The long term risk perspectiveThe long term risk perspectiverisk perspective of the nuclear storage

risk perspective of the nuclear storagestorage industrystorage industry

How much energy do we need and how much will it cost?How much energy do we need and how much will it cost?Dr. James Conca, Director Golden, CO May 2010Dr. James Conca, Director Golden, CO May 2010How much energy do we need and how much will it cost?How much CO2 will it generate?How does nuclear fit into this?

How much energy do we need and how much will it cost?How much CO2 will it generate?How does nuclear fit into this?

Carlsbad Environmental Monitoring and Research CenterInstitute for Energy and the Environment at New Mexico State University575-706-0214 jconca@cemrc.org

Carlsbad Environmental Monitoring and Research CenterInstitute for Energy and the Environment at New Mexico State University575-706-0214 jconca@cemrc.org

Global Energy Distribution

as indicated by nighttime electricity use

Present Energy Distribution (Power)1%

United States50% coal 19% gas

Oil

Gas

California8%

15%

0%

0%0%

19% gas19% nuclear6% hydroelectric6% other

World (2007)Gas

Coal (all types)

Nuclear WashingtonIllinois IndianaCalifornia2% coal

49% gas15% nuclear22% hydroelectric

20%

17%

gas

nuclear

hydrooil

Hydroelectric

Wind

Washington8% coal 8% gas7% nuclear

73% hydroelectric

Illinois48% coal

2% gas48% nuclear

2% other

Indiana94% coal

3% gas0% nuclear3% other

11% other 17%

39%

coal Geothermal

Biofuels

European Union30% coal 18% gas

4% other

Present Energy Distribution (Transportation

5% 0%

Solar

Petroleum fuels

18% gas32% nuclear11% hydroelectric6% oil 3% other

ChiJ0% 5% 0%

bio

Petroleum fuels(including H for fuelcells)

Nuclear (H for fuelcells)

China75% coal 5% gas

11% oil3% l

Japan25% coal 28% gas10% oil26% l

petroleum India75% coal

cells)

Biofuels

3% nuclear6% hydro <1% other

26% nuclear9% hydro 2% other

Korea37% coal

95%

3% nuclear20% hydroelectric3% other

Solar (including H forfuel cells)

18% gas5% oil

40% nuclear

40 40historicprojected

30 30In order to address any of the environmentalissues we seem to

20 20

issues we seem tocare about:

over20 trkWhrs

World presently at15 trillion kWhrs/year

20 trkWhrsmust be

non-fossil fuel

10 10

U S presently atpresent fossil fuel

contribution

1980 2000 2020 2040

U.S. presently at 4 trillion kWhrs/year

contribution 2/3 of present total

1980 2000 2020 2040

181800

28282020

88570570

801801

815815 332332 Map ofMap of

9696 530530509509

221221332332 Map of Map of

Global Global EE

Millions of people without electricityMillions of people without electricity

Millions of people relying on biomassMillions of people relying on biomass

5656 Energy Energy PovertyPoverty

f p p y gf p p y g

3,0003,000Millions of people to be born by 2040Millions of people to be born by 2040

1.6 billion people have no access to1.6 billion people have no access toelectricity 80% of them in South Asiaelectricity 80% of them in South Asia

Source: United Nations; McFarlane 2006

electricity, 80% of them in South Asia electricity, 80% of them in South Asia and suband sub––Saharan Africa. Saharan Africa.

2.4 billion people burn wood and2.4 billion people burn wood andmanure as their main energy source.manure as their main energy source.gygy

3 billion more people will be born by 20403 billion more people will be born by 2040Source: ©2005 Kay Chernush for the

U.S. Department of State

With modern efficiencies, conservation and technologies, 3,000 kWh/year With modern efficiencies, conservation and technologies, 3,000 kWh/year can provide an HDI > 0.8; > 6,000 kWh/year is unnecessary and wastefulcan provide an HDI > 0.8; > 6,000 kWh/year is unnecessary and wastefulAccess to energy is essential to quality of lifeAccess to energy is essential to quality of life

FranceFrance JapanJapan

U.S.U.S.1.0 UKUK

CACAAn adult human can generate

ChinaChinaRussiaRussia

GermanyGermanyAustraliaAustralia

CanadaCanada

0.8

China (500)China (500)about 11 kWhrs/year of useful muscular

work on

IndiaIndia ProsperityProsperity0 6

IndonesiaIndonesia

IranIranwork on 2,500 Calories/day.

