|
|
|
Disposal > BfS Papers on the Topic > There is no way without a repository
|
|
There is no way without a repository
|
|
In the Financial Times Deutschland’s (FTD) 1 December 2010 issue the president of the Federal Office for Radiation Protection (BfS), Wolfram König, replies to an article of executive consultant Matthias Ginsberg. In the following you will find a translation of Mr König’s comment.
“The debate about the accountability of nuclear energy regularly goes along with discussions about the disposal of radioactive waste produced in the process of nuclear energy utilisation. Recently Matthias Ginsberg made an argument in the FTD of 24 November for giving up radioactive waste disposal in favour of permanent storage above ground. Ginsberg argued that safe disposal could not be forecast for one million years, not even for 100 years. Future innovations in the 100 years to come are supposed to solve the problem. The answer sounds plausible and enticing in view of the experience gained in the past decades. However, the author still owes the answer to the question what would happen, should these innovations fail to appear.
Dangerous delay
Delaying solutions to problems is hardly compatible with the federal duty to safely dispose of radioactive waste. Moreover, it contradicts the responsibility to future generations anchored in Article 20a of the German Constitution.
We take over responsibility by taking on a problem. We elude responsibility when we give the task of solving a problem which we caused ourselves, over to future generations. Out of sight, out of mind – that cannot and must not be the principle when dealing with a high-risk technology.
It is correct that as of today, no country has an operable, safe repository for high-level radioactive waste from power plants. However, that is by no means a reason for focussing solely on possible solutions in the 100 years to come. If one wanted to see that from a different angle, one would speak in favour of those who – secretly or also quite openly – prefer an “international solution”.
Unfortunately there have been no offers made by countries wanting to take over part of the disposal on behalf of an increase in safety. Central ideas of such multi-national solutions are in fact motivated economically. Thus, they open the floodgates to cheap disposal, for example in Russia. But that would be irresponsible.
Safety through depth
The storage of radioactive waste in deep geological formations is considered the best way to dispose of radioactive waste in Germany and internationally, especially for high-level radioactive waste. Several hundred metres of geological layers are to shield the radiating waste from the biosphere and protect it from ice ages or earthquakes. The deep and sealed storage prevents external, also unintended interference and an improper re-use of the substances.
Retrieving the waste is for all intents and purposes technically feasible. That applies to disposal in salt, clay or granite. However, one should not aim at retrieving the waste, as this is associated with cutbacks in safety and the risk of improper use of the stored waste.
Irrespective of the question of retrieval, it should also be possible to recover the waste in case of danger with the help of techniques used in mining, if it is stored in deep geological formations. It must be stored in long-living containers, the storage conditions being well documented. That is also one of the central lessons learnt from the disaster in the Asse mine.
Above-ground interim storage of the waste can and may only serve to bridge the period of time until a national repository will be available. The above-ground storage of hazardous substances cannot secure the shielding from the biosphere to the same extent as disposal in deep geological formations can do that. Evidently, it cannot provide a comparable protection from the consequences of war, terrorism or environmental disasters, either.
What we urgently need is a societal, cross-party consensus about disposal that outlasts legislations. Today, from the technical point of view, there is a need for concentrating scientific know-how, overcoming both political and socio-cultural obstacles and jointly searching for a disposal site for high-level radioactive waste which is widely accepted and safe.
Transparent procedures
We need true openness and transparency in the procedures. And we have to take note that disposal is more than a purely scientific-technical challenge. Hoping for technical innovations in the future, such as the development of transmutation, does not help, nor does the fear of citizens’ protests and of the loss of votes.
Radioactive waste disposal is a special challenge. It denotes a long and uncomfortable way. As long as we have not furnished proof that the geological formations existing in the Federal Republic of Germany are technically not suitable for the safe storage of our relics, we cannot accept the comfortable way to leave these relics to other countries or even future generations.
We should resist temptation to dissuade ourselves from the – admittedly uncomfortable – way of taking over responsibility.”
|
|
Printer safe version
|
|
|
