South Australia Nuclear Waste Dump Case Study

Should South Australia Host a High-Level Nuclear Waste Dump?

Nuclear waste is radioactive material that is produced as a common by-product of the operation of nuclear power generation and any additional applications of nuclear technology. Nuclear (Radioactive) waste is hazardous to the environment as well as living organisms and is strictly regulated by certain government agencies to protect the world from the risks of this waste. However, nuclear technology can also be a good thing as it is used in smoke alarms and radiotherapy to cure cancer (Brainiac75, 2012). Radioactive waste decays naturally over specific periods depending on the types of radioactive material that the waste is composed of. Radioactive waste has materials that are unstable due to a differing number of neutrons. The neutron is ejected out the nucleus and can produce radiation in the form of an electron formed by a neutron; there are also other types of radiation such as alpha (fast helium atoms) or gamma rays (Black Cat Systems, n.d). Therefore, nuclear waste

must be stored securely until it no longer poses a risk to health. Nuclear waste is an important topic in South Australia as there is a debate of storing other nations nuclear waste. Nuclear waste is a type of waste that is a byproduct of working with radioactive materials such as the operation of nuclear reactors or treatment of cancer with radioactive therapy. The arguments presented will demonstrate that a nuclear waste dump is a highly beneficial venture for South Australia.

Figure 1: An Alpha Particle

Source: Mirion Technologies, n.d

To understand the arguments relating to nuclear waste, there must be an understanding of radioactive particles. Nuclear waste is radioactive materials that emit one or more types of radiation. The main types of radiation are Beta, Gamma and Alpha and they have different properties. Alpha radiation is a fast helium atom (Helium-4) that is ejected from the nucleus when nuclear breakdown occurs (see Figure 1). The properties of alpha radiation are that is interacts with matter strongly, can only travel a few centimetres through air and cannot penetrate through the layer of dead human skin cells. However, if ingested into the human body than it will cause severe cell damage. Beta radiation can either be an electron or positron (mass of an electron but with a positive charge). This type of radiation can travel further through the air than alpha radiation and can penetrate materials easier but still can be stopped by materials easily (e.g. Plastic). This type of radiation can penetrate human skin a few centimetres. However, the main risk for humans is ingestion like alpha radiation. Another main type of radiation is gamma radiation. Unlike the other type of radiation mentioned; gamma is not a particle but rather a high energy wave. This radiation is dangerous as it can penetrate most materials and can travel very far through the air. It can be stopped using dense materials with high atomic numbers such as lead. These are the main types of radiation that should be known however there are more types such as X-Rays and Neutron Radiation. These particles make nuclear waste dangerous as these can cause harm but the harm is very limited when they are controlled.
Figure 2: Survival rate correlating to radiation exposure (in Grey)

Source: Regis Lachaume, 2005 (main source: Haskin et al. 1997)

A concern that most of the public agrees on is the risk of having a nuclear waste dump in South Australia is the radiation. As explained, the two type of radiation that were mentioned (Alpha and Beta) can only have limited travel through air. However, radiation is still dangerous as seen in Figure 2. Figure 2 shows us that mortality is increased the more a person is exposed to radiation and the dose rate. Nevertheless, radiation is not harmful in small doses such as background radiation. In Figure 2, there still is a clear line showing that death is more likely when you are exposed to radiation. However, the dose rate is very high being 0.2 grey. The normal background radiation in Australia is 1.5 millisievert per year which equates to 0.0015 grey. Even though radiation seems to be harmful, it still cannot cause a lot of harm as the waste will be buried in a site that is 0.5km deep and there will be no public access meaning that the people who claim that nuclear waste is dangerous are correct but are exaggerating these dangers as the background radiation level on the surface will be the same as the types of radiation (Alpha, Beta) cannot travel that far. The public is often concerned with the topic of radioactivity and nuclear technologies mostly due to accidents such as a severe nuclear incident caused by flawed design and inadequate personnel in the Chernobyl Nuclear Power Plant causing nuclear fallout to spend causing acute radiation syndrome and early cancers, killing an estimated 4000 by hard cancer (IAEA, 2005; World Nuclear, 2018). This caused nuclear power to be questioned, due to the possibility of the accident occurring again in a different reactor. Another major event is the Fukushima disaster caused by a nuclear power plant losing all power due to a major tsunami. This event was more contained and had a death toll of 34 from evacuation and none from radiation. Nonetheless, this puts nuclear power in a bad view in the public spotlight thus causing a problem in building a nuclear waste dump and that is the people opinion.