Simple tools increase by 3-4x IndiaIndia

PakistanPakistanProsperityProsperity

EducationEducation

Life spanLife spanPapua New GuineaPapua New Guinea

AngolaAngola

0.6

China (800)China (800)

increase by 3-4x

Horses and oxen increase by 5-20x

f pf p

NigerNigerEthiopiaEthiopia0.4Diesel backhoe

increases 20-100x

80% f th ld’ l ti f 6 billi l i b l 0 8

4,000 8,000 12,000

Annual Electricity Use (kWh/Capita)16,000

80% of the world’s population of over 6 billion people is below 0.8 on the U.N. Human Development Index (HDI)

Source: United Nations Development Program; McFarlane 2006

How much energy do we need by 2040? How much energy do we need by 2040? -- what levels are needed to what levels are needed to o uc e e gy do e eed by 0 0o uc e e gy do e eed by 0 0 at e e s a e eeded toat e e s a e eeded toend poverty, war and terrorism, i.e., raise everyone up to 0.8 HDI?end poverty, war and terrorism, i.e., raise everyone up to 0.8 HDI?

Energy/capita neededEnergy/capita needed AnnualAnnualEnergy/capita needed Energy/capita needed Annual Annual to raise HDI to >0.8 to raise HDI to >0.8 Approximate Approximate energy energy

Subpopulation groupSubpopulation group or maintain at 0.9 or maintain at 0.9 subpopulationsubpopulation requirementrequirement

Industrialized world - cut to 6,000 kWhrs/yr 1,000,000,000 6 tkW-hrs

Intermediate - maintain 3,000 kWhrs/yr 1,000,000,000 3 tkW-hrs

Developing world increase to 3 000 kWhrs/yr 4 000 000 000 12 tkW hrsDeveloping world - increase to 3,000 kWhrs/yr 4,000,000,000 12 tkW-hrs

Those born by 2040 - achieve 3,000 kWhrs/yr 3,000,000,000 9 tkW-hrs

TotalTotal Annual Global Energy Requirement 30 tkW-hrs

This requires renewables and nuclear worldwide to quadruple over what anyone is expecting by 2040:2 million+ MW wind turbines; over 1,700 new nuclear reactors; a 100 bbl of biofuels; 3 tkWhrs from solar; 4 tkWhrs from other

The Target → a Third, a Third and a Third - 1/3 fossil fuel, 1/3 renewables and 1/3 nuclear

World (2007)15 tkWhrs/yr

Present Energy Distribution (Power)Present Energy Distribution (Power) A Target Sustainable Energy Distribution

by 2040 (Power)

World (2040)30 tkWhrs/yr

Present Energy Distribution (Power)

8%15%

0%

0%

1%

0%

renewables

by 2040 (Power)

0%16%

11%

3%2% 8%

bio

geogassolar

20%

17%coal

gasnuclear

hydro oil17%

10%

11%

coal

nuclear

hydro

wind

39%

coal

A Target Sustainable Energy Distribution

33%

Present Energy Distribution (Transportation)

0% 5% 0%

bio

Present Energy Distribution (Transportation)

A Target Sustainable Energy Distribution by 2040 (Transportation)

25%5%

solaroilbio

petroleum

30%

l

biofuelspetroleum

(e- H2-cars)

95%

40%

nuclear(e ,H2 cars)

Dramatic increase in coal and development of unconventional fossil fuels

The most likely scenario given the direction of present investment, development and policy

Present Energy Distribution (Power)Present Energy Distribution (Power)

World (2007)15 tkWhrs/yr

An Industry Energy Distributionby 2040 (Power)

World (2040)30 tkWhrs/yr

4%

23%12%

3%

3%0%

0%

Present Energy Distribution (Power)

8%15%

0%

0%

1%

0%

renewables

oil

geo+solar

wind

other reneweables

23%

15%

20%

17%coal

gasnuclear

hydro oil

coal

gas

nuclear

hydrooil

40%

15%

39%

coal coal

Present Energy Distribution (Transportation)

0% 5% 0%

bio

Present Energy Distribution (Transportation)An Industry Energy Distribution

by 2040 (Transportation)

30%bio

petroleum

35%30%

petroleumoil shale, tar

sands, heavy oils

biofuel and others

95%

25%

10%

others coal to gasoline

Construction costs have skyrocketed for all energy sources-when comparing, costs must be corrected for capacity factor and lifespan

How much does it cost to build a unit/farm/array that will produce 469 billion kWhrs over its lifespan?

