Nuclear decommissioning

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search
Example of decommissioning work underway.
The reactor pressure vessel being transported away from the site for burial.

Nuclear decommissioning is the process whereby a nuclear power plant site is dismantled to the point that it no longer requires measures for radiation protection. The presence of radioactive material necessitates processes that are occupationally dangerous, hazardous to the natural environment, expensive, and time-intensive.[1]

Decommissioning is an administrative and technical process. It includes clean-up of radioactive materials and progressive demolition of the plant. Once a facility is fully decommissioned, no radiologic danger should persist. The costs of decommissioning are spread over the lifetime of a facility and saved in a decommissioning fund.[2] After a facility has been completely decommissioned, it is released from regulatory control and the plant licensee is no longer responsible for its nuclear safety. Decommissioning may proceed all the way to "greenfield" status.


The International Atomic Energy Agency has defined three options for decommissioning:

  • Immediate Dismantling (Early Site Release/DECON in the US): This option allows for the facility to be removed from regulatory control relatively soon after shutdown or termination of regulated activities. Final dismantling or decontamination activities begin within a few months or years, and depending on the facility, it could take five years or more.[3] Following removal from regulatory control, the site becomes available for re-use.[4]
  • Safe Enclosure (or Safestor(e) SAFSTOR): This option postpones the final removal of controls for a longer period, usually on the order of 40 to 60 years. The facility is placed into a safe storage configuration until the eventual dismantling and decontamination activities occur.[5]
  • Entombment/ENTOMB: This option entails placing the facility into a condition that will allow the remaining radioactive material to remain on-site indefinitely. This option usually involves reducing the size of the area where the radioactive material is located and then encasing the facility in a long-lived material such as concrete, theoretically preventing a release of radioactive material.[6]


A wide range of nuclear facilities have been decommissioned so far. This includes nuclear power plants (NPPs), research reactors, isotope production plants, particle accelerators, and uranium mines. The number of decommissioned power plants is small. Companies specialize in nuclear decommissioning; decommissioning has become a profitable business. More recently, construction and demolition companies in the UK have also begun to develop nuclear decommissioning services. The current estimate by the United Kingdom's Nuclear Decommissioning Authority is that it will cost at least £100 billion to decommission the 19 existing United Kingdom nuclear sites.[7] Due to the radioactivity in the reactor structure, decommissioning takes place in stages. The plans of the Nuclear Decommissioning Authority for decommissioning reactors have an average 50 year time frame. The long time frame makes reliable cost estimates difficult. Cost overruns are common even for quick projects.

North America[edit]

The Pickering Nuclear Generating Station, viewed from the west. All eight reactors are visible; two units have been shut down.

Most nuclear plants currently operating in the United States were designed for a life of about 30–40 years[8] and are licensed to operate for 40 years by the US Nuclear Regulatory Commission.[9] The average age of these reactors is 32 years.[9] Many are coming to the end of their licensing period. If their licenses are not renewed, the plants must go through a decontamination and decommissioning process.[8][10]

Several nuclear reactors dismantled in North America, type, power, and decommissioning cost:[11][12][13]

Dismantled nuclear reactors in Canada & USA
Country: Location: Reactor type: Operative life: Decommissioning
Canada (Québec) Gentilly-1 CANDU-BWR
250 MWe
180 days
(between 1966 and 1973)
"Static state" since 1986[14][15][16] stage two:
$25 million
Pickering NGS
Units A2 and A3
8 x 542 MWe
30 years
(from 1974 to 2004)
Two units currently in "cold standby"
Decommissioning to begin in 2020 [17][18]
$270–430/kWe ?)
United States Fort St. Vrain HTGR
380 MWe
12 years
Immediate Decon $195 million
USA Rancho Seco[19] Multiunit:
913 MWe
12 years
(Closed after a referendum in 1989)
SAFSTOR: 5–10 years
completion 2018[citation needed]
USA Three Mile Island 2 Multiunit:
913 MWe PWR
core fusion

