Page 135 - Beyond Decommissioning

116 Beyond Decommissioning

In an open fuel cycle, colocation allows the NPP operator ready access to the spent
fuel inventory, as well as a packaging facility and a repository. The site could also be
used for spent fuel training, R&D, and other functions, concentrating a large number
of qualified staff in one purpose-built location. In a closed fuel cycle environment,
there is the option that disposed-of spent fuel be recovered later. In addition, having
a reprocessing plant next to a repository saves a lot of resources, which otherwise
would go into treatment and packaging the waste for shipment to another site on
public roads.
Locating a repository next to an existing nuclear facility is likely to make public
acceptance easier than building one on a greenfield site. Experience generally proves
that communities close to nuclear facilities may feel readier to accept new facilities
than nonnuclear communities. Brownfields are always given priority for new facili-
ties. Moreover, choosing a disposal site near an NPP and other facilities provides
already-done environmental impact statements and other investigations that are
common to all site structures.
But of course there are safety concerns. The main issue is the geology. A deep
geological repository is required for HLW. Once the safe geological media is chosen
then the actual site can be finalized based on many factors, like social acceptance, eco-
nomics, access to transportation ways, and vicinity to other nuclear facilities (Nuclear
Energy Insider, 2012). In Canada, the Elliot Lake mines were proposed for conversion
into a waste disposal facility (International Atomic Energy Agency, 2009b,
Section 3.4). Similarly, in Romania, the former uranium mine at Baita-Bihor is reused
as a disposal site for institutional (nonfuel cycle) LLW and ILW. The Bratrstvi site
(near Jachimov, Czech Republic), a former uranium mine, serves for the disposal of
waste containing only naturally-occurring radionuclides. The Dukovany site, Czech
Republic hosts both a NPP and a waste disposal facility for LLW and ILW from
Dukovany and Temelin NPPs. The same colocation applies to Loviisa site, Finland.
The reuse of renewable energy plants in brownfields is in line with the consider-
ations above. To this end, the US Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) and the
National Renewable Energy Laboratory (NREL) are looking at 12 suitable sites in
California, Florida, Kansas, Massachusetts, Michigan, Minnesota, Pennsylvania,
Puerto Rico, Rhode Island, West Virginia, and Wisconsin. An EPA-sponsored presen-
tation of the advantages gained in reusing Contaminated Land for Renewable Energy
is given in US Environmental Protection Agency (2012). Specific benefits to develop
renewable energy on contaminated land include:

l many EPA tracked sites, for example, superfund sites (see Glossary and sec. 7.3), offer thou-
sands hectares of land, and may be situated in areas where the presence of wind and solar
structures are less likely to be aesthetically disturbing;
such EPA sites have electric transmission lines and other essential infrastructure, such as
l
roads. The saved new infrastructure capital costs can be considerable;
reducing project cycle times through streamlined permitting and zoning;
l
protecting open space;
l
l many EPA sites are situated in areas where traditional redevelopment may not be possible
because of site remoteness, or because environmental conditions impede residential or com-
mercial redevelopment; and