Nuclear decommissioning
Nuclear decommissioning is the process whereby a nuclear power plant site is dismantled to the point that it no longer requires measures for radiation protection. The presence of radioactive material necessitates processes that are occupationally dangerous, hazardous to the natural environment, expensive, and time-intensive.[1]
Decommissioning is an administrative and technical process. It includes clean-up of radioactive materials and progressive demolition of the plant. Once a facility is fully decommissioned, no radiologic danger should persist. The costs of decommissioning are spread over the lifetime of a facility and saved in a decommissioning fund. After a facility has been completely decommissioned, it is released from regulatory control and the plant licensee is no longer responsible for its nuclear safety. Decommissioning may proceed all the way to "greenfield" status.
Options
The International Atomic Energy Agency has defined three options for decommissioning:
- Immediate Dismantling (Early Site Release/DECON in the US): This option allows for the facility to be removed from regulatory control relatively soon after shutdown or termination of regulated activities. Final dismantling or decontamination activities begin within a few months or years, and depending on the facility, it could take five years or more.[2] Following removal from regulatory control, the site becomes available for re-use.[3]
- Safe Enclosure (or Safestor(e) SAFSTOR): This option postpones the final removal of controls for a longer period, usually on the order of 40 to 60 years. The facility is placed into a safe storage configuration until the eventual dismantling and decontamination activities occur.[4]
- Entombment/ENTOMB: This option entails placing the facility into a condition that will allow the remaining radioactive material to remain on-site indefinitely. This option usually involves reducing the size of the area where the radioactive material is located and then encasing the facility in a long-lived material such as concrete, theoretically preventing a release of radioactive material.[5]
Experience
A wide range of nuclear facilities have been decommissioned so far. This includes nuclear power plants (NPPs), research reactors, isotope production plants, particle accelerators, and uranium mines. The number of decommissioned power plants is small. Companies specialize in nuclear decommissioning; decommissioning has become a profitable business. More recently, construction and demolition companies in the UK have also begun to develop nuclear decommissioning services. The current estimate by the United Kingdom's Nuclear Decommissioning Authority is that it will cost at least £100 billion to decommission the 19 existing United Kingdom nuclear sites.[6] Due to the radioactivity in the reactor structure, decommissioning takes place in stages. The plans of the Nuclear Decommissioning Authority for decommissioning reactors have an average 50 year time frame. The long time frame makes reliable cost estimates difficult. Cost overruns are common even for quick projects.
North America
Most nuclear plants currently operating in the United States were designed for a life of about 30–40 years[7] and are licensed to operate for 40 years by the US Nuclear Regulatory Commission.[8] The average age of these reactors is 32 years.[8] Many are coming to the end of their licensing period. If their licenses are not renewed, the plants must go through a decontamination and decommissioning process.[7][9]
Several nuclear reactors dismantled in North America, type, power, and decommissioning cost:[10][11][12]
| Dismantled nuclear reactors in Canada & USA | ||||||
| Country: | Location: | Reactor type: | Operative life: | Decommissioning phase: |
Dismantling costs: | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Canada (Québec) | Gentilly-1 | CANDU-BWR 250 MWe |
180 days (between 1966 and 1973) |
"Static state" since 1986[13][14][15] | stage two: $25 million | |
| Canada (Ontario) |
Pickering NGS Units A2 and A3 |
CANDU-PWR 8 x 542 MWe |
30 years (from 1974 to 2004) |
Two units currently in "cold standby" Decommissioning to begin in 2020 [16][17] |
(calculated: $270–430/kWe ?) | |
| United States | Fort St. Vrain | HTGR (helium-graphite) 380 MWe |
12 years (1977–1989) |
Immediate Decon | $195 million | |
| USA | Rancho Seco[18] | Multiunit: PWR 913 MWe |
12 years (Closed after a referendum in 1989) |