(in 1979)
Phase 2 (1979)
$805 Million
USA Shippingport (The first BWR)
60 MWe
25 years
(closed in 1989)
Decon completed
dismantled in 5 years
(first small
experimental reactor)
$98.4 million[22]
USA Piqua(Ohio) OCM (Organically Cooled/Moderated) reactor
46 MWe[23]
2 years
(closed in 1966)
(coolant design inadequate for neutron flux)
USA Trojan PWR
1,180 MWe
16 years
(Closed in 1993
because nearby to seismic fault)
(cooling tower demolished in 2006)
USA Yankee Rowe PWR 185 MWe 31 years
Decon completed - Demolished
(greenfield open to visitors) [25]
$608 million with $8 million per year upkeep
USA Maine Yankee PWR
860 MWe
24 years
(closed in 1996)
Decon completed - Demolished in 2004
(greenfield open to visitors) [26][27]
$635 million[28]
USA Connecticut Yankee PWR
590 MWe
28 years
(closed in 1996)
Decon - Demolished in 2007
(greenfield open to visitors) [29]
$820 million[30]
USA Exelon -
Zion 1 & 2
PWR - Westinghouse
2 x 1040 MWe
25 years
(Incident in proceedings,
abandoned because
of the excessive cost of vaporizers substitution)
(opening of the site to visitors for 2018) [31]
$900–1,100 million
(2007 dollars)[32]
USA Pacific Gas & Electric -
Humboldt Bay Nuclear Power Plant - Unit 3
1 x 63 MWe
13 years
(Shut down due to seismic retrofit)
On July 2, 1976, Humboldt Bay Power Plant (HBPP) Unit 3 was shut down for annual refueling and to conduct seismic modifications. In 1983, updated economic analyses indicated that restarting Unit 3 would probably not be cost-effective, and in June 1983, PG&E announced its intention to decommission the unit. On July 16, 1985, the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) issued Amendment No. 19 to the HBPP Unit 3 Operating License to change the status to possess-but-not-operate, and the plant was placed into a SAFSTOR status. Unknown - Closure date: 12/31/2015[33]


Reactors not located in Japan[edit]

Several nuclear reactors dismantled in Asia, type, power and decommissioning cost per kilowatt of electric power (source: World Nuclear Association)[34]

Dismantled reactors in Asia
Country: Location: Reactor type: Operative life: Decommissioning
China[35] Beijing (CIAE) HWWR 10 MWe (multipurpose)
(Heavy Water Experimental Reactor for the production of plutonium and tritium)
49 years
SAFSTOR & Decon in 20 years (until 2027) proposed:
$6 Million for dismantling
$5 Million for fuel remotion
North Korea Yongbyon Magnox-type
(reactor for the production of nuclear weapons through PUREX treatment)
20 years
Deactivated after a treaty[36][37]
SAFSTOR: cooling tower dismantled  ?
India[38][39] Tarapur-1,2
2x BWR 160 MWe 40 years ?
NOT deactivated  ?
India[40] Rawatbhata Atomic Power Station-1,2
1x PHWR 100 MWe
1x PHWR 200 MWe
(similar to CANDU)
40 years ?
NOT deactivated  ?
Iraq Osiraq/Tammuz-1[41] BWR 40 MWe
Nuclear reactor with weapons-grade plutonium production capability
(Destroyed by Israeli Air Force in 1981) Not radioactive: never refurbished with uranium  ?


The three damaged reactors at Fukushima Dai-ichi #1,#2,#3 are expected to be decommissioned as well as #4.

Heavily damaged reactors in Japan[42]
Nuclear Power Plant Electric max.
Type Connection to
electric grid
Decommissioning costs
Fukushima Dai-ichi NPP
(Unit 1)
439 BWR November 17, 1970 nuclear meltdown

Hydrogen explosion
(INES 7) [51][52]

Estimated at ¥10 trillion (US$ 100 billion) for decontaminating Fukushima and dismantling all reactors in Japan and considering long time damage to environment and economy, including agriculture, cattle breeding, fishery, water depuration, tourism
(without considering further health care spending & reduction of life expectancy).[53]
Fukushima Dai-ichi NPP
(Unit 2)
760 BWR December 24, 1973 partial nuclear meltdown
(INES 6)
(Risk of going into INES 7)[54][55][56]
Fukushima Dai-ichi NPP
(Unit 3)
760 BWR October 26, 1974 nuclear meltdown
Hydrogen explosion
(INES 7) [57]
Fukushima Dai-ichi NPP
(Unit 4)
760 BWR February 24, 1978 Reactor defuelled when tsunami hit
Damage to spent fuel cooling-pool
(INES 4)

(Could worsen if pool collapses) [58][59][60][61][62][63]
(Other specialists disagree about this danger) [64][65]

Fukushima Dai-ichi NPP
(Unit 5)
760 BWR September 22, 1977 SCRAM  ?
Fukushima Daiichi NPP
(Unit 6)
1067 BWR May 4, 1979 SCRAM  ?
Fukushima Daini NPP
(Unit 1 ) [66]
1067 BWR July 31, 1981 SCRAM
(leakage of coolant) [67]
Fukushima Daini NPP
(Units 2 - 4)
3 × 1067 BWR June 23, 1983
December 14, 1984
December 17, 1986
3 x SCRAM  ?
Tokai NPP (Reactor 2) 1100 MW BWR/5[68] November 28, 1978 SCRAM
Shutdown since March 2011
(anti-tsunami barrier stopped the waves)
INES 1 (leakage of coolant) [69]
Safely decommissioned reactors in Japan[42]
Nuclear Power Plant Electric max.
Type Connection to
electric grid
Decommissioning costs
Tokai NPP (Reactor 1) 160 MWe Magnox (GCR) (1966–1998) Safstore: 10 years[70][71]
then decon
until 2018

