Advertisement

Managing Liability: Comparing Radioactive Waste Disposal and Carbon Dioxide Storage

Chapter
  • 948 Downloads
Part of the Advances in Global Change Research book series (AGLO, volume 44)

Abstract

Liability issues are a major concern for final disposal of radioactive waste (RW) and for geological storage of carbon dioxide (CO2). We develop a list of overarching questions that drive liability and present a discussion of where managing liability for geological CO2 storage and RW disposal is fundamentally different and where it is similar. Governments have been trying to manage high-level RW from civilian reactors for over 40 years and there are ample lessons in the interplay between technology, policy, politics and society that are relevant for both future nuclear energy and geological CO2 storage projects. We examine the history of managing liability for RW using case studies on Germany, France, Finland and the USA to better understand how liability for RW is currently structured. We compare this to potential liabilities for geological CO2 storage and outline current proposals for managing liability in the US and European Union. From this, we develop ‘lessons learned’ from past management of RW that could help to both structure liability and ultimately deploy future RW and geological CO2 storage projects. We conclude that while establishment of a legal framework is important for future development of nuclear energy and geological CO2 storage, it is insufficient to guarantee deployment. Rather, legal liability is embedded within a larger socio-political context and addressing these broader concerns is vital for future RW disposal and geological CO2 storage deployment.

Keywords

Liability Radioactive waste Carbon capture and storage Geological storage Comparative analysis 

Notes

Acknowledgements

Thanks to the two anonymous reviewers, Ferenc Toth of the IAEA and to Melisa Pollak of the University of Minnesota for help with this article.

