The burial of radioactive wastes

International Nuclear Energy Agency has developed recommendations concerning burial of radioactive wastes which nuclear power stations give off while producing electricity (using uranium). The majority of specialists support the French approach to this issue. French specialists divide radioactive wastes into long living (period of semi-disintegration - several hundreds of years) and short-living (period of semi-disintegration - 30 years). The French take into consideration the specifics of semi-disintegration of the elements and prepare the burial spots in accordance with the findings.

In France the spots of radioactive wastes are designed to serve for several hundreds of years, while the wastes are accumulated in the burial spots, they are looked after and only after 300 years the spot, where the wastes were buried, is considered to be relatively safe. There are several of such places on the territory of France. By the way, in France 70% of the energy are produced by nuclear power plants.

In Sweden about 50 % of аll energy is produced on nuclear power plants. The main objective here is to safely bury the production wastes. This problem is reviewed by Swedish nuclear fuel companies and nuclear wastes storage companies. Scientific and technical ways to solve this problem are continuously developing since 1970s. Nuclear wastes are stored in very firm copper tanks, which are placed into vertical wells, drilled in rocks at the depth of 500 meters. For additional protection the walls of the tunnels are covered with concrete. The surrounding territory is also protected from the influence of the radioactive wastes. In Sweden burial of the nuclear wastes is regulated by state legislative acts.

 

How is the problem of radioactive wastes burial solved?

 

 

Read the article:

 

Text 2

Norway fury at UK nuclear waste floods

Paul Brown

Environment Correspondent

NORWAY has detected an eightfold increase in radioactive waste reaching its shores in the last year as a result of discharges from the Sellafield nuclear plant in Cumbria, and is to renew demands for the closure of the plant responsible.

The disclosure that the radionuclide Technetium-99 (T-99) has travelled 500 miles on sea currents to the shores of Norway comes at an embarrassing time for the Government, which is considering an application for new discharge licences from the Sellafield plant.

Michael Meacher, the Environment Minister, at a meeting of ministers from 15 countries including Norway, pledged that the UK would end its sea discharges of nuclear waste and chemicals as soon as possible. It was to finally remove from Britain the tag of «the dirty man of Europe».

Thirteen of the countries present at the meeting of the Oslo/Paris Commission, which controls pollution the North Sea, had expressed particular concern about T-99 because it accumulates in shellfish. Lobsters off Sellafield were caught in the summer by the Ministry of Agriculture (Maff) and found to be 32 times over the European Union safe limit for human consumption.

Per Strand, a member of the Norwegian Radiation Protection Board, said that after that Commission meeting in Brussels Norway had begun tests to see whether T-99 was reaching Norway. The board had since found an eightfold increase.

«We started this monitoring programme because somewhat raised levels had been reported in the Irish Sea. So we wanted to be on the safe side and see what the situation is in Norwegian areas,» he said.

«We traced it across the North Sea, and around Scotland almost all the-way to Sellafield.»

Mr Strand acknowledged that the levels of radioactivity were not dangerous to humans but that they could accumulate in shellfish. These were now being tested.

Another meeting of the commission is due in January. The Norwegian Environment Ministry said it would await a full report from the board before deciding how to frame its protest.

The cause of the problem is a plant opened in 1994 to process, stored nuclear waste accumulated over many years. T-99 was not thought to be 'a problem at the ime and is routinely discharged into the sea. Maff monitoring found that levels in shellfish have more than doubled every year since then.

The Department of the Environment said it would be giving a presentation at the January meeting of the Oslo/Paris Commission on the problem of T-99 and how it would be dealt with. Ministers were awaiting advice from the Environment Agency on the application by British Nuclear Fuels (BNFL) for discharges.

In a statement BNFL said it was to reduce its T-99 discharges by 25 per cent. «The impact on someone who lives close to Sellafield and consumes a large quantity of seafood results in a maximum dose of 40 microsieverts — equivalent to the amount of radiation received during an eight-hour flight. Doses further afield from the UK will be smaller Any doses received in Norway will be tiny compared to the dose of 3.000-4.000 microsieverts per annum from natural background radiation.»

BNFL said in September that it did not have the technology to prevent the discharges that it was investigating.

 

COMPREHENSION

I. Match the words from the text to make word combinations:

1) eightfold a) time

2) discharge b) limit

3) embarrassing c) increase

4) sea d) consumption

5) safe e) programme

6) human f) discharge

7) monitoring g) nuclear waste

8)raised h) licences

9) level I) radioactivity

10)process j)levels

 

II. Insert the required prepositions:

1. discharges…the nuclear plant;

2. demands…the closure of the nuclear plant;

3. an application…new licences;

4. concern…T-99;

5. to be 32 times…the European Union safe limit;

6. to give a presentation…the problem of T-99.

 

III. Answer the questions:

1. Are the raised levels of radioactivity in the Irish Sea dangerous to humans?

2. What caused Norway’s fury at UK?