¥93 billion[72]
(€660 million of 2003)

Western Europe and Former Yugoslavia[edit]

Several nuclear reactors dismantled in Western Europe, type, power and decommissioning cost per kilowatt of power: European Union Website about Nuclear Decommissioning,[73] World Nuclear Association (reactor building companies),[74] United Kingdom.[75]

Safely decommissioned reactors in Western Europe[42]
Country: Location: Reactor type: Operative Life: Decommissioning
(Nuclear Free Country)[77]
Zwentendorf NPP
Google Maps
723 MWe
Never activated due to referendum in 1978[78]  ?  ?
Belgium SCK•CEN - BR3,
located at Mol, Belgium
PWR (BR-3)
25 years
Decon completed (2011)[79][80]
European pilot project
(underwater cutting and remote operated tools) [81][82]
France [83] Brennilis HWGCR 70 MWe 12 years
Phase 3 €480 million
(20 times the forecasted amount) [citation needed]
France Bugey-1 UNGG
Gas cooled, graphite moderator
1972–1994 postponed  ?
France Chinon 1,2,3 Gas-graphite
postponed  ?
France Chooz-A PWR 300 MW 24 years
Fully decommissioned - Greenfield [84][85][86]
(Nuclear reactor was located inside a mountain cave)
France Saint-Laurent Nuclear Power Plant Gas-graphite 1969–1992
50 kg of Uranium in one of the reactors at the Saint-Laurent Nuclear Power Plant began to melt, an event classified at 'level 4' on the International Nuclear Event Scale (INES).[87] As of March 2011, this is the most serious civil nuclear power accident in France.[88]
postponed  ?
France Rapsodie at
Fast breeder nuclear reactor
40 MWe
15 years
1983: Defuelling
1987: Remotion of neutron reflectors
1985-1989: Decontamination
of sodium coolant
Accident when cleaning residual sodium in vessel with ethyl carbitol (March 31° 1994)
The removed activity is estimated to around 4800 TBq.
600 TBq (60Co) in 1990 still contained in 1ry vessel

The dose burden from 1987 to 1994 was 224 mSv.
RAPSODIE reached IAEA level 2 of decomm in 2005

STAGE 3 is planned in 2020[89]

France Phénix at
Fast breeder nuclear reactor
233 MWe
36 years
(1973–2009) [90]
1) Defuelled estimated for the future:
$4000/kWe[citation needed]
France Superphénix at
Fast breeder nuclear reactor
11 years
(1985–1996) [91]
1) Defuelled
2) Extraction of Sodium [92]
Pipe cutting with a robot [93][94]
estimated for the future:
$4000/kWe[citation needed]
United Kingdom Berkeley Magnox
(2 x 138 MWe)
27 years
SAFSTOR: 30 years
(internal demolition)
United Kingdom Sellafield-Windscale
Windscale Advanced Gas Reactor
(32 MWe)
18 years
Remotion of reactor in 2009
pilot project
(cutting with remote controlled robots, UV lasers)[81][95][96][97]
More than $2600/kWe
(WNI estimates)
So far €117 million
United Kingdom Dorset -Winfrith

Operated in Dorset from 1958 to 1990. Had 9 reactors all mostly dismantled[98] [99]