$7 billion 980 MW AP-1000 GenIII nuclear with a cf = 92% and lifespan = 60 yrs980 MW x 1000 kW/MW x 0.92 x 8,766 hrs/yr x 60 yrs = 469 billion kWhrs

∴ to produce 469 billion kWhrs ⇒ 1 unit at $7 billion

$1.5 million 1 MW GE turbine with a cf = 35% and lifespan = 20 yrs1 MW x 1000 kW/MW x 0.35 x 8,766 hrs/yr x 20 yrs = 61.3 million kWhrs

∴ to produce 469 billion kWhrs ⇒ 7,650 units at $11.4 billion

$300 million 92 MW thin film solar with a cf = 26% and lifespan = 25 yrs92 MW x 1000 kW/MW x 0.26 x 8,766 hrs/yr x 25 yrs = 5.2 billion kWhrs

∴ to produce 469 billion kWhrs ⇒ 96 units at $28.8 billion

$2.5 billion 750 MW coal plant with a cf = 71% and lifespan = 40 yrs750 MW x 1000 kW/MW x 0.71 x 8,766 hrs/yr x 40 yrs = 187 billion kWhrs

∴ to produce 469 billion kWhrs ⇒ 2.5 units at $6.2 billion

$1.1 billion 300 MW natural gas CC with a cf = 42% and lifespan = 40 yrs300 MW x 1000 kW/MW x 0.42 x 8,766 hrs/yr x 40 yrs = 44 billion kWhrs

∴ to produce 469 billion kWhrs ⇒ 10 units at $11 billion

$3 billion 600 MW hydroelectric with a cf = 44% and lifespan = 80 yrs600 MW x 1000 kW/MW x 0.44 x 8,766 hrs/yr x 80 yrs = 185 billion kWhrs

∴ to produce 469 billion kWhrs ⇒ 2.5 units at $7.5 billionp $p , $p $p $p $p $

K i f diff f b ild d bSolar

cf = 26%$30

Key assumptions for different energy systems from recent builds and buys

cf Lifespan Inst. Cap. Inst. Costs Source

Coal 0.71 40 years 750 MW $2.5 billion Nevada Energy

olla

rs

$16 Wind

$28.8 b

G

Coal 0.71 40 years 750 MW $2.5 billion Nevada Energy

Natural Gas 0.42 40 years 300 MW $1.1 billion Alliant Energy

Nuclear 0.92 60 years 960 MW $7.0 billion Westinghouse

s of

Do

$10

$12

$14Wind

cf = 35%

$11 4 bNuclear

Gascf = 42%

CoalHydrocf = 44%

Wind 0.35 20 years 1 MW $0.0015 bil Shell Wind Division

Solar 0.26 25 years 92 MW $0.3 billion NRG Energy

Hydro 0.44 80 years 600 MW $3.0 billion Susitna Hydro Proj

Bill

ions

$6

$8

$10 $11.4 b cf = 92%

$7 b

$11 bCoalcf = 71%

$6 2 b

cf = 44%

$7.5 b

B

$2

$4$$6.2 b

2009($) Construction Costs to produce similar power (469 bkWhrs)function of installation cost, installed capacity (kW), capacity factor (cf), lifespan, 8,766 hours/year

Gascf = 42%

$80

Fuel Costs

$80

$80

MW

hr

$30

$35

$40

ars

per M

$25

$30 Coalcf = 71%

$20

Dol

la

Nuclearcf = 92%

Windcf = 35%

Solarcf = 26%

$20$15

$10Hydrocf = 44%

$

$6 $0 $0 $ 5

$0

2009($) Fuel Costs per MWhr ProducedCoal - $40/t NG - $4/tcf U - $100/lb yellowcake

O&M Costs

$16

O&M Costsr

Nuclearcf = 92%

Wind$14

$16

er M

Whr $13

Windcf = 35%

$10C l$10

$12

Hydrocf = 44%

llars

pe $10Gas

cf = 42%

Coalcf = 71%$8

$6$8

Do

Solarcf = 26%

$5$6

$4

$2

2009($) O&M C MWh P d d

($1)