SAFSTOR: 5–10 years completion 2018 |
? ($200–500/kWe)[19] | |
| USA | Three Mile Island 2 | Multiunit: 913 MWe PWR |
INCIDENT: core fusion (in 1979) |
Post-Defuelling Phase 2 (1979) |
$805 Million (estimated)[20] | |
| USA | Shippingport | (The first BWR) 60 MWe |
25 years (closed in 1989) |
Decon completed dismantled in 5 years (first small experimental reactor) |
$98.4 million[21] | |
| USA | Piqua(Ohio) | OCM (Organically Cooled/Moderated) reactor 46 MWe[22] |
2 years (closed in 1966) |
ENTOMB (coolant design inadequate for neutron flux) |
? | |
| USA | Trojan | PWR 1,180 MWe |
16 years (Closed in 1993 because nearby to seismic fault) |
SAFSTOR (cooling tower demolished in 2006) |
?[23] | |
| USA | Yankee Rowe | PWR 185 MWe | 31 years (1960–1991) |
Decon completed - Demolished (greenfield open to visitors) [24] |
$608 million with $8 million per year upkeep | |
| USA | Maine Yankee | PWR 860 MWe |
24 years (closed in 1996) |
Decon completed - Demolished in 2004 (greenfield open to visitors) [25][26] |
$635 million[27] | |
| USA | Connecticut Yankee | PWR 590 MWe |
28 years (closed in 1996) |
Decon - Demolished in 2007 (greenfield open to visitors) [28] |
$820 million[29] | |
| USA | Exelon - Zion 1 & 2 |
PWR - Westinghouse 2 x 1040 MWe |
25 years (1973–1998) (Incident in proceedings, abandoned because of the excessive cost of vaporizers substitution) |
SAFSTOR-EnergySolutions (opening of the site to visitors for 2018) [30] |
$900–1,100 million (2007 dollars)[31] | |
| USA | Pacific Gas & Electric - Humboldt Bay Nuclear Power Plant - Unit 3 |
BWR 1 x 63 MWe |
13 years (1963–1976) (Shut down due to seismic retrofit) |
On July 2, 1976, Humboldt Bay Power Plant (HBPP) Unit 3 was shut down for annual refueling and to conduct seismic modifications. In 1983, updated economic analyses indicated that restarting Unit 3 would probably not be cost-effective, and in June 1983, PG&E announced its intention to decommission the unit. On July 16, 1985, the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) issued Amendment No. 19 to the HBPP Unit 3 Operating License to change the status to possess-but-not-operate, and the plant was placed into a SAFSTOR status. | Unknown - Closure date: 12/31/2015[32] | |
Asia
Reactors not located in Japan
Several nuclear reactors dismantled in Asia, type, power and decommissioning cost per kilowatt of electric power (source: World Nuclear Association)[33]
| Dismantled reactors in Asia | ||||||
| Country: | Location: | Reactor type: | Operative life: | Decommissioning phase: |
Dismantling cost: | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| China[34] | Beijing (CIAE) | HWWR 10 MWe (multipurpose) (Heavy Water Experimental Reactor for the production of plutonium and tritium) |
49 years (1958–2007) |
SAFSTOR & Decon in 20 years (until 2027) | proposed: $6 Million for dismantling $5 Million for fuel remotion | |
| North Korea | Yongbyon | Magnox-type (reactor for the production of nuclear weapons through PUREX treatment) |
20 years (1985–2005) Deactivated after a treaty[35][36] |
SAFSTOR: cooling tower dismantled | ? | |
| India[37][38] | Tarapur-1,2 (Maharashtra) |
2x BWR 160 MWe | 40 years ? (1969–2009?) |
NOT deactivated | ? | |
| India[39] | Rawatbhata Atomic Power Station-1,2 (Rajasthan) |
1x PHWR 100 MWe 1x PHWR 200 MWe (similar to CANDU) |
40 years ? (1970–2011?) |
NOT deactivated | ? | |
| Iraq | Osiraq/Tammuz-1[40] | BWR 40 MWe Nuclear reactor with weapons-grade plutonium production capability |
(Destroyed by Israeli Air Force in 1981) | Not radioactive: never refurbished with uranium | ? | |
Japan
The three damaged reactors at Fukushima Dai-ichi #1,#2,#3 are expected to be decommissioned as well as #4.
| Heavily damaged reactors in Japan[41] | ||||||
| Nuclear Power Plant | Electric max. output (MW) |
Type | Connection to electric grid |
Situation |
Decommissioning costs | |
| Fukushima Dai-ichi NPP (Unit 1) |
439 | BWR | November 17, 1970 | nuclear meltdown [42][43][44][45][46][47][48][49] |
? Estimated at ¥10 trillion (US$ 100 billion) for decontaminating Fukushima and dismantling all reactors in Japan and considering long time damage to environment and economy, including agriculture, cattle breeding, fishery, water depuration, tourism (without considering further health care spending & reduction of life expectancy).[52] | |
| Fukushima Dai-ichi NPP (Unit 2) |