References

  1. Anderson DR (1978) Limits on liability: the Price-Anderson Act versus other laws. J Risk Insur 45:651–674CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. ASN (Autorité de sûreté nucléaire–Nuclear Safety Authority) (2009) The French Nuclear Safety Authority. http://www.asn.fr/french-nuclear-safety-authority/about-asn. Accessed 10 Apr 2009
  3. Bachu S, McEwen T (2011) Geological media and factors for the long-term emplacement and isolation of carbon dioxide and radioactive waste. In this volumeGoogle Scholar
  4. Beaubien SE, Lombardi S, Ciotoli G, Annunziatellis A, Hatziyannis G, Metaxas A, Pearce JM (2004) Potential hazards of CO2 leakage in storage systems–learning from natural systems. In: Rubin ES, Keith DW, Gilboy CF (eds) Greenhouse Gas Control Technologies: Proceedings of the 7th International Conference on Greenhouse Gas Control Technologies, vol 1. Elsevier, Oxford, pp 551–560Google Scholar
  5. Bennhold K (2005) EDF shares fail to light up market: no price change in first day of trading. International Herald Tribune. http://www.iht.com/articles/2005/11/21/business/edf.php
  6. BfS (Bundesamt für Strahlenschutz–Federal Office for Radiation Protection) (2009a) English description of who is responsible for operation of federal radioactive waste repositories. Atomic Energy Act (AtG) § 9a para. 3. http://www.bfs.de/en/endlager/publika/verant_betrieb_endl.html
  7. BfS (Bundesamt für Strahlenschutz–Federal Office for Radiation Protection) (2009b) Introduction to the Gorleben site. http://www.bfs.de/en/endlager/gorleben/einfuehrung.html Accessed 10 Apr 2009
  8. Birraux C (2006) The French 2006 Act on the sustainable management of radioactive materials and wastes: a major breakthrough. Parliamentary Office for Science and Technology Assessment. http://www.icgr2007.org/downloads/background/Birraux_2006-Act-Presentation.pdf
  9. BMU (Bundesministerium für Umwelt, Naturschutz und Reaktorsicherheit–Federal Ministry for the Environment, Nature Conservation and Nuclear Safety) (2009) Act on the peaceful utilization of atomic energy and the protection against its hazards (Atomic Energy Act). http://www.bmu.de/files/pdfs/allgemein/application/pdf/atg_english.pdf
  10. Business Wire (2009) Zurich creates two new insurance policies to support green house gas mitigation technologies, addressing the unique needs of carbon capture and sequestration. Business Wire, 19 Jan. http://www.businesswire.com/news/home/20090119005535/en
  11. Cameron PD (2007) The revival of nuclear power: an analysis of the legal implications. J Environ Law 19:71–87CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Cawley K (2007) CBO Testimony: statement of Kim Cawley, Chief, Natural and physical resources cost estimates unit, on the federal government’s liabilities under the nuclear waste policy act before the committee on the budget, US House of Representatives. Congressional Budget Office. http://www.cbo.gov/doc.cfm?index=8675&type=0
  13. CCSReg Project (2009) Carbon capture and sequestration: framing the issues for regulation. http://www.ccsreg.org/pdf/CCSReg_3_9.pdf
  14. Clinton WJ (2000) Message to the Senate returning without approval the nuclear waste policy amendments act of 2000. United States Government Printing Office. http://frwebgate.access.gpo.gov/cgi-bin/getdoc.cgi?dbname=106_cong_documents&docid=f:sd019.106.pdf
  15. Dawson JI, Darst RG (2006) Meeting the challenge of permanent nuclear waste disposal in an expanding Europe: transparency, trust and democracy. Environ Polit 15:610–627CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. de Figueiredo M (2007) The liability of carbon dioxide storage. Ph.D dissertation,. Massachusetts Institute of Technology, CambridgeGoogle Scholar
  17. Deutch J, Moniz EJ, Ansloabehere S, Driscoll M, Gray P, Holdren J, Joskow P, Lester R, Todreas N (2003) The future of nuclear power. Massachusetts Institute of Technology, Cambridge. http://web.mit.edu/nuclearpower/
  18. Dietze W (2004) Overview on the legal issues involved in the international disposal of high-level radioactive waste–with special consideration to the regional disposal in the European Union. SAPIERR Working Group Meeting. Piestany, 19–20 Feb 2004. www.sapierr.net/files1/Documents/Dietze.doc
  19. Directorate-General of Energy and Transport (2008) Radioactive waste. http://ec.europa.eu/energy/nuclear/waste/index_en.htm Accessed 13 Aug. 2008
  20. Directorate-General of Environment (2008) CCS in Europe. http://ec.europa.eu/environment/climat/ccs/work_en.htm Accessed 13 Aug 2008