$2

2009($) O&M Costs per MWhr Produced

Environmental CostsExternalities (other non-direct costs) not included in

CO2

3 miles2

Externalities (other non-direct costs) not included in these costs but may be reflected in up-coming legislation

such as Cap&Trade or C-Tax, and Footprint costsPossible legislation has carbon costs up to $15/ton CO2 emitted

CO

2 miles2

The EU has assigned about $100/acre for simple footprint costsCO2

2.00¢

Whr

Coalcf = 71%

1 46¢62 miles21.50¢

1.75¢

24 miles2

s pe

r kW

Gascf = 42%

1.46¢

CO1 mile2

36 miles2

1.25¢

1.00¢CO2

Cen

ts

0.90¢CO2

CO2CO2

0.75¢

Nuclearcf = 92%

Windcf = 35%

Solarcf = 26%

0.08¢

0.50¢

0.25¢

Hydrocf = 44%

0.14 ¢ 0.02¢ 0.02¢

0.08¢

2009($) Carbon Tax Costs (¢ per kWhr Produced)

Materials, Resource and Capital NeedsMaterials, Resource and Capital NeedsConcrete + steel + copper are > 98% of construction inputs, and become more expensive in a carbon-constrained economy

Nuclear Nuclear (LWR)(LWR)::90% capacity factor, 60 year life90% capacity factor, 60 year life

40 MT t l/MW40 MT t l/MW–– 40 MT steel/MW40 MT steel/MW–– 90 m90 m33 concrete/MWconcrete/MW

Wind:Wind: 6 4 m/s avg wind speed6 4 m/s avg wind speed1000

m3 /M

W) Natural Gas Combined CycleNatural Gas Combined Cycle

NuclearNuclearCoalCoalWi dWi dWind:Wind: 6.4 m/s avg wind speed 6.4 m/s avg wind speed

25% cap. factor, 15 year life25% cap. factor, 15 year life–– 460 MT steel/MW460 MT steel/MW–– 870 m870 m33 concrete/MWconcrete/MW 600

800

olum

e (m WindWind

870 m870 m concrete/MWconcrete/MW

Coal:Coal:78% cap. factor, 30 year life78% cap. factor, 30 year life

400

ncre

te V

o

78% cap. factor, 30 year life78% cap. factor, 30 year life–– 98 MT steel/MW98 MT steel/MW–– 160 m160 m33 concrete/MWconcrete/MW

200

Con

Natural Gas Combined Cycle:Natural Gas Combined Cycle:75%75% cap. factor, 30 year lifecap. factor, 30 year life–– 3.3 MT steel / MW3.3 MT steel / MW

2727 33 t / MWt / MW

100 200 300 400 500

Mass of Steel (MT/MW)Courtesy of Per Peterson, UC Berkeley• R.H. Bryan and I.T. Dudley, “Estimated Quantities of Materials Contained in a 1000-

MW(e) PWR Power Plant,” Oak Ridge National Laboratory, TM-4515, June (1974)2. S. Pacca and A. Horvath, Environ. Sci. Technol., 36, 3194-3200 (2002).3. P.J. Meier, “Life-Cycle Assessment of Electricity Generation Systems and Applications

for Climate Change Policy Analysis,” U. WisconsinReport UWFDM-1181, August 2002.

–– 27 m27 m33 concrete / MWconcrete / MW

A Target Sustainable Energy Distribution b 2040 (P )

World (2040)30 tkWhrs/yr

Total Global Costs for Producing 266 tkWhrs from Existing Fleet 2010 to 2060*Cost ($trillions) Fuel O&M Decom C-Tax subTot

by 2040 (Power)

0%16%

11%

3%2% 8%bio

geogas

wind

solar

Coal (75 tkWhrs) 1.5 0.45 0.16 1.1 3.21Natural Gas(+ Oil) (50 tkWhrs) 4.0 0.25 0.001 0.45 4.70Nuclear (31 tkWhrs) 0.2 0.40 0.03 0.006 0.64H d (110 kWh ) 0 0 88 0 95 0 15 1 98 17%

10%

coal

nuclear

hydroHydro (110 tkWhrs) 0 0.88 0.95 0.15 1.98TOTAL for aging fleet 5.7 1.98 1.14 1.71 10.53*assuming a 50% phase-out rate for C/NG/N by 2040; 100% by 2060

Between 2010 and 2060,* combining all these costs,

33%Total Global Costs for Producing 994 tkWhrs from New Builds 2010 to 2060normalized

Cost ($trillions) Constr Fuel O&M Decom C-Tax subTotal (¢/kWhr)