760 | BWR | December 24, 1973 | partial nuclear meltdown (INES 6) (Risk of going into INES 7)[53][54][55] |
? | |
| Fukushima Dai-ichi NPP (Unit 3) |
760 | BWR | October 26, 1974 | nuclear meltdown Hydrogen explosion (INES 7) [56] |
? | |
| Fukushima Dai-ichi NPP (Unit 4) |
760 | BWR | February 24, 1978 | Reactor defuelled when tsunami hit Damage to spent fuel cooling-pool (INES 4) (Could worsen if pool collapses) [57][58][59][60][61][62] |
? | |
| Fukushima Dai-ichi NPP (Unit 5) |
760 | BWR | September 22, 1977 | SCRAM | ? | |
| Fukushima Daiichi NPP (Unit 6) |
1067 | BWR | May 4, 1979 | SCRAM | ? | |
| Fukushima Daini NPP (Unit 1 ) [65] |
1067 | BWR | July 31, 1981 | SCRAM (leakage of coolant) [66] |
? | |
| Fukushima Daini NPP (Units 2 - 4) |
3 × 1067 | BWR | June 23, 1983 December 14, 1984 December 17, 1986 |
3 x SCRAM | ? | |
| Tokai NPP (Reactor 2) | 1100 MW | BWR/5[67] | November 28, 1978 | SCRAM Shutdown since March 2011 (anti-tsunami barrier stopped the waves) INES 1 (leakage of coolant) [68] |
? | |
| Safely decommissioned reactors in Japan[41] | ||||||
| Nuclear Power Plant | Electric max. output (MW) |
Type | Connection to electric grid |
Situation |
Decommissioning costs | |
| Tokai NPP (Reactor 1) | 160 MWe | Magnox (GCR) | (1966–1998) | Safstore: 10 years[69][70] then decon until 2018 |
¥93 billion[71] (€660 million of 2003) | |
Western Europe and Former Yugoslavia
Several nuclear reactors dismantled in Western Europe, type, power and decommissioning cost per kilowatt of power: European Union Website about Nuclear Decommissioning,[72] World Nuclear Association (reactor building companies),[73] United Kingdom.[74]
| Safely decommissioned reactors in Western Europe[41] | ||||||
| Country: | Location: | Reactor type: | Operative Life: | Decommissioning phase: |
Dismantling cost: | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Austria[75] (Nuclear Free Country)[76] |
Zwentendorf NPP Google Maps |
PWR 723 MWe |
Never activated due to referendum in 1978[77] | ? | ? | |
| Belgium | SCK•CEN - BR3, located at Mol, Belgium |
PWR (BR-3) |
25 years (1962–1987) |
Decon completed (2011)[78][79] European pilot project (underwater cutting and remote operated tools) [80][81] |
? | |
| France [82] | Brennilis | HWGCR 70 MWe | 12 years (1967–1979) |
Phase 3 | €480 million (20 times the forecasted amount) | |
| France | Bugey-1 | UNGG Gas cooled, graphite moderator |
1972–1994 | postponed | ? | |
| France | Chinon 1,2,3 | Gas-graphite | (1973–1990) |
postponed | ? | |
| France | Chooz-A | PWR 300 MW | 24 years (1967–1991) |
Fully decommissioned - Greenfield [83][84][85] (Nuclear reactor was located inside a mountain cave) |
? | |
| France | Saint-Laurent Nuclear Power Plant | Gas-graphite | 1969–1992 50 kg of Uranium in one of the reactors at the Saint-Laurent Nuclear Power Plant began to melt, an event classified at 'level 4' on the International Nuclear Event Scale (INES).[86] As of March 2011, this is the most serious civil nuclear power accident in France.[87] |
postponed | ? | |
| France | Rapsodie at Cadarache |
Experimental Fast breeder nuclear reactor (sodium-cooled) 40 MWe |
15 years (1967–1983) |
1983: Defuelling 1987: Remotion of neutron reflectors 1985-1989: Decontamination of sodium coolant Accident when cleaning residual sodium in vessel with ethyl carbitol (March 31° 1994) |
The removed activity is estimated to around 4800 TBq. 600 TBq (60Co) in 1990 still contained in 1ry vessel The dose burden from 1987 to 1994 was 224 mSv. | |
| France | Phénix at Marcoule |
Experimental Fast breeder nuclear reactor (sodium-cooled) 233 MWe |
36 years (1973–2009) [89] |
1) Defuelled | estimated for the future: $4000/kWe | |
| France | Superphénix at Creys-Malville |
Fast breeder nuclear reactor (sodium-cooled) |
11 years (1985–1996) [90] |
1) Defuelled 2) Extraction of Sodium [91] Pipe cutting with a robot [92][93] |
estimated for the future: $4000/kWe | |
| United Kingdom | Berkeley | Magnox (2 x 138 MWe) |
27 years (1962–1989) |
SAFSTOR: 30 years (internal demolition) |
$2600/kWe | |
| United Kingdom | Sellafield-Windscale |
Windscale Advanced Gas Reactor WAGR (32 MWe) |
18 years (1963–1981) |
Remotion of reactor in 2009 pilot project (cutting with remote controlled robots, UV lasers)[80][94][95][96] |
More than $2600/kWe (WNI estimates) So far €117 million | |
| United Kingdom | Dorset -Winfrith Operated in Dorset from 1958 to 1990. Had 9 reactors all mostly dismantled[97] [98] |
|||||
| West Germany | Gundremmingen-A | BWR 250 MWe |