  21. Dupuis MC (2009) The implementation process for a deep geological repository for radioactive waste in France. In a common objective, a variety of paths. Third International Conference on Geological Repositories. Berne, Switzerland, 15–17 Oct 2007. http://www.nea.fr/html/rwm/reports/2009/6875-icgr2007.pdf
  22. EC (European Commission) (2004) Amended proposal for a Council Directive (Euratom) laying down basic obligations and general principles on the safety of nuclear installations. Amended Proposal for a Council Directive (Euratom) on the Safe Management of the Spent Nuclear Fuel and Radioactive Waste. COM(2004)526. http://eur-lex.europa.eu/LexUriServ/LexUriServ.do?uri=COM:2004:0526:FIN:EN:PDF
  23. EC (European Commission) (2007) Draft report of the meeting of the ECCP working group on carbon dioxide capture and geological storage (CCS). The impact assessment of the enabling legal framework for CCS. http://ec.europa.eu/environment/climat/ccs/pdf/070626_ccs_eccp_meeting_report.pdf
  24. EIA (Energy Information Administration) (2008) Germany energy profile. http://tonto.eia.doe.gov/country/country_energy_data.cfm?fips=GM. Accessed 13 Aug 2008
  25. EP (European Parliament) (2009a) Directive of the European Parliament and of the Council on the geological storage of carbon dioxide. http://ec.europa.eu/environment/climat/ccs/pdf/st03739_en08.pdf
  26. EP (European Parliament) (2009b) European Parliament Legislative Resolution of 22 Apr 2009 on the Proposal for a Council Directive (Euratom) Setting Up a Community Framework for Nuclear Safety (COM(2008)0790 – C6-0026/2009 – 2008/0231(CNS)). http://www.europarl.europa.eu/sides/getDoc.do?type=TA&reference=P6-TA-2009-0254&language=EN
  27. European Community (1957) Treaty establishing the European Atomic Energy Community (Euratom). http://eur-lex.europa.eu/en/treaties/dat/12006A/12006A.htm
  28. French National Assembly (2006) The 2006 programme act on the sustainable management of radioactive materials and waste. http://www.asn.fr/sites/default/files/files/radioactive-waste-management-act-280606.pdf
  29. Garner BA (2004) Black ’s Law Dictionary. West Publishing Company, St. PaulGoogle Scholar
  30. Hebert HJ (2009) Nuclear waste won’t be going to Nevada’s Yucca Mountain, Obama official says. Chicago Tribune. http://www.chicagotribune.com/news/nationworld/chi-nuke-yucca_­frimar06,0,2557502.story
  31. IAEA (International Atomic Energy Agency) (1997) Joint convention on the safety of spent fuel management and on the safety of radioactive waste management. INFCIRC/546. Article 20. http://www.iaea.org/Publications/Documents/Infcircs/1997/infcirc546.pdf
  32. IAEA (International Atomic Energy Agency) (2007) The 1997 Vienna Convention on Civil Liability for Nuclear Damage and the 1997 Convention on Supplementary Compensation for Nuclear Damage–Explanatory Texts, vol 3, IAEA International Law Series. IAEA, ViennaGoogle Scholar
  33. IPCC (Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change) (2005) IPCC Special Report on Carbon Capture and Storage. Metz B, Davidson O, de Coninck HC, Loos M, Meyer LA (eds). Cambridge University Press, Cambridge and New YorkGoogle Scholar
  34. Kanter J (2009) Debating next-generation nuclear waste. New York Times. http://greeninc.blogs.nytimes.com/2009/02/02/debating-next-generation-nuclear-waste/?hp
  35. Khune G (2007) Judicial progress in Germany’s nuclear waste disposal policy: the Konrad repository decisions of 26 Mar 2007. Nucl Law Bull 80:9–19Google Scholar
  36. Klass AB, Wilson EJ (2008) Climate change and carbon sequestration: assessing a liability regime for the long-term storage of carbon dioxide. Emory Law J 58:103–179Google Scholar
  37. Klass AB, Wilson EJ (2010) Climate change, carbon sequestration, and property rights. University of Illinois Law Review. Spring 2010. 363–428Google Scholar
  38. Lidskog R, Andersson A-C (2002) The management of radioactive waste. a description of ten countries. Svensk Kärnbränselhantering AB, Stockholm, SKB ReportGoogle Scholar
  39. Lidskog R, Sundqvist G (2004) On the right track? Technology, geology and society in Swedish nuclear waste management. J Risk Res 7:251–268CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  40. Louka E (1993) Bringing polluters before transnational courts: why industry should demand strict and unlimited liability for transnational movement of hazardous and radioactive waste. Denver J Int Law Pol 22:79Google Scholar