Coal (115 tkWhrs) 1.5 2.3 0.69 0.24 1.7 6.43 5.59

what will it cost to build, fuel, operate and decommission

Natural Gas (125 tkWhrs) 2.9 10.0 0.63 0.003 1.13 14.66 11.73Nuclear (385 tkWhrs) 5.7 2.3 5.0 0.42 0.08 13.50 3.51Wind (200 tkWhrs) 4.9 0 2.0 0.26 0.04 7.20 3.60Solar (144 tkWhrs) 8 8 0 0 14 0 11 0 12 9 17 6 37 The nuclear waste

units/farms/arrays to achieve this 1/3-1/3-1/3 mix by 2040,

l (190 tkWh ) t l (175 tkWh ) l (416 tkWh )

Solar (144 tkWhrs) 8.8 0 0.14 0.11 0.12 9.17 6.37Hydro (24 tkWhrs) 0.4 0 0.19 0.21 0.03 0.83 3.46TOTAL new builds 27.4 14.6 8.65 1.24 3.10 51.79

The nuclear waste disposal footprint needed worldwide

for this amount of HLW/ILW = 12 miles2

using a reasonable ramp-up and replacement schedule?

coal (190 tkWhrs) natural gas (175 tkWhrs) nuclear (416 tkWhrs) wind (200 tkWhrs) solar (144 tkWhrs) hydro (134 tkWhrs)

TOTAL GLOBAL ENERGY COSTS from 2010 to 2060 to produce

= 12 miles2

~ $800b separate< $150b centralized

(U.S. ⇒ nuclear waste fund)*the point at which almost all existing energy systems will have been replacedTOTAL GLOBAL ENERGY COSTS from 2010 to 2060 to produce

1,260 trillion kWhrs total by the 1/3, 1/3, 1/3 mix (2% gaGDP) $62 trillion (50% less CO2 ~ 1 trillion tons)

1,260 trillion kWhrs total by the baseline mix 2/3 fossil fuel $75 trillion (> 2 trillion tons)

y p

Social Social -- risks facing Americans over the past 5 yearsrisks facing Americans over the past 5 years

alcohol consumptionautomobile drivingcoal industry The average citizen thinks

that smoking and theconstructionhunting

that smoking and thenuclear power industryare the most dangerous

ti iti i A iminingiatrogenic

activities in America.

gnuclear industryfood poisoningfood poisoningpolice worksmoking tobaccosmoking tobacco

Number of Deaths in U.S. Number of Deaths in U.S. ActivityActivity over the past 5 yearsover the past 5 years

iatrogenic 950,000(medicine gone wrong)

smoking 760,000

alcohol 500,000

automobile accidents 250,000

coal use (~ 50% of U.S. power) 70,000

food poisoning 25,000

construction 5,000

hunting 4,100

police work 800

mining 359

nuclear industry (~ 20% of U.S. power) 0

RelativeRelativeNumber of Deaths in U SNumber of Deaths in U S DangerDangerNumber of Deaths in U.S.Number of Deaths in U.S. Danger Danger

ActivityActivity Normalized to SubNormalized to Sub--PopulationPopulation IndexIndex

1) smoking (43.4 million smokers) 760,000 0.01751) g ( ) ,

2) alcohol (60 million impacted Americans) 500,000 0.00833

3) iatrogenic (180 million receive medical treatment per/yr) 950,000 0.00527) g ( p y ) ,

4) automobile accidents (180 million drivers) 250,000 0.00138

5) police work (680,000 police officers) 800 0.00118) p p

6) mining (350,000 miners) 359 0.00103

7) construction (7.7 million workers) 5,000 0.00065)

8) hunting (12.5 million hunters) 4,100 0.00033

9) coal use (~ 50% of U.S. power) (240 million impacted) 70,000 0.00029)

10) food poisoning (304 million) 25,000 0.00008

11) nuclear industry (~ 20% of U.S. power) (60 million) 0 0.00000y

Even nonEven non--lethal routine accidents are lethal routine accidents are dramatically lower in the nuclear industrydramatically lower in the nuclear industrydramatically lower in the nuclear industry dramatically lower in the nuclear industry

than in any other industrythan in any other industry

4 24.24.34 74.5

5U.S. ManufacturingOSHA Accident Rates

444.24.74.7

3.5

4

5

Accidents pe 200 000 o ke ho s

2.5

3Accidents per 200,000 worker-hours

U.S. Finance, Insurance, Real Estate

0 70 70.80.80.91.11

1.5

2

U.S. Nuclear

U.S. Finance, Insurance, Real Estate

0.70.70.6

0.260.340.290.450.460.640.770

0.5

1

'92 '94 '96 '97 '98 '99 '00

Why is Everyone So Afraid of Nuclear Energy?Why is Everyone So Afraid of Nuclear Energy?