11 years |
Immediate dismantling pilot project (underwater cutting) |
(~ $300–550/kWe) | |
| Italy | Caorso NPP | BWR 840 MWe[99][100] |
3 years (1978 - Closed in 1987 after referendum in 1986) |
SAFSTOR: 30 years (internal demolition) |
€450 million (dismantling) + €300 million (fuel reprocessing)[101][102][103][104] | |
| Italy | Garigliano NPP (Caserta) | BWR 150 MWe[105] |
? (Closed on March 1, 1982) |
SAFSTOR: 30 years (internal demolition) |
? | |
| Italy | Latina NPP (Foce Verde) | Magnox 210 MWe Gas-graphite[106] |
24 years (1962 - Closed in 1986 after referendum) |
SAFSTOR: 30 years (internal demolition) |
? | |
| Italy | Trino Vercellese NPP | PWR Westinghouse, 270 MWe[107] |
? (Closed in 1986 after referendum) |
SAFSTOR: 30 years (internal demolition) |
? | |
| Netherlands | Dodewaard NPP | BWR Westinghouse 58 MWe[108] |
28 years (1969–1997) |
Defuelling completed SAFSTOR: 40 years |
? | |
| Spain | Vandellós NPP-1 | UNGG 480 MWe (gas-graphite) |
18 years Incident: fire in a turbogenerator (1989) |
SAFSTOR: 30 years (internal demolition) |
Phases 1 and 2: €93 million | |
| Sweden | Barsebäck NPP 1 & 2 | BWR 2 x 615 MW | Reactor 1: 24 years 1975 - 1999 Reactor 2: 28 years 1977 - 2005 |
SAFSTOR: demolition will begin in 2020 | The Swedish Radiation Safety Authority has assessed that the costs for decommissioning and final disposal for the Swedish nuclear power industry may be underestimated by SKB by at least 11 billion Swedish crowns ($1.63 billion)[109] | |
| Switzerland[110] | DIORIT | MWe Gas-graphite (experimental) |
? | SAFSTOR (internal demolition) |
? | |
| Switzerland | LUCENS | 8,3 MWe CO2-heavy water (experimental) |
(1962–1969) Incident: fire in 1969 |
Entombment for ? years SAFSTOR & Decon: 24 years (internal demolition) |
? | |
| Switzerland | SAPHIR | 0,01-0,1 MWe (Light water pool) |
39 years (1955–1994) (Experimental demonstrator) |
In public display since inauguration | ? | |
- Repository for radioactive waste Morsleben: €2.2 billion
Eastern Europe and former Soviet Union
Several nuclear reactors dismantled in the nations born from the former Soviet Union: (Belarus, Russia, Ukraine and others) and reactors dismantled in countries formerly belonging to "Warsaw Pact" and/or to "Comecon", type, electric power and decommissioning cost per kilowatt of power: World Nuclear Association,[111] OSTI (Russia & USA).[12]
| Decommissioned reactors in Eastern Europe | ||||||
| Country: | Location: | Reactor typr: | Operative life: | Decommissioning phase: |
Dismantling cost: | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Bulgaria | Kozloduy NPP-1,2,3,4[112] | PWR VVER-440 (4 x 408 MWe) |
Reactors 1,2 closed in 2003, reactors 3,4 closed in 2006 (Closing forced by European Union) |
De-fuelling | ? | |
| East Germany | Greifswald NPP-1, 2,3,4,5,6 |
VVER-440 5 x 408 MWe |
Reactors 1-5 closed in 1989/1990, reactor 6: finished but never operated |
Immediate dismantling (underwater cutting) |
~ $330/kWe | |
| East Germany | Rheinsberg NPP-1 | VVER-210 70–80 MWe |
24 years (1966–1990) |
In dismantling since 1996 Safstor (underwater cutting) |
~ $330/kWe | |
| East Germany | Stendal NPP-1,2,3,4 | VVER-1000 (4 x 1000 MWe) |
Never activated (1st reactor 85% completed) |
Not radioactive (Cooling towers demolished with explosives) |
? (Structure in exhibition inside an industrial park) | |
| Russia | Mayak[113] (Chelyabinsk-65) |
PUREX plant for uranium enrichment |
Several severe incidents (1946–1956) |
? | ? | |
| Russia | Seversk[114] (Tomsk-7) |
Three plutonium reactors Plant for uranium enrichment |
Two fast-breeder reactors closed (of three), after disarmaments agreements with USA in 2003.[115] |
? | ? | |
| Slovakia | Jaslovske Bohunice NPP-1,2 (180 km east from Vienna)[116][117] |
VVER 440/230 2 X 440 MWe |
(1978–2006) (1980–2008) |
? | ? | |
| Ukraine | Chernobyl NPP-4 (110 km from Kiev) |
RBMK-1000 1000 MWe |
hydrogen explosion, then graphite fire (1986) (INES 7) |
ENTOMBMENT (armed concrete "sarcophagus") |
Past: ? Future: riding sarcophagus in steel[118] | |
Legal aspects
The decommission of a nuclear reactor can only take place after the appropriate licence has been granted pursuant to the relevant legislation. As part of the licensing procedure, various documents, reports and expert opinions have to be written and delivered to the competent authority, e.g. safety report, technical documents and an environmental impact study (EIS).