West Germany Gundremmingen-A BWR
250 MWe

11 years
pilot project
(underwater cutting)
(~ $300–550/kWe)
Italy Caorso NPP BWR
840 MWe[100][101]
3 years[citation needed]
(1978 - Closed in 1987 after referendum in 1986)
SAFSTOR: 30 years
(internal demolition)
€450 million (dismantling)
+ €300 million (fuel reprocessing)[102][103][104][105]
Italy Garigliano NPP (Caserta) BWR
150 MWe[106]
(Closed on March 1, 1982)
SAFSTOR: 30 years
(internal demolition)
Italy Latina NPP (Foce Verde) Magnox
210 MWe Gas-graphite[107]
24 years
(1962 - Closed in 1986 after referendum)
SAFSTOR: 30 years
(internal demolition)
Italy Trino Vercellese NPP PWR Westinghouse,
270 MWe[108]
(Closed in 1986 after referendum)
SAFSTOR: 30 years
(internal demolition)
Netherlands Dodewaard NPP BWR Westinghouse
58 MWe[109]
28 years
Defuelling completed
SAFSTOR: 40 years
Spain Vandellós NPP-1 UNGG
480 MWe
18 years
fire in a turbogenerator
SAFSTOR: 30 years
(internal demolition)
Phases 1 and 2: €93 million
Sweden Barsebäck NPP 1 & 2 BWR 2 x 615 MW Reactor 1: 24 years 1975 - 1999
Reactor 2: 28 years 1977 - 2005
SAFSTOR: demolition will begin in 2020 The Swedish Radiation Safety Authority has assessed that the costs for decommissioning and final disposal for the Swedish nuclear power industry may be underestimated by SKB by at least 11 billion Swedish crowns ($1.63 billion)[110]
Switzerland[111] DIORIT MWe Gas-graphite
(internal demolition)
Switzerland LUCENS 8,3 MWe CO2-heavy water
Incident: fire in 1969
Entombment for ? years
SAFSTOR & Decon: 24 years
(internal demolition)
Switzerland SAPHIR 0,01-0,1 MWe
(Light water pool)
39 years
(Experimental demonstrator)
In public display since inauguration[citation needed]  ?

Eastern Europe and former Soviet Union[edit]

Several nuclear reactors dismantled in the nations born from the former Soviet Union: (Belarus, Russia, Ukraine and others) and reactors dismantled in countries formerly belonging to "Warsaw Pact" and/or to "Comecon", type, electric power and decommissioning cost per kilowatt of power: World Nuclear Association,[112] OSTI (Russia & USA).[13]

Decommissioned reactors in Eastern Europe
Country: Location: Reactor typr: Operative life: Decommissioning
Bulgaria Kozloduy NPP-1,2,3,4[113] PWR VVER-440
(4 x 408 MWe)
Reactors 1,2 closed in 2003,
reactors 3,4 closed in 2006

(Closing forced
by European Union)
De-fuelling  ?
East Germany Greifswald NPP-1,
5 x 408 MWe
Reactors 1-5 closed in 1989/1990,
reactor 6: finished but never operated
(underwater cutting)
~ $330/kWe
East Germany Rheinsberg NPP-1 VVER-210
70–80 MWe
24 years
In dismantling
since 1996
Safstor (underwater cutting)
~ $330/kWe
East Germany Stendal NPP-1,2,3,4 VVER-1000
(4 x 1000 MWe)
Never activated
(1st reactor 85% completed)
Not radioactive
(Cooling towers
demolished with explosives)
(Structure in exhibition
inside an
industrial park)
Russia Mayak[114]
PUREX plant for
uranium enrichment
Several severe incidents
 ?  ?
Russia Seversk[115]
Three plutonium reactors
Plant for uranium enrichment
Two fast-breeder reactors closed (of three),
after disarmaments agreements with USA in 2003.[116]
 ?  ?
Slovakia Jaslovske Bohunice NPP-1,2
(180 km east from Vienna)[117][118]
VVER 440/230
2 X 440 MWe
 ?  ?
Ukraine Chernobyl NPP-4
(110 km
from Kiev)
1000 MWe
hydrogen explosion,
then graphite fire (1986)

(INES 7)
(armed concrete "sarcophagus")
Past: ?
Future: riding sarcophagus in steel[119]

Legal aspects[edit]

The decommission of a nuclear reactor can only take place after the appropriate licence has been granted pursuant to the relevant legislation. As part of the licensing procedure, various documents, reports and expert opinions have to be written and delivered to the competent authority, e.g. safety report, technical documents and an environmental impact study (EIS).

In the European Union these documents are the basis for the environmental impact assessment (EIA) according to Council Directive 85/337/EEC. A precondition for granting such a licence is an opinion by the European Commission according to Article 37 of the Euratom Treaty. Article 37 obliges every Member State of the European Union to communicate certain data relating to the release of radioactive substances to the Commission. This information must reveal whether and if so what radiological impacts decommissioning – planned disposal and accidental release – will have on the environment, i.e. water, soil or airspace, of the EU Member States.[120] On the basis of these general data, the Commission must be in a position to assess the exposure of reference groups of the population in the nearest neighbouring states.


In USA many utility estimates now average $325 million per reactor all-up (1998 $).

In France, decommissioning of Brennilis Nuclear Power Plant, a fairly small 70 MW power plant, already cost €480 million (20x the estimate costs) and is still pending after 20 years. Despite the huge investments in securing the dismantlement, radioactive elements such as plutonium, caesium-137 and cobalt-60 leaked out into the surrounding lake.[121][122]

In the UK, decommissioning of the Windscale Advanced Gas Cooled Reactor (WAGR), a 32 MW prototype power plant, cost €117 million.

