2nd International Workshop on
Radiological Sciences and Applications (IWRSA)
Vienna, Austria
March 16-18, 2005
Summary Report of Discussion Session 1A:
Peaceful versus Non-peaceful Use of Nuclear
Technologies
Professor Heino Nitsche,
Presented March 17, 2005, 8:10 to 8:30 a.m.
It was suggested to not
dispose the actinide waste but to burn it via breeder reactor technology.
Assistance was requested
from IAEA for equipment to track sensitive materials in Central Asia
(Uzbekistan, Kazakhstan, Kyrgyzstan).
Increased trafficking of nuclear material may become a future concern
because this material may currently not be as securely protected as it should
be.
The potential increase of
nuclear power in developing countries may require regional or other nuclear
waste disposal/control measures for less developed countries. Establishment of regional and
international repositories for disposal of high-level nuclear wastes was
discussed. This may be accompanied
by political acceptance problems to dispose nuclear waste in specific
countries. The Pangea proposal to
dispose high-level nuclear waste in Western Australia was given as an example
for this. The Australian population
did not accept this proposal at all and accepted even the disposal of low-level
nuclear waste only if it was disposed on an island away from the Australian
main island. This brought the
discussion to the subject that only economically more challenged countries may
be willing to accept the waste because of certain economic benefits. The idea was discussed that in analogy
to the carbon tracking regime where countries can buy and sell carbon credits,
nuclear waste material could be handled in a similar fashion.
A delegate stated that the
main problem of nuclear waste disposal is not a technological issue but a
political one. The delegate
suggested the use of underground cavities formed by nuclear weapons testing for
nuclear waste disposal. It was
suggested to propose a feasibility study in the form of a joint international
demonstration project to study the technical, political, and sociological
aspects of such a disposal concept.
This international demonstration project should also suggest a specific
site.
It was generally remarked
that a large credibility gap exists for nuclear energy and waste. An urgent need exists to better educate
populations on the subject to regain credibility. This was thought as difficult
because it appears that intellectual leadership in this field is rapidly declining.
Perhaps populations may only be willing accept the use of nuclear technologies
once they experience the immediate consequences when these resources become
unavailable. The energy
crisis in California during the early 2000s was given as an example. Before the
shortage of energy only 29% of the population accepted nuclear energy
technology; whereas directly after experiencing the lack of energy and its
consequences, the acceptance increased to 61%.
The benefits of the use of
radioactivity need to be better disseminated among populations. So far the
discussion is mainly focused on the disposal of nuclear waste and the so-called
danger of nuclear energy and has a very negative impact. A more aggressive approach needs
to be taken to inform populations about the many positive aspects of nuclear
technology use, such as radio-pharmaceuticals, radiation treatments, radiology,
avoidance of greenhouse gases, to name only a few. Generally, populations need to be more educated on risk,
exposure and dose rate.
It was discussed that most
of the populations do not understand that the major oil supplies come
essentially from six countries. There was a discussion about the current oil
reserves and the opinions about the subject varied substantially. New technologies such as coal
liquification and the explorations of shale and oil sands may play an important
role in future energy supplies.
In closing, it was
remarked that we are not experts on sociological issues and that our goal is to
provide technical and engineering solutions and their uses to assist policy
makers and stake holders with their making of decision.