OF AMERICA ETHIOPIA NETHERLANDS URUGUAY FINLAND NEW ZEALAND UZBEKISTAN FRANCE NICARAGUA VENEZUELA GABON NIGER VIETNAM GEORGIA NIGERIA YEMEN GERMANY NORWAY ZAMBIA GHANA PAKISTAN ZIMBABWE The Agency’s Statute was approved on 23 October 1956 by the Conference on the Statute of the IAEA held at United Nations Headquarters, New York; it entered into force on 29 July 1957. The Headquarters of the Agency are situated in Vienna.
    [Show full text]
  • UNITED NATIONS Geneva 1958 A/CONF.15/1 English, Vol
    UNITED NATIONS Geneva 1958 A/CONF.15/1 English, Vol. 33 UNITED NATIONS PUBLICATION Sales No.: 58. IX. 2. Vol. 33 I Price: $U.S. 16.50; £5 18s. (stg.); Sw. fr. 70.00 (or equivalent in other currencies) PRINTED IN GREAT BRITAIN PROCEEDINGS OF THE SECOND UNITED NATIONS INTERNATIONAL CONFERENCE ON THE PEACEFUL USES OF ATOMIC ENERGY Volume 33 INDEX OF THE PROCEEDINGS PREFACE More than 2100 papers were submitted by the Governments, specialized agencies, and the International Atomic Energy Agency, which participated in the Second United Nations International Conference on the Peaceful Uses of Atomic Energy, held at Geneva in September 1958. These papers together with the records of the sessions have been published, in English, in a series of thirty-two volumes which constitute the official Proceedings of the Conference. The United Nations has also published abbreviated French and Spanish editions of the Proceedings which total thirteen volumes in each edition. They consist of all the Conference papers in the language of the edition, the complete text of the orally- presented papers, the complete text of the one hundred and nine thermonuclear fusion papers, additional selected papers, and the records of the sessions. A similar abbrevi­ ated edition is being published in Russian by the Government of the Union of Soviet Socialist Republics. A list of the titles and prices of the volumes in each of the editions published by the United Nations is included in this volume, which is the index volume of the Proceedings. Prices are quoted in US dollars, but the volumes may be purchased in any national currency.
    [Show full text]
  • General Assembly
    UNITED NATIONS Distr. GENERAL GENERAL A/34/497 24 September 1979 ASSEMBLY ORIGINAL: ENGLISH/FRENCH/ RUSSIAN/SPANISH Thirty-fourth session Item 14 of the provisional agenda* REPORT OF 'mE INTERNATIONAL ATOMIC ENERGY AGENCY Note by the Secretary-General 1. The twenty-third report of the International Atomic Energy Agency for the calendar year 1978 is submitted herewith to the General Assembly. Major developments since this report was published will be covered by the annual statement of the Director-General of the Agency to the Assembly. This report has been transmitted in accordance with the provision of article Ill, paragraph 1 (al, of the Agreement governing the relationship between the United Nations and the International Atomic Energy Agency. !I 2. As only a limited number of copies of this report is available, it has not been possible to make a full distribution. Delegations are therefore requested to have the copies transmitted to them available during the discussion of this item. " A/34/150. !I General Assembly resolution 1145 (XIIl, annex. 79-23964 / ... NOTE The Board of Governors of the International Atomic Energy Agency approved the annual report for 1978 (GC(XXIIIlI610l at its meeting on 27 June 1979. Because the twenty-third regular session of the General Conference of the International Atomic Energy Agency is taking place in December 1979 instead of in September as is customary, the annual report for 1978 will not have been considered by the General Conference by the time that the relevant item comes before the thirty-fourth regular session of the General Assembly. The annual report for 1978, contained in the attached docu­ ment, is therefore in the nature of a provisional document pending its formal consideration at the Agency's General Conference.
    [Show full text]