In Germany, decommissioning of Niederaichbach nuclear power plant, a 100 MW power plant, amounted to more than €143 million.

New methods for decommissioning have been developed in order to minimize the usual high decommissioning costs. One of these methods is in situ decommissioning (ISD), meaning that the reactor is entombed instead of dismantled. This method was implemented at the U.S. Department of Energy Savannah River Site in South Carolina for the closures of the P and R Reactors. With this tactic, the cost of decommissioning both reactors was $73 million. In comparison, the decommissioning of each reactor using traditional methods would have been an estimated $250 million. This results in a 71% decrease in cost by using ISD.[123]

Decommissioning funds[edit]

In Europe there is considerable concern over the funds necessary to finance final decommissioning. In many countries either the funds do not appear sufficient to cover decommissioning and in other countries decommissioning funds are used for other activities, putting decommissioning at risk, and distorting competition with parties who do not have such funds available.[124]

In 2016 the European Commission assessed that European Union's nuclear decommissioning liabilities were seriously underfunded by about 118 billion euros, with only 150 billion euros of earmarked assets to cover 268 billion euros of expected decommissioning costs covering both dismantling of nuclear plants and storage of radioactive parts and waste. France had the largest shortfall with only 23 billion euros of earmarked assets to cover 74 billion euros of expected costs.[125]

Similar concerns exist in the United States, where the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission has located apparent decommissioning funding assurance shortfalls and requested 18 power plants to address that issue.[126] The decommissioning cost of Small Modular Reactors is expected to be twice as much respect to Large Reactors.[127]

International collaboration[edit]

Organizations that promote the international sharing of information, knowledge, and experiences related to nuclear decommissioning include the International Atomic Energy Agency, the Organization for Economic Co-operation and Development's Nuclear Energy Agency and the European Atomic Energy Community.[11] In addition, an online system called the Deactivation and Decommissioning Knowledge Management Information Tool was developed under the United States Department of Energy and made available to the international community to support the exchange of ideas and information. The goals of international collaboration in nuclear decommissioning are to reduce decommissioning costs and improve worker safety.[11]

Ships, mobile reactors, military reactors[edit]

Many warships and a few civil ships have used nuclear reactors for propulsion. Former Soviet and American warships have been taken out of service and their power plants removed or scuttled. Dismantling of Russian submarines and ships and American submarines and ships is ongoing. Marine power plants are generally smaller than land-based electrical generating stations.

See also[edit]


