Deep beneath the rolling hills of France’s Champagne region, a vast network of tunnels is being developed to address one of the most pressing issues facing the nuclear industry: the safe disposal of radioactive waste. Located 1,500 feet underground, this facility operated by France’s National Radioactive Waste Agency (Andra) is at the forefront of scientific experimentation and construction technique testing, essential for gaining regulatory approval to build a geological disposal facility (GDF).
As I navigate the dimly lit passages of this underground laboratory, the air is dry and dusty, and I am acutely aware of the heavy emergency respirators I must carry. It is a reminder of the dangers associated with working in an environment meant to store some of the world’s most hazardous materials: intermediate and high-level nuclear waste.
GDFs are among the largest underground structures humanity has ever built, designed to contain radioactive waste produced by nuclear reactors. These facilities are planned in multiple countries, including the UK, France, Sweden, and Finland, with Finland leading the way as the first nation to build a deep geological disposal site for spent fuel. Meanwhile, construction is set to begin soon at Forsmark in Sweden, while France plans a similar facility at Ciego.
Currently, high-level waste is stored on the surface in facilities such as Sellafield in the UK and La Hague in France. This waste can include spent fuel, reactor components, and other radioactive byproducts. The challenge lies in designing GDFs to safely contain this waste for up to 100,000 years, a task that requires decades of planning and construction.
According to Jacques Delay, a scientist at the French facility, the licensing process for these GDFs takes between 20 to 30 years. After approval, facilities will operate for about a century before being sealed, followed by hundreds of years of monitoring. “The key to siting a GDF is to find a suitable site and a willing host community,” Delay explained.
Geological considerations are paramount in the search for appropriate locations, with rocks such as granite and clay deemed ideal for long-term containment. However, potential sites may be disqualified if they are too close to vital aquifers or other geological risks, such as advancing glaciers.
Finding a suitable site can be challenging, particularly in densely populated regions. “Many of the communities that volunteered for hosting were unrealistic, such as those close to suburbs of Paris,” Delay noted. Community engagement is crucial, as local consent is required at every step of the process. In Finland, where public familiarity with nuclear energy is high, community support has been more forthcoming compared to countries like the UK, where past experiences with nuclear projects have bred skepticism.
The construction of GDFs is not without controversy. Protests have erupted in Sweden over proposed drilling activities, highlighting the importance of local support for such monumental projects. Additionally, while some may suggest reusing disused mines for nuclear waste storage, experts like Neil Hyatt caution against this approach. Mines were not designed with the precision required for high-level waste storage, and there are concerns about potential disturbances from future mining activities.
Ultimately, the construction of new purpose-built facilities may be more feasible. Pasi Tuohimaa of Posiva Oy, Finland’s nuclear waste disposal company, noted that designing a facility from scratch allows for comprehensive planning to meet safety standards.
As nations grapple with the complexities of nuclear waste disposal, the pressing question remains: How will humanity manage its radioactive legacy in the centuries to come?