  41. Macfarlane A (2003) Underlying Yucca Mountain: the interplay of geology and policy in nuclear waste disposal. Soc Stud Sci 33:783–807CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  42. Macfarlane AM (2006) Uncertainty, models, and the way forward in nuclear waste. In: Macfarlane AM, Ewing RC (eds) Uncertainty Underground: Yucca Mountain and the Nation’s High-Level Nuclear Waste. MIT Press, Cambridge, pp 393–410Google Scholar
  43. Macfarlane AM, Ewing RC (2006) Uncertainty Underground: Yucca Mountain and the Nation’s High-Level Nuclear Waste. MIT Press, CambridgeGoogle Scholar
  44. National Research Council (2006) Going the Distance: The Safe Transport of Spent Nuclear Fuel and High-Level Radioactive Waste in the United States. The National Academies Press, WashingtonGoogle Scholar
  45. NEA (Nuclear Energy Agency) (1960) Convention on Nuclear Third Party Liability, as Amended by the Additional Protocol of 28 Jan 1964 and by the Protocol of 16 Nov 1982. Article 4(a). www.nea.fr/html/law/nlparis_conv.html
  46. NEA (Nuclear Energy Agency) (2000) Nuclear Legislation: Analytical Study–Regulatory and Institutional Framework for Nuclear Activities. OECD Publishing, ParisGoogle Scholar
  47. NEA (Nuclear Energy Agency) (2005) Legislative updates. Nuclear Liability Bill (2005). OECD Nuclear Energy Agency, Finland. http://www.nea.fr/html/pub/newsletter/2005/23-2-legislative-updates.pdf. Accessed 14 Aug 2008
  48. NEA (Nuclear Energy Agency) (2006) Nuclear legislation in OECD countries: regulatory and institutional framework for nuclear activities. OECD Nuclear Energy Agency, Germany. http://www.nea.fr/html/law/legislation/germany.html
  49. NEA (Nuclear Energy Agency) (2007) Radioactive waste management programmes in OECD/NEA member countries. Country profile France. OECD Nuclear Energy Agency. http://www.oecdnea.org/html/rwm/profiles/France_profile_web.pdf
  50. NEA (Nuclear Energy Agency) (2008) International nuclear third party liability. OECD Nuclear Energy Agency. http://www.nea.fr/html/general/press/press-kits/nuclear-law.html
  51. NEA (Nuclear Energy Agency) (2009) 2004 Protocol to amend the Brussels supplementary convention on nuclear third party liability. OECD Nuclear Energy Agency. http://www.nea.fr/html/law/brussels-supplementary-convention-protocol.html. Accessed 6 Apr 2009
  52. NRC (Nuclear Regulatory Commission) (1957) Financial protection requirements and indemnity agreements. 10 CFR 140. United States Government Printing Office, Washington, DC. http://www.nrc.gov/reading-rm/doc-collections/cfr/part140/
  53. NRC (Nuclear Regulatory Commission) (2006a) Amounts of financial protection for certain reactors. 10 CFR 140.11. United States Government Printing Office, Washington, DC. http://edocket.access.gpo.gov/cfr_2006/janqtr/pdf/10cfr140.12.pdf
  54. NRC (Nuclear Regulatory Commission) (2006b) Determination of extraordinary nuclear occurrence. 10 CFR 140.83. United States Government Printing Office, Washington, DC. http://edocket.access.gpo.gov/cfr_2006/janqtr/pdf/10cfr140.85.pdf
  55. Nuclear Energy Institute (2008) Nuclear waste fund payment information by state. Nuclear Energy Institute, Washington DC. http://www.nei.org/resourcesandstats/documentlibrary/nuclearwastedisposal/graphicsandcharts/nuclearwastefundpaymentinformationbystate/
  56. OSHA (Occupational Safety and Health Administration) (1989). Carbon Dioxide, Industrial Exposure and Control Technologies for OSHA Regulated Hazardous Substances, vol. I of II: substance A – I. Occupational Safety and Health Administration, US Department of Labor, Washington, DCGoogle Scholar
  57. OSPAR (Convention for the Protection of the Marine Environment of the North-East Atlantic) (2007) Northeast Atlantic OSPAR amendment Annex II, Article 3 (2), Annex III 3(3). OSPAR Commission, London. http://www.ospar.org
  58. Palmgren CR, Morgan MG, de Bruin WB, Keith DW (2004) Initial public perceptions of disposal of CO2. Environ Sci Technol 38:6441–6450CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  59. Parfomak PW (2008) Community acceptance of carbon capture and sequestration infrastructure: siting challenges. Congressional Research Service. http://assets.opencrs.com/rpts/RL34601_20080729.pdf
  60. Parliament of Finland (1987) Nuclear Energy Act. 11.12.1987/990. http://www.edilex.fi/stuklex/en/lainsaadanto/19870990
  61. Parliament of France (2009) French environmental code, Book V, Title IV, Chapter II: specific provisions relating to radioactive waste. Article L542-12. Legifrance: le Service Public de la Diffusion du Droit. http://195.83.177.9/code/liste.phtml?lang=uk&c=40&r=5069