In the European Union these documents are the basis for the environmental impact assessment (EIA) according to Council Directive 85/337/EEC. A precondition for granting such a licence is an opinion by the European Commission according to Article 37 of the Euratom Treaty. Article 37 obliges every Member State of the European Union to communicate certain data relating to the release of radioactive substances to the Commission. This information must reveal whether and if so what radiological impacts decommissioning – planned disposal and accidental release – will have on the environment, i.e. water, soil or airspace, of the EU Member States.[119] On the basis of these general data, the Commission must be in a position to assess the exposure of reference groups of the population in the nearest neighbouring states.
Cost
In USA many utility estimates now average $325 million per reactor all-up (1998 $).
In France, decommissioning of Brennilis Nuclear Power Plant, a fairly small 70 MW power plant, already cost €480 million (20x the estimate costs) and is still pending after 20 years. Despite the huge investments in securing the dismantlement, radioactive elements such as plutonium, caesium-137 and cobalt-60 leaked out into the surrounding lake.[120][121]
In the UK, decommissioning of the Windscale Advanced Gas Cooled Reactor (WAGR), a 32 MW prototype power plant, cost €117 million.
In Germany, decommissioning of Niederaichbach nuclear power plant, a 100 MW power plant, amounted to more than €143 million.
Decommissioning funds
In Europe there is considerable concern over the funds necessary to finance final decommissioning. In many countries either the funds do not appear sufficient to cover decommissioning and in other countries decommissioning funds are used for other activities, putting decommissioning at risk, and distorting competition with parties who do not have such funds available.[122]
Currently the European Commission is looking into this issue. It is estimated, that during the next two decades, the dismantling of the 150 nuclear reactors in Europe will cost around €150 billion, with an average cost of 1 billion per reactor.[123]
Similar concerns exist in the United States, where the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission has located apparent decommissioning funding assurance shortfalls and requested 18 power plants to address that issue.[124]
International collaboration
Organizations that promote the international sharing of information, knowledge, and experiences related to nuclear decommissioning include the International Atomic Energy Agency, the Organization for Economic Co-operation and Development's Nuclear Energy Agency and the European Atomic Energy Community.[10] In addition, an online system called the Deactivation and Decommissioning Knowledge Management Information Tool was developed under the United States Department of Energy and made available to the international community to support the exchange of ideas and information. The goals of international collaboration in nuclear decommissioning are to reduce decommissioning costs and improve worker safety.[10]
Ships, mobile reactors, military reactors
Many warships and a few civil ships have used nuclear reactors for propulsion. Former Soviet and American warships have been taken out of service and their power plants removed or scuttled. Dismantling of Russian submarines and ships and American submarines and ships is ongoing. Marine power plants are generally smaller than land-based electrical generating stations.
See also
- Nuclear Decommissioning Authority
- Ship-Submarine recycling program
- Nuclear entombment
- Marcoule (French nuclear site)
- D&D KM-IT (Deactivation and Decommissioning Knowledge Management Information Tool)
References
- ↑ Benjamin K. Sovacool. "A Critical Evaluation of Nuclear Power and Renewable Electricity in Asia", Journal of Contemporary Asia, Vol. 40, No. 3, August 2010, p. 373.
- ↑ "Fact Sheets: Decommissioning Of Nuclear Power Plants". National Energy Institute. Retrieved 2014-06-19.
- ↑ DECON: a method of decommissioning, in which structures, systems, and components that contain radioactive contamination are removed from a site and safely disposed at a commercially operated low-level waste disposal facility, or decontaminated to a level that permits the site to be released for unrestricted use shortly after it ceases operation.
- ↑ SAFSTOR: a method of decommissioning in which a nuclear facility is placed and maintained in a condition that allows the facility to be safely stored and subsequently decontaminated (deferred decontamination) to levels that permit release for unrestricted use.
- ↑ ENTOMB: a method of decommissioning, in which radioactive contaminants are encased in a structurally long-lived material, such as concrete. The entombed structure is maintained and surveillance is continued until the entombed radioactive waste decays to a level permitting termination of the license and unrestricted release of the property. During the entombment period, the licensee maintains the license previously issued by the NRC.
- ↑ House of Commons Committee of Public Accounts (4 February 2013). "Nuclear Decommissioning Authority: Managing risk at Sellafield" (PDF). London: The Stationery Office Limited. Retrieved 2 Dec 2013.
- 1 2 "Nuclear Decommissioning: Decommission nuclear facilities". World-nuclear.org. Retrieved 2013-09-06.