  1. ^ Benjamin K. Sovacool. "A Critical Evaluation of Nuclear Power and Renewable Electricity in Asia", Journal of Contemporary Asia, Vol. 40, No. 3, August 2010, p. 373.
  2. ^ Quote: Before a nuclear power plant begins operations, the licensee must establish or obtain a financial mechanism – such as a trust fund or a guarantee from its parent company – to ensure there will be sufficient money to pay for the ultimate decommissioning of the facility.
  3. ^ "Fact Sheets: Decommissioning Of Nuclear Power Plants". National Energy Institute. Retrieved 2014-06-19. 
  4. ^ DECON: a method of decommissioning, in which structures, systems, and components that contain radioactive contamination are removed from a site and safely disposed at a commercially operated low-level waste disposal facility, or decontaminated to a level that permits the site to be released for unrestricted use shortly after it ceases operation.
  5. ^ SAFSTOR: a method of decommissioning in which a nuclear facility is placed and maintained in a condition that allows the facility to be safely stored and subsequently decontaminated (deferred decontamination) to levels that permit release for unrestricted use.
  6. ^ ENTOMB: a method of decommissioning, in which radioactive contaminants are encased in a structurally long-lived material, such as concrete. The entombed structure is maintained and surveillance is continued until the entombed radioactive waste decays to a level permitting termination of the license and unrestricted release of the property. During the entombment period, the licensee maintains the license previously issued by the NRC.
  7. ^ House of Commons Committee of Public Accounts (4 February 2013). "Nuclear Decommissioning Authority: Managing risk at Sellafield" (PDF). London: The Stationery Office Limited. Retrieved 2 Dec 2013. 
  8. ^ a b "Nuclear Decommissioning: Decommission nuclear facilities". Retrieved 2013-09-06. 
  9. ^ a b "How old are U.S. nuclear power plants and when was the last one built? - FAQ - U.S. Energy Information Administration (EIA)". Retrieved 2013-09-06. 
  10. ^ "NRC: Decommissioning of Nuclear Facilities". 2013-06-28. Retrieved 2013-09-06. 
  11. ^ a b c Nuclear Decommissioning article by World Nuclear Association (associaciation of nuclear reactors builders: [1]
  12. ^ NRC: Locations of Power Reactor Sites Undergoing Decommissioning
  13. ^ a b OSTI: Appendix A - A Summary of the Shutdown and Decommissioning Experience for Nuclear Power Plants in the United States and the Russian Federation. Appendix B - A Summary of the Regulatory Environment for the Shutdown and Decommissioning of Nuclear Power Plants in the United States and the Russian Federation. Appendix C - Recommended Outlines for Decommissioning Documentation
  14. ^ IAEA: Taking Canada's Gentilly-1 to a "static state (by Balarko Gupta)
  15. ^ ASCE: Gentilly-1 a study in nuclear decommission
  16. ^ A Chernobyl in Québec? (correspondence on the dangers of Québec's only nuclear plant)
  17. ^ Ontario Power Generation: Pickering Nuclear Power
  18. ^ FAIREWINDS: Relicensing Pickering Nuclear Generating Station
  19. ^ OSTI: Energy Citations Database about Rancho Seco nuclear power plant
  20. ^ US-NRC: Rancho Seco nuclear power plant
  21. ^ UNITED STATES NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION: Three Mile Island - Decommissioning Unit 2
  22. ^ OSTI, Office of Scientific and Technical Information - Shippingport station decommissioning project: start of physical decommissioning
  23. ^ US NRC Information Digest 2008-2009
  24. ^ Koberstein, Paul (2005-03-09). "Trojan: PGE's Nuclear Gamble". Willamette Week. p. A1. Retrieved 2007-06-15. 
  25. ^ Yankee Rowe Nuclear Reactor (third nuclear reactor in USA, totally dismantled)
  26. ^ Maine Yankee Nuclear Power Station, ME - Power Technology
  27. ^ Maine Yankee Decommissioning 80% Complete
  28. ^ Maine Yankee Decommissioning Experience Report
  29. ^ Connecticut Yankee Nuclear Reactor - Complete Decommissioning
  30. ^ SEC-INFORMATION: Connecticut Yankee The United Illuminating Company (UI), a wholly owned subsidiary of UIL Holdings Corporation (UIL), owns 9.5% of the equity of Connecticut Yankee Atomic Power Company. Connecticut Yankee has prepared a draft updated estimate of the cost of decommissioning its nuclear unit, as part of its transition to self performance of decommissioning. Connecticut Yankee's draft updated cost estimate includes an increase of approximately $270 million over the cost estimate reported in November 2002
