A Model-Based Assessment of Centralized and Decentralized Interim Waste Storage for HLW in Germany

Managing nuclear waste is a critical issue, with Germany currently possessing approximately 620,000 cubic meters of low and intermediate-level waste and 27,000 cubic meters of high-level waste (HLW), mostly spent fuel. As the search for a final repository continues, the Site Selection Act mandates a transparent and scientifically grounded selection process for suitable locations, but recent developments have pushed the projected timeline for site location to as late as 2074 or beyond (Krohn et al. 2024). These delays mean that current decentralized interim storage facilities housing HLW, will exceed their licensed lifetimes of approx. 40 years. Consequently, a consolidation of nuclear wastes into centralized interim storage sites, as currently partially being conducted in the United States (Wimmers and Von Hirschhausen 2024), might be a feasible option to increase waste management efficiency in Germany. This study proposes a quantitative approach to address the challenge of consolidated interim storage facilities (CISFs) for HLW in Germany. The concept of consolidating HLW at fewer sites has gained traction as a potential solution to manage these challenges effectively (Wegel et al. 2019; Scheer et al. 2024). We develop a linear optimization model aimed at addressing key questions regarding the number of CISFs required, their ideal capacities, and optimal locations. The model extends traditional transport problems by incorporating facility construction decisions and variable capacities. Utilizing a dataset that includes geographic, geological, and cost factors, we apply the model to assess various consolidation scenarios, aiming to identify the most cost-effective approach for the interim storage of HLW. Preliminary results indicate that consolidating HLW into seven strategically located CISFs can significantly reduce overall costs compared to a decentralized approach. The model highlights critical trade-offs between transportation costs, construction expenditures, and long-term storage reliability. Sensitivity analyses further reveal how various parameters, such as distance to waste generation sites and site-specific construction costs, influence the optimal configuration of CISFs.

 

References

Krohn, Judith, Angelika Spieth-Achtnich, Silvia Schütte, Mbah Melanie, Alexandra Lampke, Katja Hünecke, Dörte Fouquet, Jörg Kuhbier, and Tobias Reinhardt. 2024. “Unterstützung des BASE bei der Prozessanalyse des Standortauswahlverfahrens (PaSta).” Abschlussbericht FKZ 4718F10001. Bundesamt für die Sicherheit der nuklearen Entsorgung. https://www.base.bund.de/SharedDocs/Downloads/BASE/DE/fachinfo/fa/pasta_abschlussbericht.pdf?__blob=publicationFile&v=3.

Scheer, Dirk, Frank Becker, Thomas Hassel, Peter Hocke, Thorsten Leusmann, and Volker Metz. 2024. “Trittsicherheit auf Zukunftspfaden? Ungewissheitsbewältigung bei der Entsorgung hochradioaktiver Abfälle.” In Entscheidungen in die weite Zukunft, edited by Anne Eckhardt, Frank Becker, Volker Mintzlaff, Dirk Scheer, and Roman Seidl, 113–40. Energiepolitik und Klimaschutz. Energy Policy and Climate Protection. Wiesbaden: Springer Fachmedien Wiesbaden. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-658-42698-9_7.

Schneider, Mycle, Antony Froggatt, Julie Hazemann, Christian von Hirschhausen, M.V. Ramana, Alexander James Wimmers, Nina Schneider, et al. 2023. “World Nuclear Industry Status Report 2023.” Paris: Mycle Schneider Consulting. https://www.worldnuclearreport.org/IMG/pdf/wnisr2023-v1-hr.pdf.

Wegel, Sebastian, Victoria Czempinski, Pao-Yu Oei, and Ben Wealer. 2019. “Transporting and Storing High-Level Nuclear Waste in the U.S.—Insights from a Mathematical Model.” Applied Sciences 9 (12): 2437. https://doi.org/10.3390/app9122437.

Wimmers, Alexander, and Christian Von Hirschhausen. 2024. “Organizational Models for the Decommissioning of Nuclear Power Plants: Lessons from the United Kingdom and the United States.” Utilities Policy 91 (December):101843. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jup.2024.101843.