- 1 2 "How old are U.S. nuclear power plants and when was the last one built? - FAQ - U.S. Energy Information Administration (EIA)". Eia.gov. Retrieved 2013-09-06.
- ↑ "NRC: Decommissioning of Nuclear Facilities". Nrc.gov. 2013-06-28. Retrieved 2013-09-06.
- 1 2 3 Nuclear Decommissioning article by World Nuclear Association (associaciation of nuclear reactors builders:
- ↑ NRC: Locations of Power Reactor Sites Undergoing Decommissioning
- 1 2 OSTI: Appendix A - A Summary of the Shutdown and Decommissioning Experience for Nuclear Power Plants in the United States and the Russian Federation. Appendix B - A Summary of the Regulatory Environment for the Shutdown and Decommissioning of Nuclear Power Plants in the United States and the Russian Federation. Appendix C - Recommended Outlines for Decommissioning Documentation
- ↑ IAEA: Taking Canada's Gentilly-1 to a "static state (by Balarko Gupta)
- ↑ ASCE: Gentilly-1 a study in nuclear decommission
- ↑ A Chernobyl in Québec? (correspondence on the dangers of Québec's only nuclear plant)
- ↑ Ontario Power Generation: Pickering Nuclear Power
- ↑ FAIREWINDS: Relicensing Pickering Nuclear Generating Station
- ↑ OSTI: Energy Citations Database about Rancho Seco nuclear power plant
- ↑ US-NRC: Rancho Seco nuclear power plant
- ↑ UNITED STATES NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION: Three Mile Island - Decommissioning Unit 2
- ↑ OSTI, Office of Scientific and Technical Information - Shippingport station decommissioning project: start of physical decommissioning
- ↑ US NRC Information Digest 2008-2009
- ↑ Koberstein, Paul (2005-03-09). "Trojan: PGE's Nuclear Gamble". Willamette Week. p. A1. Retrieved 2007-06-15.
- ↑ Yankee Rowe Nuclear Reactor (third nuclear reactor in USA, totally dismantled)
- ↑ Maine Yankee Nuclear Power Station, ME - Power Technology
- ↑ Maine Yankee Decommissioning 80% Complete
- ↑ Maine Yankee Decommissioning Experience Report
- ↑ Connecticut Yankee Nuclear Reactor - Complete Decommissioning
- ↑ SEC-INFORMATION: Connecticut Yankee The United Illuminating Company (UI), a wholly owned subsidiary of UIL Holdings Corporation (UIL), owns 9.5% of the equity of Connecticut Yankee Atomic Power Company. Connecticut Yankee has prepared a draft updated estimate of the cost of decommissioning its nuclear unit, as part of its transition to self performance of decommissioning. Connecticut Yankee's draft updated cost estimate includes an increase of approximately $270 million over the cost estimate reported in November 2002
- ↑ With Exelon's Zion 1 & 2 reactors (2 x 1098 MWe) closed down in 1998 and in Safstor, a slightly different process is envisaged, considerably accelerating the decommissioning. Exelon has contracted with a specialist company - EnergySolutions, to remove the plant and return the site to greenfield status. To achieve this, the plant's licence and decommissioning funds will be transferred to EnergySolutions, which will then be owner and licensee, and the site will be returned to Exelon about 2018. Used fuel would remain on site until taken to the national repository.
- ↑ WEBWIRE: Exelon Nuclear To Accelerate Decommissioning Of Zion Station
- ↑ "NRC: Humboldt Bay". Nrc.gov. Retrieved 2013-09-06.
- ↑ Nuclear Decommissioning article by the association of nuclear reactor builders http://www.world-nuclear.org
- ↑ IAEA: Decommissioning in China
- ↑ PRESS TV (Iranian News Agency): North Korea to decommission nuclear facility
- ↑ THE GUARDIAN: Nuclear agreement: North Korea halts decommissioning
- ↑ SCIDEV: India's energy mix needs nuclear boost
- ↑ ECOWORLD: Nuclear power in India, by Avilash Roul
- ↑ INDIA - CISED: Economics of Nuclear Power Heavy Water Reactors
- ↑ Federation of American Scientists: Osiraq/Tammuz Nuclear Reactor
- 1 2 3 AIEA: Nuclear Power Reactors in Japan
- ↑ TEPCO: Unit No. 1 is now “in a state of meltdown” — Suspects there are holes in bottom of reactor (VIDEO)
- ↑ ALERT: Melted fuel in No. 1 reactor NOT covered with water
- ↑ Fukushima Nuclear Accident Update Log
- ↑ "3 nuclear reactors melted down after quake, Japan confirms". CNN. 7 June 2011. Retrieved 13 July 2011.
- ↑ "'Melt-through' at Fukushima? / Govt report to IAEA suggests situation worse than meltdown". Yomiuri. 8 June 2011. Retrieved 8 June 2011.
