Premier Debate 2016 September/October ld brief

NEG—Spec

Decommissioning Spec

Decommissioning processes are a key element of the nuclear power debate-the public doesn’t know about it, so discussion of the issue is key to raise awareness.

IEA 15 ["Technology Roadmap: Nuclear Energy." IEA Technology Roadmaps (n.d.): n. pag. 2015. Web. 8 Aug. 2016] [Premier]

Decommissioning will become an increasingly important part of the nuclear sector activity in the coming decades, as dozens of reactors will be shut down. Industry must provide further evidence that it can dismantle these plants safely and cost effectively. Further improvements in technology (for instance, robotics) and adaptation of regulations (for instance, allowing the clearance of nonradioactive material from a power plant as ordinary or municipal waste) can help to reach these objectives. It is important that decommissioning activities are covered by sufficient funds, and governments have a responsibility to ensure that this financial security is in place. In most countries, operators are required to set aside dedicated funds, the costs of which are internalised in the cost of nuclear electricity. Once a nuclear facility is closed permanently, whether it is for technical, economic or political reasons, it needs to be put into a state where it can do no harm to the public, workers or the environment. This includes removal of all radioactive materials, decontamination and dismantling, and finally demolition and site clearance. This process, known as decommissioning, consists of several stages that can take place over many years. The general public is often not well informed about decommissioning activities, and the ill-founded belief that decommissioning of nuclear facilities is an unsolved issue is one of the factors that can explain poor public acceptance of nuclear power. This Roadmap recognises that decommissioning is a significant challenge given the size of the fleet that will be retired in the coming decades. However, it is also a great opportunity for new business and skills to be developed. Demonstrating that NPPs that have been shut down can be dismantled safely and in a financially controlled manner is a key factor for allowing new build projects to move ahead. Today, decommissioning is a well-regulated activity of the nuclear fuel cycle, with specific safety guides and standards (e.g. IAEA, Western European Nuclear Regulators Association [WENRA]). As of December 2014, 150 power reactors had been permanently shut down and were in various stages of decommissioning. International information exchange forums exist, where processes are reviewed, lessons learnt and best practices shared. But it is also an area of technological expertise where operators and new industries compete (see Box 10).

Two main methods of decommissioning-can’t just dump the shit somewhere

IEA 15 ["Technology Roadmap: Nuclear Energy." IEA Technology Roadmaps (n.d.): n. pag. 2015. Web. 8 Aug. 2016] [Premier]

There are essentially two main strategies for decommissioning: (i) immediate dismantling, where after the nuclear facility closes, equipment, structures, and radioactive materials are removed or decontaminated to a level that permits release of the property and termination of the operating licence within a period of about 10 to 15 years; (ii) deferred dismantling, where a nuclear facility is maintained and monitored in a condition that allows the radioactivity to decay – typically for about 30-40 years, after which the plant is dismantled and the property decontaminated. A third strategy exists called entombment, where all or part of the facility is encased in a structurally long-lived material. It is not a recommended option, although it may be a solution under exceptional circumstances (such as after a severe accident).

There are three types of decommissioning strategies and it makes a big difference

Pedraza 12

Jorge Morales Pedraza, consultant on international affairs, ambassador to the IAEA for 26 yrs, degree in math and economy sciences, former professor, Energy Science, Engineering and Technology : Nuclear Power: Current and Future Role in the World Electricity Generation : Current and Future Role in the World Electricity Generation, New York. [Premier]

The decommissioning of nuclear power plants means the removal of some or all of the regulatory controls that apply to a nuclear site whilst securing the long-term safety of the public and the environment. Underlying this there are other practical objectives to be achieved, including release of valuable assets such as site and buildings for unrestricted alternative use, recycling and reuse of materials and the restoration of environmental amenity. In all cases, the basic objective is to achieve an endpoint that is sensible in technical, social and financial terms, that properly protects workers, the public and the environment and, in summary, complies with the basic principles of sustainable development. [131] In other words, the term decommissioning covers all of the administrative and technical actions associated with cessation of operation and withdrawal from service. It starts when a facility is shut down and extends to eventual removal of the facility from its site (termed dismantling). These actions may involve some or all of the activities associated with dismantling of plant and equipment, decontamination of structures and components, remediation of contaminated ground and disposal of the resulting wastes.

There are three main decommissioning strategies that can be applied. These are the following: a) immediate dismantling; b) deferred dismantling, also called safe enclosure; and c) entombment. In the first case, a facility is dismantled right after the removal of materials and waste from the facility. In the second case, after the removal of materials and waste, the facility is kept in a state of safe enclosure for 30-100 years followed by dismantling. In the third case, a facility is encapsulated on site and kept isolated until the radionuclides decayed to levels that allow a release from nuclear regulatory control. The present trend is in favor of immediate dismantling. [120]

The selection of the correct decommissioning strategy depends of several factors that can be grouped into the following three categories: a) policy and socio-economic factors; b) technological and operational factors; and c) long-term uncertainties. Policy and socioeconomic factors are dominated by the national and/or the local situation, which varies from country to country. Countries with important nuclear power programmes tend to dismantle obsolete nuclear power plants immediately in order to use the sites for the construction of new facilities. Decommissioning costs associated to a nuclear power reactor include, among other elements, the following components: a) dismantling the nuclear power plant; b) waste treatment; c) disposal of all types of radioactive waste; d) security; e) site cleanup; and f) project management. Dismantling and disposal represents a major share, each accounting for approximately 30% of the total decommissioning cost. The average cost estimates are in the range of US$320 to US$420/kWe for most nuclear power reactor types. In general, GCR are more expensive to decommission than water-cooled reactors, because they must dispose of large quantities of graphite. The cost for dismantling the older, smaller 160 MWe nuclear power reactor at Zorita nuclear power plant in Spain has recently been estimated by Union Fenosa at €850 Euro/kW and the dismantling of the German pla nt Obrigheim was estimated at € 1,400/kWe.

National policy may influence decommissioning strategy to be selected either directly or indirectly. If a national decommissioning policy is reflected in legislation, direct influence is exerted by way of the legal framework, and the extent of this influence depends on the degree to which laws are either prescriptive or enabling. Policies and regulations vary from country to country and affect some or all of the issues associated with public and occupational health and safety, environmental protection, the definition of end-state, waste management, reuse and recycling of materials, arrangements for release of materials from regulatory control and matters concerning regional development. However, national policy may influence decommissioning strategy indirectly. In this case, influence may be by way of national policies that are not concerned specifically with the process of decommissioning but may be to it by way of wider issues. These may include matters such as the future use of power, economic and societal issues associated with the effects of shutting down industrial facilities, safety issues and broad financial issues concerned with costs, the available funds and the timing of their deployment. Although perhaps not associated national policy, as such, the prospects for continued availability of qualified and trained may also have such an influence. [120]

Country Spec

1: Depth – without specifying a country, there’s no way to have an in-depth debate about the morality of nuclear power. Relevant background context like the political climate, renewable development, other energy resources available, a country’s wealth, etc. play a role and we can debate those factors only if we limit the scope of the rez.

2: Clash – France has 80% nuclear and probably should have nuclear power, but Iran probably shouldn’t. These vastly different examples make it impossible to draw a general conclusion when evaluating the Iran aff vs. the France DA. There’s no clash and it’s impossible to evaluate.

3: Stable ground – without specifying, we don’t know what the aff defends. All countries, hypothetical countries, countries in general, or on balance? Only my interp solves this ambiguity so the aff can’t delink neg DAs.