Disposal of Spent Fuel Science and Acceptance in Sweden Magnus Holmqvist President SKB International AB

Sweden 10 reactors at 3 sites (after June 1st 2005) ~45% electricity 10,600 (12,000) tonnes of spent fuel Phase out of 2 + 2 reactors in 2017-2020

License application submitted March 2011 Backfill Spent Fuel Repository at Forsmark Rock Buffer Både lokalisering- och teknik Platsvalet genomfördes i juni 2009 Två miljarder år gammalt urberg Tektonisk lins Få vattenförande sprickor De sprickor som finns är mycket gamla Stabilitet ger förutsägbarhet Synnerligen väl lämpad plats för vår metod Canister Typområden 1977–1985 Översiktsstudier 1990-tal Förstudier 1993–2002 Encapsulation plant in Oskarshamn

The KBS-3 concept for disposal of spent nuclear fuel Fuel pellet of uranium dioxide Spent nuclear fuel Copper canister with cast-iron insert Cladding tube BWR fuel assemblies Bedrock Bentonite clay Primary safety function: Total containment Secondary safety function: Retardation Final repository for spent nuclear fuel

Research, development and siting A long science based process 2015 Technology implementation, licensing and building of encapsulation plant and repository 2010 2015 m/s Sigrid in operation Site investigations, Technology development 2005 2010 Site selection Forsmark 2000 Bentonite Laboratory 2005 Feasibility studies and development of scientific basis 2000 1995 Canister Laboratory Äspö Hard Rock Laboratory 1995 Methodology development 1990 1990 1988 RD&D programme reviewed and approved every three years SFR in operation 1985 1985 Clab in operation 1983 1980 KBS-3 concept 1976 m/s Sigyn in operation

Geological disposal - a new and broad field for research in 1976 Long time perspectives requires detailed understanding of processes Broad and cross-cutting scientific research needed – basic and applied: Fuel behaviour and dissolution Canister corrosion and mechanical stability Buffer stability Hydrogeology in fractured rock Geochemistry and groundwater processes Speciation and transport of radionuclides in buffer and rock Surface ecosystem – changes over time (glaciations) R&D at universities, in laboratories and in the field – driven by safety assessments

Safety assessment – scientific areas Climate Surface ecosystem Transport of radionuclides Geology Bentonite Hydrogeology Canister material Geochemistry and Microbiology Fuel

SKB’s full scale laboratories Äspö Hard Rock Laboratory, in operation since 1996 Preceeded by Stripa mine project 1977 -86 Canister Laboratory, in operation since 1998 Bentonite Laboratory, in operation since 2007 8

An open and peer reviewed RD&D process All results from research activities published openly in SKB reports and in peer reviewed journals RD&D programme published every three years describing: Results of RD&D performed Plans for RD&D still needed Plans for development of remaining facilities Formal review by the Swedish Radiation Safety Authority (SSM) based on a broad review by scientific communities, affected municipalities, NGOs and others Approved by the Government as planning document Provides possibilities to adapt and change directions.

International cooperation – key for success International cooperation sought from the start of the project, as All knowledge was not available in Sweden, and Other countries were more advanced International projects coordinated by SKB in Swedish facilities: Stripa Mine Project (under NEA auspices) JSS project with Japan on vitrified waste Äspö Hard Rock Laboratory – wide international participation EU projects in Äspö Participation in projects abroad International peer review (NEA) of the safety assessment submitted with the licence application

Siting of the repository for spent nuclear fuel Knowledge accumulation Siting process Decision on site 2009 Hultsfred Malå Nyköping Oskarshamn Storuman Tierp Älvkarleby Östhammar Oskarshamn (Laxemar) Östhammar (Forsmark) Feasibility studies 1992-2001 Site investigations 2002-2007 Study sites 1977-1985 General siting studies 1990s Licensing ca. 2011-2020 Construction ca. 2020-2030 Feasibility studies – describes local pros and cons – opens local discussions

From then to now Announcement of site selection Forsmark June 3rd, 2009 Protests against drilling at a study sites

Public consultation and involvement - key to success Broad national information Focused dialogue with potential local communities Strong local involvement of SKB and municipalities Ear-marked funding for municipality involvement

Factors for success Clear responsibilities for implementation and financing Scientific/engineering approach Trustworthy regulator Strong public involvement Close cooperation with local municipalities

Remaining challenges Licensing and accepting a First of a Kind facility Going from theory to practice – Industrialization Keeping public confidence

Thank you for your attention