- ↑ Nuclear Engineer Arnie Gundersen: Fukushima Meltdown May Result in 1 Million Cases of Cancer
- ↑ Fukushima: Find the corium? Maybe in a few thousand years or so
- ↑ Fukushima: A Nuclear War without a War: The Unspoken Crisis of Worldwide Nuclear Radiation
- ↑ "Japan to raise Fukushima crisis level to worst". Retrieved 12 April 2011.
- ↑ "Japan raises nuclear crisis to same level as Chernobyl". Reuters. 12 April 2011.
- ↑ The Japan Times: Whether Tepco fails or not, it’s taxpayers’ tab
- ↑ Hydrogen levels continue rising at Reactor No. 2 — Now above .50%, highest in months — Explosion risk at 4%
- ↑ Highest hydrogen levels
- ↑ Mainichi: Reactors No. 1 and 2 have holes up to 50 square CENTImeters, analysis says — Biggest hurdle now is filling with water — “Caused by hydrogen explosions” — Half million pounds of highly radioactive fuel inside reactors 1-3
- ↑ Japan Nuclear Expert: “We don’t even know at this point where the melted down core is” under Reactors No. 1, 2 or 3 (VIDEO)
- ↑ Coalition requests UN intervention to stabilize Spent Fuel Pool No. 4 at Fukushima — Endorsed by nuclear experts
- ↑ Footage of gov’t official at Fukushima inspecting support posts under Spent Fuel Pool No. 4 (VIDEOS)
- ↑ “Ability for Unit 4 to withstand another seismic event is rated at zero” -Nuclear Watchdog
- ↑ The Worst Yet to Come? Why Nuclear Experts Are Calling Fukushima a Ticking Time-Bomb - Experts say acknowledging the threat would call into question the safety of dozens of identically designed nuclear power plants in the U.S.
- ↑ Japan Nuclear Expert: There are known to be broken fuel rod assemblies in Spent Fuel Pool No. 4 — Large amount of radioactive material has fallen to bottom — “Many years” to get fuel out (VIDEO)
- ↑ THE GUARDIAN: The Fukushima nuclear plant's slow recovery offers lessons to the US
- ↑ Adam Curry Exposes Robert Alvarez’s Fukushima Spent Fuel Pool Fable on No Agenda
- ↑ The Neutron Economy: Overheated rods & rhetoric
- ↑ The Other Fukushima Nuclear Power Plant
- ↑ Fukushima Daini Nuclear Power Station all shutdown
- ↑ "Reactors in operation". IAEA. 31 December 2009. Retrieved March 12, 2011.
- ↑ NHK-world (22 March 2012 10:52 +0900 (JST)'Wastewater leakage found at Tokai nuclear plant
- ↑ Article in IAEA-TECDOC--1043: Permanent cessation of Tokai power plant's operation.
- ↑ Science Links Japan: Progression of decommissioning of Tokai power plant. First case of power reactor in Japan.
- ↑ Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development/Nuclear Energy Agency, report 2003: Strategy Selection for the Decommissioning of Nuclear Facilities (page 118).
- ↑ European webside on Decommissioning of Nuclear Installations - Decommissioning in Europe
- ↑ Nuclear Decommissioning (Reactor Building Companies) http://www.world-nuclear.org
- ↑ British Parliament: Estimated dates for the dismantling of nuclear reactors in the United Kingdom
- ↑ NEA: Decommissioning in Austria
- ↑ EURONUCLEAR-NEWS: Can Austria Survive Without Nuclear Power ?
- ↑ SUSTAINABILITY INSTITUTE: Zwentendorf, a Nuclear Plant That Will Never Be Turned On
- ↑ "BR3". Eu-decom.be. Retrieved 2013-09-06.
- ↑ "Nuclear Power in Belgium | Belgian Nuclear Energy". World-nuclear.org. Retrieved 2013-09-06.
- 1 2 EU-DECOM-belgium - From 1979 until now: five framework programmes
- ↑ The European Nuclear Decommissioning Training Facility - Mol, Belgium, 2002
- ↑ Nuclear Power in France
- ↑ MAMMOET: Nuclear decommissioning through a bottleneck.
- ↑ WM2009 Conference, March 1-5, 2009 Phoenix, AZ - International Cooperation for the Dismantling of Chooz A Reactor Pressure Vessel – 9087
- ↑ Segmentation of Reactor Vessel Internals
- ↑ "INES – The International Nuclear and Radiological Event Scale" (PDF). International Atomic Energy Agency. 1 August 2008. p. 2. Retrieved 13 March 2011.
