25 Years ago
What happened 25 years ago? We go back to news from our 1979 WISE Bulletin, comparing anti-nuclear news then and now.
Then
In issue 6 of WISE Bulletin we wrote about decommissioning issues in Germany: “the government of Lower Saxony, in West Germany wants guarantees, from the companies that operate nuclear power stations, that the cost of decommissioning will be paid by the operators. These guarantees are wanted before a construction permit is issued”. (WISE Bulletin 6, October 1979)
Now
In the German state of Lower Saxony, four NPPs were built: Stade (now closed), Emsland (one reactor closed, one operating), Unterweser and Grohnde. In addition, three underground repository sites were selected for waste disposal (Konrad, Asse and Gorleben). (Informationskreis Kernenergie, 23 December 2004)
The decommissioning of nuclear reactors is a very complex and costly operation. Huge parts of the reactor internals and buildings must be disposed of as radioactive waste and to date only a small number of reactors have been completely dismantled. In all these cases the real costs of dismantling were higher than originally estimated. In many countries, dismantling will be postponed for decades to allow money to be raised from interest growth on decommissioning funds.
Early assumptions by the nuclear industry estimated the costs of decommissioning at 10-15% of original construction costs. Experience has since shown that these costs represent much higher percentages in reality. Decommissioning costs of the U.S. Yankee Row reactor increased from US$368 million to US$508 million due to the elevated costs for spent fuel storage. When the Spanish Vandellos I reactor closed in 1990, the decommissioning costs were estimated at US$138.3 million. Three years later, this figure had tripled to US$563 million. (WISE News Communique 394, 21 May 1993; WISE News Communique 485, 23 January 1998)
To guarantee that reactor operators are fully responsible for the dismantling of their reactors, sufficient amounts of money must be set aside and used only for decommissioning purposes. A 2003 Greenpeace study showed that European Union member states have adopted extremely different management systems for decommissioning funds. Some countries, such as France and Germany, even allowed operators to use money from such funds to finance company expansions. In such cases, there exists a risk that decommissioning money will no longer be available when it is really needed. (WISE/NIRS Nuclear Monitor 586, 25 April 2003)
The European Commission has failed to set common rules for decommissioning funds. Though the parliament had asked for separate funds managed by independent bodies, the Commission only recommended to set sufficient money aside. (WISE/NIRS Nuclear Monitor 619, 12 November 2004)
WISE-Amsterdam/NIRS
ISSN: 1570-4629
Reproduction of this material is encouraged. Please give credit when reprinting.
Editorial team: Tinu Otoki (WISE Amsterdam), Michael Mariotte (NIRS). With contributions from Urgewald, Russell D. Hoffman, European Renewable Energies Foundation and Global Network Against Weapons & Nuclear Power in Space.
The next issue (621-622) will be mailed out February, 2005.
We would like to wish all our readers and contributors the very best for the holiday season and success in all activities (campaign or otherwise) in 2005!