Interim Storage of Spent Nuclear Fuel - Woods Hole Research Center

26
needs of their reactors, and the uncertainties surrounding
spent fuel management have clouded the future of nuclear
energy in many of these countries. Each country faces its
own unique set of issues and problems. Below, we provide
brief discussions of the spent fuel storage situations in a few
selected countries.
Taiwan. Management of spent fuel and other nuclear
wastes has become the subject of enormous political controversy
in Taiwan, and an important factor in the heated
national debate over whether to complete a new nuclear
power plant. 76 Taiwan, which has six nuclear power reactors
at three sites, is a small, densely populated, and seismically
active country with highly contentious politics—not
an ideal combination for nuclear waste management. All of
Taiwan’s spent fuel is U.S.-obligated, and the United States
has not given its consent to reprocessing, judging Taiwan to
be in a region of proliferation concern. As of early 1998,
Taiwan had some 1,950 tHM of spent fuel in storage, with
115 tHM of additional spent fuel being discharged each
year, and adequate storage capacity remaining for only a
few years. 77 Taipower, the national utility, has re-racked the
fuel in its storage pools, but nonetheless projects that the
reactors at Chinshan might run out of space by 2007 if additional
storage capacity is not provided, and hence hopes to
build a dry cask storage facility by 2005. 78 This has been
politically contentious, however, and Taipower’s plans have
been delayed both by the expected high cost of benefits to
potential host communities to get them to accept spent
fuel, 79 and by the fact that the particular cask design
Taipower initially chose has been under intense regulatory
scrutiny from the U.S. NRC (whose judgments are influen-
INTERIM STORAGE OF SPENT NUCLEAR FUEL
tial with Taiwan’s regulators) after serious quality control
problems in cask manufacture were revealed in the late
1990s. The cask manufacturer has now withdrawn the cask
from NRC licensing review. 80 Taiwan has also pursued discussions
with a variety of parties about shipping spent fuel
or low-level nuclear wastes to sites in other countries, as
described in Chapter 4, but none of these options have yet
come to fruition. The ultimate outcome of Taiwan’s nuclear
waste dilemmas remains very much in doubt.
Republic of Korea. Korea has also had substantial political
controversies over spent fuel and nuclear waste management.
Korea has 14 nuclear power reactors, both LWRs
and CANDUs, and plans to build more. Like Taiwan, much
of the fuel in Korea is under U.S. obligations, and the United
States has not given its consent to reprocessing, so the
fuel remains in storage. By mid-1998, some 3,400 tHM of
spent fuel had been discharged from these reactors, and
some 500 tHM of additional fuel was being discharged each
year. 81 An initial plan for an away-from-reactor dry storage
facility was put off after intense public opposition in the
early 1990s, so fuel is currently stored at the reactor sites. 82
The fuel pools at these sites have been re-racked to increase
their capacity, fuel has been moved between neighboring
reactor units, and at-reactor dry storage for both CANDU
and LWR fuel has been added in recent years. 83 Unless additional
storage capacity is provided, it is expected that storage
capacity at some of the reactor sites would be filled by
2006. 84 Transshipment of fuel between reactor sites is being
considered, and could extend the available storage capacity
for a considerable period, particularly if fuel burnup were
also increased. 85 Additional at-reactor dry cask storage is
76 Mark Hibbs, “Battle Over Lungmen Forces Taiwan Waste Debate Into Open,” Nucleonics Week, October 5, 2000.
77 Estimates provided by the IAEA.
78 Mark Hibbs, “Taiwan Planning on Dry Storage for Its Spent Fuel Inventory,” Nuclear Fuel, November 1, 1999.
79 Ibid.
80 Mark Hibbs, “KEPCO, Taipower Will Not Rush Decisions on Spent Fuel Storage,” Nuclear Fuel, May 15, 2000.
81 D.K. Min, G.S. You, S.G. Ro, and H.S. Park, “Current Status of Spent Fuel Management in the Republic of Korea,” in
Storage of Spent Fuel from Power Reactors, IAEA-TECDOC-1089, July 1999.
82 Jungmin Kang, Evaluation of Additional Spent Fuel Storage Requirements in Korea Through the Year 2030, PU/CEES Report
No. 312 (Princeton, NJ: Center for Energy and Environmental Studies, Princeton University, January 1999).
83 Min, You, Ro, and Park, “Current Status of Spent Fuel Management in the Republic of Korea,” op. cit.
84 Min, You, Ro, and Park, “Current Status of Spent Fuel Management in the Republic of Korea,” op. cit., and Kang, Evaluation
of Additional Spent Fuel Storage Requirements in Korea Through the Year 2030, op. cit.
85 Kang, Evaluation of Additional Spent Fuel Storage Requirements in Korea Through the Year 2030, op. cit. See also Hibbs,
“KEPCO, Taiwpower Will Not Rush Decisions on Spent Fuel Storage,” op. cit.