  62. Pollak M, Wilson E (2009) Regulating geologic sequestration in the United States: early rules take divergent approaches. Environ Sci Technol 43(9):3035–3041CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  63. Rudig W (2000) Phasing out nuclear energy in Germany. Ger Polit 9:43–80CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  64. SAPIERR Project (2008) SAPIERR Project information website. European Commission. http://www.sapierr.net/index_01.htm. Accessed 13 Aug 2008
  65. Slovic P, Fischoff B, Lichtenstein S (1990) Rating the risks. In: Glickman TS, Gough M (eds) Readings in Risk. RFF Press, Washington, DC, pp 61–74Google Scholar
  66. STUK (Finnish Radiation and Nuclear Safety Authority) (2008) Nuclear power plants. http://www.stuk.fi/ydinturvallisuus/ydinvoimalaitokset/en_GB/ydinvoimalaitokset/
  67. Syrota J (2008) L’avenir du nucléaire civil. Politique étrangère 50:161–171CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  68. Temple RK (1994) Regulation of nuclear waste and reactor safety within the commonwealth of independent states: toward a workable model. Chicago-Kent Law Rev 69:1071–1120Google Scholar
  69. Trabucchi C, Patton L (2008) Storing carbon: options for liability, risk management, financial responsibility. BNA Daily Environ 170:1–22Google Scholar
  70. United Nations (1972) Convention on the prevention of marine pollution by dumping of wastes and other matter. http://www.imo.org/Conventions/contents.asp?topic_id=258&doc_id=681
  71. United States Congress (1988) 1988 Amendment to Price-Anderson Act. 42 U.S.C. 2210. US Government Printing Office, Washington, DCGoogle Scholar
  72. United States Congress (2005) Energy Policy Act of 2005. 42 U.S.C. 15801. US Government Printing Office, Washington, DCGoogle Scholar
  73. US EPA (United States Environmental Protection Agency) (2000) Carbon dioxide as a fire suppressant: examining the risks. Report EPA430-R-00-002. http://www.epa.gov/Ozone/snap/fire/co2/co2report.pdf
  74. US EPA (United States Environmental Protection Agency) (2008) Federal requirements under the underground injection control program for carbon dioxide geologic sequestration wells. Federal Register. Office of the Federal Register, vol. 73. US National Archives and Records Administration, College Park, pp. 43491–43541Google Scholar
  75. US EPA (United States Environmental Protection Agency) (2010) Federal Requirements Under the Underground Injection Control (UIC) Program for Carbon Dioxide (CO2) Geologic Sequestration (GS) Wells Final Rule, November, 22, Docket No. EPA-HQ-OW-2008-03902, pp 282Google Scholar
  76. US GAO (United States General Accounting Office) (2004) Nuclear regulation: NRC’s liability insurance requirements for nuclear power plants owned by limited liability companies. GAO-04-654. http://www.gao.gov/new.items/d04654.pdf
  77. Vandenbosch R, Vandenbosch SE (2007) Nuclear Waste Stalemate. The University of Utah Press, Salt Lake CityGoogle Scholar
  78. West JM, Shaw RP, Pearce JM (2011) Environmental issues in the geological disposal of carbon dioxide and radioactive waste. In this volumeGoogle Scholar
  79. Wilson EJ, de Figueiredo MA (2005) Geologic carbon dioxide sequestration: an analysis of subsurface property law. Environ Law Rep 36:10114–10124Google Scholar
  80. Wilson EJ, Gibbons A (2007) Deploying carbon capture and storage in Europe and the United States: a comparative analysis. J Eur Environ Plann Law 5:343–352CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  81. Wilson EJ, Pollak M (2008) Regulation of Carbon Capture and Storage, Policy Brief. International Risk Governance Council, GenevaGoogle Scholar
  82. Wilson EJ, de Figueiredo MA, Trabuchi C (2007a) Liability and Financial Responsibility FrameWorks for Carbon Capture and Sequestration, WRI Issue Brief. World Resources Institute, Washington, DCGoogle Scholar
  83. Wilson EJ, Friedmann SJ, Pollak MF (2007b) Research for deployment: incorporating risk, regulation and liability for carbon capture and sequestration. Environ Sci Technol 41:5945–5952CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  84. WNA (World Nuclear Association) (2008a) Nuclear power in Germany. http://www.world-nuclear.org/info/inf43.html. Accessed 13 Aug 2008
  85. WNA (World Nuclear Association) (2008b) Nuclear power in France. http://www.world-nuclear.org/info/inf40.html. Accessed 13 Aug 2008
  86. WNA (World Nuclear Association) (2008c) Nuclear power in Finland. http://www.world-nuclear.org/info/inf76.html. Accessed 13 Aug 2008

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media B.V. 2011

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Humphrey Institute of Public AffairsUniversity of MinnesotaMinneapolisUSA
  2. 2.University of Minnesota Law SchoolMinneapolisUSA

Personalised recommendations