  31. ^ With Exelon's Zion 1 & 2 reactors (2 x 1098 MWe) closed down in 1998 and in Safstor, a slightly different process is envisaged, considerably accelerating the decommissioning. Exelon has contracted with a specialist company - EnergySolutions, to remove the plant and return the site to greenfield status. To achieve this, the plant's licence and decommissioning funds will be transferred to EnergySolutions, which will then be owner and licensee, and the site will be returned to Exelon about 2018. Used fuel would remain on site until taken to the national repository.
  32. ^ WEBWIRE: Exelon Nuclear To Accelerate Decommissioning Of Zion Station
  33. ^ "NRC: Humboldt Bay". Retrieved 2013-09-06. 
  34. ^ Nuclear Decommissioning article by the association of nuclear reactor builders
  35. ^ IAEA: Decommissioning in China
  36. ^ PRESS TV (Iranian News Agency): North Korea to decommission nuclear facility
  37. ^ THE GUARDIAN: Nuclear agreement: North Korea halts decommissioning
  38. ^ SCIDEV: India's energy mix needs nuclear boost
  39. ^ ECOWORLD: Nuclear power in India, by Avilash Roul
  40. ^ INDIA - CISED: Economics of Nuclear Power Heavy Water Reactors
  41. ^ Federation of American Scientists: Osiraq/Tammuz Nuclear Reactor
  42. ^ a b c AIEA: Nuclear Power Reactors in Japan
  43. ^ TEPCO: Unit No. 1 is now “in a state of meltdown” — Suspects there are holes in bottom of reactor (VIDEO)
  44. ^ ALERT: Melted fuel in No. 1 reactor NOT covered with water
  45. ^ Fukushima Nuclear Accident Update Log
  46. ^ "3 nuclear reactors melted down after quake, Japan confirms". CNN. 7 June 2011. Retrieved 13 July 2011. 
  47. ^ "'Melt-through' at Fukushima? / Govt report to IAEA suggests situation worse than meltdown". Yomiuri. 8 June 2011. Retrieved 8 June 2011. 
  48. ^ Nuclear Engineer Arnie Gundersen: Fukushima Meltdown May Result in 1 Million Cases of Cancer
  49. ^ Fukushima: Find the corium? Maybe in a few thousand years or so
  50. ^ Fukushima: A Nuclear War without a War: The Unspoken Crisis of Worldwide Nuclear Radiation
  51. ^ "Japan to raise Fukushima crisis level to worst". Retrieved 12 April 2011. 
  52. ^ "Japan raises nuclear crisis to same level as Chernobyl". Reuters. 12 April 2011. 
  53. ^ The Japan Times: Whether Tepco fails or not, it’s taxpayers’ tab
  54. ^ Hydrogen levels continue rising at Reactor No. 2 — Now above .50%, highest in months — Explosion risk at 4%
  55. ^ Highest hydrogen levels
  56. ^ Mainichi: Reactors No. 1 and 2 have holes up to 50 square CENTImeters, analysis says — Biggest hurdle now is filling with water — “Caused by hydrogen explosions” — Half million pounds of highly radioactive fuel inside reactors 1-3
  57. ^ Japan Nuclear Expert: “We don’t even know at this point where the melted down core is” under Reactors No. 1, 2 or 3 (VIDEO)
  58. ^ Coalition requests UN intervention to stabilize Spent Fuel Pool No. 4 at Fukushima — Endorsed by nuclear experts
  59. ^ Footage of gov’t official at Fukushima inspecting support posts under Spent Fuel Pool No. 4 (VIDEOS)
  60. ^ “Ability for Unit 4 to withstand another seismic event is rated at zero” -Nuclear Watchdog
  61. ^ The Worst Yet to Come? Why Nuclear Experts Are Calling Fukushima a Ticking Time-Bomb - Experts say acknowledging the threat would call into question the safety of dozens of identically designed nuclear power plants in the U.S.
  62. ^ Japan Nuclear Expert: There are known to be broken fuel rod assemblies in Spent Fuel Pool No. 4 — Large amount of radioactive material has fallen to bottom — “Many years” to get fuel out (VIDEO)
  63. ^ THE GUARDIAN: The Fukushima nuclear plant's slow recovery offers lessons to the US
  64. ^ Adam Curry Exposes Robert Alvarez’s Fukushima Spent Fuel Pool Fable on No Agenda
  65. ^ The Neutron Economy: Overheated rods & rhetoric
  66. ^ The Other Fukushima Nuclear Power Plant
  67. ^ Fukushima Daini Nuclear Power Station all shutdown
  68. ^ "Reactors in operation". IAEA. 31 December 2009. Retrieved March 12, 2011. 
  69. ^ NHK-world (22 March 2012 10:52 +0900 (JST)'Wastewater leakage found at Tokai nuclear plant
  70. ^ Article in IAEA-TECDOC--1043: Permanent cessation of Tokai power plant's operation.
  71. ^ Science Links Japan: Progression of decommissioning of Tokai power plant. First case of power reactor in Japan.
  72. ^ Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development/Nuclear Energy Agency, report 2003: Strategy Selection for the Decommissioning of Nuclear Facilities (page 118).
  73. ^ European webside on Decommissioning of Nuclear Installations - Decommissioning in Europe
  74. ^ Nuclear Decommissioning (Reactor Building Companies)
  75. ^ British Parliament: Estimated dates for the dismantling of nuclear reactors in the United Kingdom
  76. ^ NEA: Decommissioning in Austria
  77. ^ EURONUCLEAR-NEWS: Can Austria Survive Without Nuclear Power ?
