Nuclear energy is becoming ever more contentious. especially with the current crises unfolding at Fukushima, Japan. there are several issues and criticisms levelled against nuclear energy, of those issues, the need to have safe storage for nuclear waste material is paramount, as these wastes remain radioactive for thousands of years after disposal.
of the 27 member states of the EU, 14 states have operational nuclear reactors with France at the lead with 58 reactors. in the EU there is a total of 143 nuclear reactors and storage of waste material becomes an issue. the problem is long-term storage of these materials, these storage facilities are very expensive and are unfeasible for small countries that have a small number of reactors which produce a small amount of waste. as a result, the EU commission has been discussing the very likely possibility of setting up an EU storage facility, built and funded by the member states and used by them. now the obstacle is "not in my back yard", what country would be willing to take on such a hazard. until the facility is set up, most countries such as Switzerland will place the responsibility of storage on the local producers of nuclear energy in their respective countries.
K.K
http://www.spiegel.de/international/germany/0,1518,478309,00.html
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-europe-11684571
2 comments:
Isn't this just what the EU is for--finding a satisfactory way to handle a collective, nearly EU-wide problem? Now, a question: in what country will the storage facility be placed?
MA
European Union is a community until we have a “private” problem. Ok I am not that pessimist. What I think is that we should not expect from a country to share in a problem of other country if the other country has advantages from the “business” and the received country has not, (or not really). And I believe that it’s equitable. Each country has to balance the advantages and disadvantages between the energy sources. Of course the location is a determinative factor, thus we can see big differences between energy policies. And I think, to make an arrangement between 2-3 countries is out and away possible, not like between 27 in generally.
( In my point of view, we saw the worst happening in Japan, and I have to say, they were disciplined and handle the tragedy with quite “low” damages. Does it mean I prefer nuclear energy? No, but we still cannot “circumvent” it. (Thanks to the growing energy demand and much lower energy price from it against the renewable energy. UNFORTUNATELY!) And as I know the storage is safety...?)
Post a Comment