The world is striving for a circular economy. Kristina Gillin reflects on what this means for the decommissioning of nuclear power plants
In line with sustainable development, there is a growing awareness that we need to move from a linear to a circular economy. In a circular economy, the things we use are built to last and can be repaired, reused, reused and recycled. Other important features of the circular economy are thinking about the life cycle and avoiding waste.
More and more reactors now have to be shut down. The question arises as to how a nuclear facility can be decommissioned in accordance with the principles of the circular economy.
Current Practices
The conventional model for a nuclear life cycle is linear (facilities are set up, built, operated and decommissioned) and materials are managed from cradle to grave. But some of today’s practices are already in line with a circular economy.
The renovation and extension of the service life of existing plants, as well as the reprocessing of spent fuel elements and the disposal and recycling of metals and other materials, strongly reflect circular principles. Other examples include reusing components from shutdown reactors in operations and converting buildings for waste processing and storage rather than building new ones. The use of material from demolished buildings as “filler material” when restoring a site also corresponds to circularity when the buildings cannot be renovated or converted.
The common practice of the waste hierarchy is a step in the right direction. But for a nuclear power plant site, the waste hierarchy is not enough to be truly circular as there is no connection to planning and waste is not removed.
Circulation Considerations
In a circular economy, products (which can be easily transferred) and capital goods (such as nuclear power plants) must be viewed differently. When looking at a nuclear site through a round lens, two different views must be considered.
One relates to space and at various levels – from the materials within a nuclear facility to the components, buildings, local communities and entire regions. Circularity can be achieved either within each of these levels (e.g. by converting buildings on the site) or between them (e.g. by reusing emergency power generators at a different industrial location within the municipality or region).
Decommissioning projects can improve the circularity of products and assets across site boundaries. For example, you can reuse products that are no longer used by others (like discarded hotel towels for workers) or repurpose buildings in surrounding communities to support nuclear back-end management. An example of the latter is SKB’s canister laboratory in Oskarshamn, Sweden. This building used to be part of a shipyard; now it is the center for developing technologies to encapsulate Sweden’s spent fuel in copper canisters.
The second view is time. The site will evolve through phases where the main activities will vary from construction to operation, safe storage, dismantling and demolition, site restoration, and finally use after decommissioning. Similarly, circularity can be achieved within each of the phases or from one phase to another.
Different requirements
Since design enables a circular economy, future reactors are much better prepared for it than existing ones. But the current nuclear power plants, which are generally not designed for a circular life cycle, have greater potential than many might think to align their decommissioning with the principles of the circular economy. Several repurposed research reactor facilities are good examples of this, like the Swedish reactor hall R1, which is now a place for art installations, concerts, media research, live theater, film productions and more.
Different regulatory requirements lead to different requirements for achieving circularity. This includes the approaches and criteria of the various countries for the release and whether buildings and other structures may be rededicated or have to be removed.
The interest of governments, owners and operators in a circular economy affects the potential to achieve the circular economy, as does the views of local stakeholders and the public.
When planning decommissioning, the input of stakeholders and the general public is crucial, but as opinions can change this can be challenging. It is not uncommon to see outside voices in favor of maintaining reactor buildings after demolition, which is a sign that acceptance and support for site repurposing is likely to increase over time.
looking ahead
To reap the benefits of a circular economy, more work is needed to understand what a circular approach brings to nuclear decommissioning.
The International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) recognizes the importance of looking at nuclear back-end management from a circular economy perspective and has organized several best practice sharing events.
“The IAEA largely supports sustainability and circular economy considerations when decommissioning nuclear power plants that are in line with UN sustainability goals,” says Christophe Xerri, director of the IAEA’s nuclear fuel cycle and waste technology division.
A circular approach to the decommissioning of nuclear power plants not only has benefits for society as a whole, but also benefits for owners and operators of nuclear power plants. Vladimir Michal, Head of the Decommissioning Team in the IAEA Decommissioning and Environmental Rehabilitation Section, explains: “Decommissioning nuclear facilities based on sustainability and circular economy principles can bring significant benefits, including less waste, lower costs and a lower risk of implementation delays. It’s also a great way to engage stakeholders and promote effective communication with the public. “
In view of the different assumptions and interpretations of what nuclear circularity means, a framework has to be developed that provides different procedures for existing and future reactors. International cooperation in this area is of crucial importance in order to ensure applicability regardless of regulatory requirements.
As regulations and standards strongly influence the potential for circularity, new guidance is needed to ensure that the requirements made do not prevent a nuclear concessionaire from – and better, actively encourage – to adopt the principles of circularity.
The time to develop a framework and review regulations and standards from a circularity perspective couldn’t be better. While several countries have ambitions to build large fleets of small modular reactors (SMRs), the nuclear industry, host communities, and society in general have much to gain if they can be designed for a truly circular life cycle.
About the author
Kristina Gillin is Principal Consultant, Nuclear Decommissioning and Waste Management at Vysus Group
Comments are closed.