  78. ^ SUSTAINABILITY INSTITUTE: Zwentendorf, a Nuclear Plant That Will Never Be Turned On
  79. ^ "BR3". Retrieved 2013-09-06. 
  80. ^ "Nuclear Power in Belgium | Belgian Nuclear Energy". Retrieved 2013-09-06. 
  81. ^ a b EU-DECOM-belgium - From 1979 until now: five framework programmes
  82. ^ The European Nuclear Decommissioning Training Facility - Mol, Belgium, 2002
  83. ^ Nuclear Power in France
  84. ^ MAMMOET: Nuclear decommissioning through a bottleneck.
  85. ^ WM2009 Conference, March 1-5, 2009 Phoenix, AZ - International Cooperation for the Dismantling of Chooz A Reactor Pressure Vessel – 9087
  86. ^ Segmentation of Reactor Vessel Internals
  87. ^ "INES – The International Nuclear and Radiological Event Scale" (PDF). International Atomic Energy Agency. 1 August 2008. p. 2. Retrieved 13 March 2011. 
  88. ^ Les Echos – 18/03/11 – A Saint-Laurent, EDF a renoncé à construire une digue contre les inondations Les Echos, published 2011-03-18, accessed 2011-03-30
  89. ^ Decommissioning of LMRs in France
  90. ^ SCITECH CONNECT: Phenix Decommissioning Project - Overview
  91. ^ WISEINTERNATIONAL: Superphénix; still more problems ahead
  92. ^
  93. ^ Decommissioning of Fast Reactors after Sodium Draining
  94. ^
  95. ^ UKAEA - Case Studies - Decommissioning - Windscale Advanced Gas-Cooled Reactor Archived October 7, 2008, at the Wayback Machine.
  96. ^ DIXON, C (1999). "WAGR decommissioning : preparation, removal and disposal of the WAGR heat exchangers". Nuclear energy. 38 (6): 361–369. 
  97. ^ Summary of Responses to Discussion Letter on Future of Windscale
  98. ^ "MP's vow to fight for Winfrith future (From Thisisdorset)". 2007-09-04. Retrieved 2013-09-06. 
  99. ^ "Winfrith - Quarterly report for 1 July - 30 September 2011". Retrieved 2013-09-06. 
  100. ^ Zona Nucleare - La centrale nucleare in fase di smantellamento ex-ENEL di Caorso (Piacenza)
  101. ^ Il Fiume Po: La Centrale Nucleare di Caorso
  102. ^ Renzo Guerzoni. "Il decommissioning della centrale nucleare di Caorso" (PDF). Sogin. p. 6. Archived from the original (PDF) on 2015-05-03. 
  103. ^ Via libera allo smantellamento della centrale di Caorso
  104. ^ Accordo tra la SOGIN e la Sudsvik svedese
  105. ^ LA REPUBBLICA: Per Caorso un addio lungo mezzo secolo, piano ENEL per smantellare la centrale
  106. ^ Zona Nucleare - La centrale nucleare in fase di smantellamento ex-ENEL di Garigliano (Caserta)
  107. ^ Zona Nucleare - La centrale nucleare in fase di smantellamento ex-ENEL di Foce Verde (Latina)
  108. ^ Zona Nucleare - La centrale nucleare in fase di smantellamento ex-ENEL di Trino Vercellese (Vercelli)
  109. ^ NEA: Decommissioning in the Netherlands
  110. ^ Sweden plans big rise in fees to nuclear decommissioning fund
  111. ^ Nuclear Energy Agency: Decommissioning in Switzerland
  112. ^ Nuclear Decommissioning article by the international association of nuclear reactor builders
  113. ^ World Nuclear Association: Nuclear Power in Bulgaria
  114. ^ La storia dei ripetuti incidenti a Majak
  115. ^ UK-Russia Closed Nuclear Cities Partnership
  116. ^ Russia shuts second plutonium-producing reactor at Seversk
  117. ^ BBC: Austria against restarting of nuclear reactor at Jaslovske Bohunice
  118. ^ YAHOO NEWS: Slovakia forced to restart nuclear reactors after Ukrainian gas crisis
  119. ^ European Bank for Reconstruction and Development: Breakthrough for Chernobyl nuclear decommissioning efforts (Consortium Novarka to build New Safe Confinement Holtec International to complete Spent Fuel Storage)
  120. ^ Heuel-Fabianek, B., Kümmerle, E., Möllmann-Coers, M., Lennartz, R. (2008): The relevance of Article 37 of the Euratom Treaty for the dismantling of nuclear reactors. atw - International Journal for Nuclear Power 6/2008
  121. ^ Le Télégramme: Brennilis
  122. ^ Ouest-France: "Brennilis : EDF se fait taper sur les doigts"
  123. ^ "SRS P and R Reactor Basins ISD Final" (PDF). D&D KM-IT - Deactivation and Decommissioning Knowledge Management Information Tool. 
  124. ^ ENDS: Nuclear decommissioning funds “require oversight”
  125. ^ Christoph Steitz, Barbara Lewis (16 February 2016). "EU short of 118 billion euros in nuclear decommissioning funds". Reuters. Retrieved 17 February 2016. 
  126. ^ "NRC Requests Plans from 18 Nuclear Power Plants to Address Apparent Decommissioning Funding Assurance Shortfalls" (PDF). Nuclear Regulatory Commission. June 19, 2009. Retrieved 2014-12-30. 
  127. ^ Locatelli, Giorgio; Mancini, Mauro (2010-07-02). "Competitiveness of Small-Medium, New Generation Reactors: A Comparative Study on Decommissioning". Journal of Engineering for Gas Turbines and Power. 132 (10): 102906–102906. doi:10.1115/1.4000613. ISSN 0742-4795. 

External links[edit]