1) Incorrect but intentional association with nuclear

Why is Everyone So Afraid of Nuclear Energy?Why is Everyone So Afraid of Nuclear Energy?

1) Incorrect, but intentional, association with nuclear weapons during the Cold War - 1945

2) Inaccurate and overly simplistic modeling of health effects of low radiation doses (LNT) 1959

Because we told them to be!health effects of low radiation doses (LNT) - 1959

3) Mi d t di f th t d t f3) Misunderstanding of the nature and amount of nuclear power waste - 1976

t h f it (< 1 k 3 ld id )• not much of it (< 1 km3 worldwide)- over 20,000 km3 of direct solid coal waste

• we know what to do with it - 1999we know what to do with it 1999

What about the waste?What about the waste?

There is not much of it.There is not much of it.

All the commercial nuclear waste in the world ever produced inin the world ever produced inhistory would fit in any high school football stadium.

In the United States:t f ll l 2 000 t lidwaste from all nuclear power ~ 2,000 tons solids

(20% of U.S. power supply) generated each year

waste from all coal fired power plants ~ 400 000 000 tons solidswaste from all coal fired power plants 400,000,000 tons solids(50% of U.S. power supply) ~ 2,000,000,000 tons CO2

generated each year 25,000 tons of radwaste (emitted)

chemical and biological waste ~ 500,000,000 tons

wastewater requiring treatment ~ 2,000,000,000,000 gallons

The Waste Isolation Pilot Plant has shown that deep geologic disposal of

Only Defense-generated TRU wastepresently permitted

- 100 nCi/g to 23 Ci/L of p g g pnuclear waste is safe and cost-effective. alpha-emitting 239Pu equivalents

16 miles2 set aside in the 1992 Land Withdrawal ActWithdrawal Act- when WIPP is full, only 1/2 mile2 will have been used

1 cm1 cm

Length: 4136 nm = ~12, 100 base pairs (similar to modern bacterial DNA)(similar to modern bacterial DNA)

WIPP Salado Formation salt was deposited by repeated evaporation200 nmWIPP Salado Formation salt was deposited by repeated evaporation of shallow marine incursions into the Permian Basin of New Mexico

200 nm

Mining the Salado is the easiest and safest mining Mining the Salado is the easiest and safest mining operation in the worldoperation in the world

At the 2000 lbs/inchAt the 2000 lbs/inch22 pressure at this depth, the salt exhibits significant creep pressure at this depth, the salt exhibits significant creep closure, i.e., the salt completely closes all fractures and openings, even closure, i.e., the salt completely closes all fractures and openings, even

micropores, making the salt extremely tight, such that water cannot move even micropores, making the salt extremely tight, such that water cannot move even i h i billii h i billian inch in a billion yearsan inch in a billion years

10 years of operation - 100,000 loaded waste containers disposed 60,000cubic meters of TRU waste disposed

300 000 fift fi ll d i l t300,000 fifty-five gallon drum equivalentszero releases to the environment

zero contaminated personnel

Evolution of the WIPP Disposal Rooms (t = 0 yrs)Evolution of the WIPP Disposal Rooms (t = 0 yrs)

Courtesy of Frank Hansen, SNL

Evolution of the WIPP Disposal Rooms (10Evolution of the WIPP Disposal Rooms (10--15 yrs)15 yrs)

Courtesy of Frank Hansen, SNL

Evolution of the WIPP Disposal Rooms (1000 yrs)Evolution of the WIPP Disposal Rooms (1000 yrs)

(water and contaminants move less than an inch in a billion years)K ≤ 10-14 m/s D ~ 10-15 m2/s