- ↑ Les Echos – 18/03/11 – A Saint-Laurent, EDF a renoncé à construire une digue contre les inondations Les Echos, published 2011-03-18, accessed 2011-03-30
- ↑ Decommissioning of LMRs in France
- ↑ SCITECH CONNECT: Phenix Decommissioning Project - Overview
- ↑ WISEINTERNATIONAL: Superphénix; still more problems ahead
- ↑ http://www.ans.org/store/j_3608
- ↑ Decommissioning of Fast Reactors after Sodium Draining
- ↑ http://uk.areva.com/EN/home-824/news2013decommissioning-of-nuclear-installations-world-first-for-the-robot-charli.html
- ↑ UKAEA - Case Studies - Decommissioning - Windscale Advanced Gas-Cooled Reactor Archived October 7, 2008 at the Wayback Machine
- ↑ DIXON, C (1999). "WAGR decommissioning : preparation, removal and disposal of the WAGR heat exchangers". Nuclear energy 38 (6): 361–369.
- ↑ Summary of Responses to Discussion Letter on Future of Windscale
- ↑ "MP’s vow to fight for Winfrith future (From Thisisdorset)". Thisisdorset.net. 2007-09-04. Retrieved 2013-09-06.
- ↑ "Winfrith - Quarterly report for 1 July - 30 September 2011". Hse.gov.uk. Retrieved 2013-09-06.
- ↑ Zona Nucleare - La centrale nucleare in fase di smantellamento ex-ENEL di Caorso (Piacenza)
- ↑ Il Fiume Po: La Centrale Nucleare di Caorso
- ↑ Renzo Guerzoni. "Il decommissioning della centrale nucleare di Caorso" (PDF). Sogin. p. 6. Archived from the original (PDF) on 2015-05-03.
- ↑ Via libera allo smantellamento della centrale di Caorso
- ↑ Accordo tra la SOGIN e la Sudsvik svedese
- ↑ LA REPUBBLICA: Per Caorso un addio lungo mezzo secolo, piano ENEL per smantellare la centrale
- ↑ Zona Nucleare - La centrale nucleare in fase di smantellamento ex-ENEL di Garigliano (Caserta)
- ↑ Zona Nucleare - La centrale nucleare in fase di smantellamento ex-ENEL di Foce Verde (Latina)
- ↑ Zona Nucleare - La centrale nucleare in fase di smantellamento ex-ENEL di Trino Vercellese (Vercelli)
- ↑ NEA: Decommissioning in the Netherlands
- ↑ Sweden plans big rise in fees to nuclear decommissioning fund
- ↑ Nuclear Energy Agency: Decommissioning in Switzerland
- ↑ Nuclear Decommissioning article by the international association of nuclear reactor builders http://www.world-nuclear.org
- ↑ World Nuclear Association: Nuclear Power in Bulgaria
- ↑ La storia dei ripetuti incidenti a Majak
- ↑ UK-Russia Closed Nuclear Cities Partnership
- ↑ Russia shuts second plutonium-producing reactor at Seversk
- ↑ BBC: Austria against restarting of nuclear reactor at Jaslovske Bohunice
- ↑ YAHOO NEWS: Slovakia forced to restart nuclear reactors after Ukrainian gas crisis
- ↑ European Bank for Reconstruction and Development: Breakthrough for Chernobyl nuclear decommissioning efforts (Consortium Novarka to build New Safe Confinement Holtec International to complete Spent Fuel Storage)
- ↑ Heuel-Fabianek, B., Kümmerle, E., Möllmann-Coers, M., Lennartz, R. (2008): The relevance of Article 37 of the Euratom Treaty for the dismantling of nuclear reactors. atw - International Journal for Nuclear Power 6/2008
- ↑ Le Télégramme: Brennilis
- ↑ Ouest-France: "Brennilis : EDF se fait taper sur les doigts"
- ↑ ENDS: Nuclear decommissioning funds “require oversight”
- ↑ Europe Has 150 Nuclear Reactors to Decommission in Two Decades
- ↑ "NRC Requests Plans from 18 Nuclear Power Plants to Address Apparent Decommissioning Funding Assurance Shortfalls" (PDF). Nuclear Regulatory Commission. June 19, 2009. Retrieved 2014-12-30.
External links
- UNITED STATES NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION: Backgrounder on Decommissioning Nuclear Power Plants
- Business Insider - UK: Getting Rid Of Old Nuclear Reactors Worldwide Is Going To Cost Way More Than People Think
- Germany's economy minister Sigmar Gabriel says state won't pay for nuclear decommissioning (May 18, 2014)
- Nuclear Decommissioning Report (www.ndreport.com) is the multi-media platform for the nuclear decommissioning industry.
- decommissioning.info is a portal with information on nuclear decommissioning
- US Nuclear Regulatory Commission
- European website on decommissioning of nuclear installations
- Decommissioning Fund Methodologies for Nuclear Installations in the EU, rapport by the German Wuppertal Institute, commissioned by the European Commission. May 2007.
- Master 'Nuclear Energy' - Decommissioning and Waste management
| ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||