The public opinion on nuclear waste can be observed in South Australia as people and communities are outraged by the notion of building a nuclear waste dump (ABC News, 2018). However, the public is not educated as a survey was undertaken which found that 71.2% of participants were not aware of how nuclear waste is processed, 44.1% also educate themselves with the media which can be biased and inaccurate (out of 59 participants) (Suresh N, 2018). An example of the public being misled is a quote from ABC News that states that there is a “sacred Aboriginal women’s site in the region.” However, the nuclear waste site is underground and has the capability to never cause human harm if left underground especially if the risk is reduced by recycling the fuel which decreases the time it is emitting harsh radiation Nonetheless, the public must be educated on the safety of nuclear waste as the public is generally uneducated basing the technology and techniques of storing nuclear waste as being unchanged as from the technology form the Chernobyl disaster which occurred in 1986 when smartphones did not exist and current computing technologies were in its infancy (World Nuclear Association, 2018). The public must be educated on the benefits of nuclear waste and its technologies to progress further to the point of storing nuclear waste in South Australia.

A benefit of storing nuclear waste is that the state government would gain a considerable amount of income from other countries storing their waste in South Australia. The state’s economy is already at a deficit due to bad decisions made by the government requiring some extra money to fix the problems that are caused by these unfavourable decisions. The revenue would be astronomical reaching up to 447 billion dollars being injected into the state’s economy (The Advertiser, 2017). Due to nuclear waste being very dangerous to the environment, storing it in a secluded area is very beneficial to the environment and should ease the panic of nuclear waste being a harm to people if they are very far away from it. It wouldn’t cause harm to anyone and would bring massive benefits to South Australia’s economy. However, there are some implications that may prevent the progress of building a nuclear waste dump such as the laws that are currently in place that prevent such a site from existing.

A problem facing nuclear waste storage in South Australia is that there is currently an act of the state parliament that states that the act is to “protect the health, safety and welfare of the people of South Australia,” by “prohibiting the establishment of certain nuclear waste storage facilities.” (Nuclear Waste Storage Facility Act 2000) The maximum punishment for building a nuclear waste facility is five million dollars for a company (body corporate).

This act must be abolished or altered to proceed with any construction of a waste facility. Furthermore, the federal government must be informed and approve the construction of such a structure. However, these setbacks can be remedied and do not stop the possibility of hosting such a nuclear waste disposal facility. A benefit that may not be evident can have the possibility of saving money by generating electricity from other countries waste by the construction of a nuclear power

plant.

Figure 2: Comparison of Electricity Prices

Source: Seiam Tavadroka, 2018

As mentioned in the introduction, nuclear waste can be regarded differently in many different countries. For example, the United States of America does not recycle its spent fuel in the reactors it operates and puts it in storage while France recycles their nuclear waste with most of their power (80%) being generated with recycled fuel. This could explain the low electricity cost that is shown in Figure 1, where France is the second-best country concerning energy prices in the graph. The opportunity that is presented is that South Australia may be able to power a nuclear reactor with reprocessed fuel from another country leading to a general decrease in electricity prices (observe Figure 1) which will create clean energy without the need for expensive wind and solar solutions. This would be very beneficial to South Australia as it holds the highest energy prices even though the government has invested in renewable technologies that are supposed to lower these costs. The topic of nuclear power is relevant to a waste dump as keeping waste in short-term storage is costly. The opportunity of nuclear power being introduced in South Australia is increased by the building of a long-term storage site as there would be a drop in the costs to keep the waste in storage. The opportunity that a waste dump brings unintentionally is a reason why the waste dump should be built. There is, however a problem that surrounds nuclear waste and that is the public’s overreaction of the dangers of nuclear waste.

Figure 2: Survival rate correlating to radiation exposure (in Grey)

Source: Regis Lachaume, 2005 (main source: Haskin et al. 1997)

Nuclear waste is dangerous but storing it in South Australia would be an innovative idea to help the local economy by gaining income from other countries, ease local panic about nuclear solutions and also allow the possibility of using nuclear reactors to provide clean power to South Australia.

[UNUSED CONTENT] (DELETE PARAGRAPHS AFTER PLACEMENT)
Another quote states that the Flinders Ranges has frequent seismic activity. This is accurate as there is a clear line of earthquakes on the Geoscience Australia website as well as a report stating that the site is very seismically active. However, the site can always be moved and when sealed, the nuclear waste possesses an extremely small risk. There was another informal survey on a technological forum with 310 voters showed mixed results as 68.38% of participants had a view neutral or positive view which shows that not all people are viewing nuclear power as the dangerous technology that others assume nuclear power is (Ubuntu Forums, 2011).