1% - 1.5% porosity pH = 8.6 - 9.2 Eh < -500 mVKτsalt ~ 15 kcal/m/hr/deg @ 200°C = 5 x Kτcrystalline

annealing of disturbed salt ~ ƒ(Tx) where 6 < x < 9 ⇒ closes in < 3 yearsg ƒ( ) y

f i d 200 000 000 10 000 100 000

no engineered barriers needed no persistence of cladding or canister needed

performance period - 200,000,000 years, not 10,000 or 100,000 years

no engineered barriers needed, no persistence of cladding or canister neededwaste form irrelevant, no vitrification needed

no adverse temperature effects, fluid inclusion migration irrelevant

Carbon Footprints

Environmental Monitoring of WIPP

CEMRC

g26,000 ft2 NMSU radiochemistry facility- Environmental, radiochemistry and separations

laboratories: perchloric acid hoods, IC, ICP-MS/OES, GC-MS, VOCs, ,

- a plutonium-uranium lab and counting labs: over100 α-specs, germanium γ-specs, gas proportionalcounters and liquid scintillation counters, UV-Visspectroscopy, Nd–YAG laser, XRD, UFA

- bioassay facility with whole body dosimetry`

Routine AnalysesRoutine AnalysesR di lidR di lidRadionuclides Radionuclides (generally to femtoCurie levels)(generally to femtoCurie levels)–– 228228Ac,Ac,241241Am,Am,77Be,Be,212212Bi,Bi,213213Bi,Bi,214214Bi,Bi,144144Ce,Ce,249249Cf,Cf,6060Co,Co,134134Cs, Cs,

137137CsCs 152152EuEu 154154EuEu 4040KK 234m234mPaPa 233233PaPa 210210PbPb 212212PbPb 214214PbPb 106106RuRuCs,Cs, Eu,Eu, Eu,Eu, K,K, Pa,Pa, Pa,Pa, Pb,Pb, Pb,Pb, Pb,Pb, Ru, Ru, 125125Sb, Sb, 9090Sr, Sr, 208208Tl,Tl,235235U,U,241241Am,Am,238238Pu,Pu,239,240239,240Pu,Pu,228228Th,Th,230230Th Th 232232Th, Th, 234234U,U,235235U,U,238238U U (and enrichment factors, HAT)(and enrichment factors, HAT)

InorganicsInorganics–– As, Ba, Be, Ca, Cd, Ce, Co, Cr, Cu, Dy, Er, Eu, Fe, Ga, Gd, As, Ba, Be, Ca, Cd, Ce, Co, Cr, Cu, Dy, Er, Eu, Fe, Ga, Gd,

i i S S S Sii i S S S SiHg, K, La, Li, Mg, Mn, Mo, Na, Nd, Ni, Pb, Pr, Sb, Sc, Se, Si, Hg, K, La, Li, Mg, Mn, Mo, Na, Nd, Ni, Pb, Pr, Sb, Sc, Se, Si, Sm, Sn, Sr, Th, Ti, Tl, U, V, ZnSm, Sn, Sr, Th, Ti, Tl, U, V, ZnChloride Fluoride Nitrate Nitrite Phosphate SulfateChloride Fluoride Nitrate Nitrite Phosphate Sulfate–– Chloride, Fluoride, Nitrate, Nitrite, Phosphate, SulfateChloride, Fluoride, Nitrate, Nitrite, Phosphate, Sulfate

OrganicsOrganicsVOCs head space gases flammablesVOCs head space gases flammables–– VOCs, head space gases, flammablesVOCs, head space gases, flammables

17 radionuclides monitored in lung and whole body 17 radionuclides monitored in lung and whole body (MDE < 6 keV)(MDE < 6 keV)

Other material propertiesOther material properties (K(K θθ GG DD κκ n etc )n etc )Other material propertiesOther material properties (K, (K, θθ, , GG, , DD, , κκ, n, etc.), n, etc.)UU--HAT measurements, Pu chemistry studies, PA (LANL, URENCO, Sandia)HAT measurements, Pu chemistry studies, PA (LANL, URENCO, Sandia)

Ambient Aerosol StudiesAmbient Aerosol StudiesOn

239,240239,240Pu variability tied to seasonal dust Pu variability tied to seasonal dust cycle (coupled to [Al]); same for cycle (coupled to [Al]); same for 241241AmAm

On Site

P tti i t tiP tti i t tiPutting zero into perspectivePutting zero into perspective

who works at WIPP

From the perspective of radiological effects, we cannot see

who lives near WIPPthat WIPP even exists

But we can see:

smokers (higher 137Cs, U from tobacco seen in a statistical # of smokers)who is a frequent hunter (wild game higher in 137Cs)q ( g g )when large dust storms occur in China (inorganics)who has big muscles (40K in muscle)