RD&D-Programme 2004 - SKB

Start of operation
Start of construction
Application
2000 2005 2010 2015 2020 2025 2030 2035 2040 2045 2050
Deep repository
Nuclear fuel programme
Feasibility
studies
Site investigations,
design
Encapsulation
Development, design
Construction,
detailed characterization
Construction,
trial operation
Initial
operation
Regular operation
Final disposal, operational and decommissioning waste (SFR)
LILW programme
Design, build-out Operation
Interim storage, core components
Existing facilities
Final disposal, other long-lived waste
Siting
Construction
Operation
Figure 1. Main features of SKB’s long-term plan.
A1.2 Points of departure
The nuclear waste programme of today is the result of nearly 30 years of continuous work.
During this period, a large part of the nuclear waste management system needed in Sweden
has been built and put into operation. This has been done with the support of a broad R&D
programme, and extensive knowledge capital has been accumulated. Concrete plans, as well
as resources and commitments, exist for the rest of the programme. Regular payments to the
Nuclear Waste Fund will ensure stable financing of the future programme, unlike anything
existing in any other sector of industry. Administratively, the programme has gradually found its
forms and now rests on a stable foundation of rules and regulations with a clear division of roles
both at the national level and in the municipalities that are particularly affected. Finally, the
programme enjoys broad support.
What has been achieved so far can be regarded as painstakingly accumulated “capital”, which
is now contributing in several respects to driving the programme forward. With many years of
unbroken progress to look back on, this driving force tends to be taken for granted. However,
this capital could be lost, for example if the continuity is broken and the knowledge capital is
squandered. A vital aspect of the strategy for moving forward is therefore to nurture and protect
what has already been achieved. The importance of this can be seen clearly when a comparison
is made with the situation in many other countries.
Siting of the remaining facilities in the system is based on a stepwise process with wellunderpinned
and firmly anchored decisions. The process is fully transparent and allows
concerned municipalities to decide freely whether they wish to participate or not. This
model has proved to lead forward, albeit at a somewhat slower pace than foreseen when the
programme was initiated. The conclusion as far as SKB is concerned is that the established work
model will be of great value now that the programme is entering the siting phase. An important
lesson is that sufficient time must be set aside to gather a solid factual basis for decisions.
This applies to both the big decisions regarding the siting and subsequent commissioning of
the facilities, and the many smaller decisions that have to be made regarding e.g. details in
the design of the facilities. The timetable must also allow time for public insight, consultation
with concerned stakeholders, and anchoring of the problem in a democratic decision process.
At the same time, implementation must proceed at a sufficiently intense pace to meet SKB’s
basic requirement that the waste from the nuclear energy programme should not burden future
362 RD&D-Programme 2004