Dialogue as nuclear waste management policy: can a Swedish transparency programme legitimise a final decision on spent nuclear fuel?

Abstract

The purpose of this article is to discuss Swedish nuclear waste management policy and assess whether a transparency programme has affected the policy discourse and contributed to legitimatising the forthcoming government decision on a final solution for spent nuclear fuel. The transparency programme implemented by the National Council for Nuclear Waste (NW Council) consisted of two main activities: dialogue meetings and public hearings for deliberating on different aspects of the waste issue. Lessons are drawn from an evaluation of the programme. The article concludes that the NW Council has implemented the government's legitimatisation policy by its existence and through the transparency programme, but achieving long lasting legitimacy is a complicated matter. Dialogue meetings and public hearings are reasonable measures; whether these measures are sufficient to legitimatise the final decision also depends on how the appropriate state agencies and the government justify their assessments and decisions regarding the long-term safety, security and sustainability of the Swedish Nuclear Fuel and Waste Management Company's proposed final repository. The dialogue policy and transparency programme, however, has failed to influence the key decisions which remain in the control of the powerful interests, most notable Swedish Nuclear Fuel and Waste Management Company (SKB) and the government.

Keywords:

• nuclear waste management
• policy
• transparency
• legitimacy
• power

Notes

1. When the government in 2010 took a new Parliamentary decision allowing for the replacement of old nuclear power plants, the demonstration policy based on SKB's Nuclear Fuel Safety programme (see below) indicate a revival for the demonstration policy. This time, however, it is used as to globally demonstrate a Swedish model for practical nuclear waste management that can be conceived as politically and environmentally sustainable (Elam et al. 2010, 199).

2. Representatives from the NW-council, Ministry of the Environment, SSM, SKB, MKG, Milkas, the Municipality of Oskarshamn and Östhammar, the Regional Council in Kalmar and Uppsala county.

3. The second winning alternative implied that nuclear power would be phased out over a period that would not impact too severely on employment and welfare. The twelve nuclear power stations operating or under construction would continue to be used until renewable sources became available. When the existing nuclear power stations would close down would be dependent on security. Efforts would also be made to reduce energy consumption whilst protecting low income groups. Nuclear power plants would be owned by central and local government and any surplus profits from the plants would be subject to a 100% tax rate.

4. To deal with the nuclear waste issue, the nuclear power industry founded the joint-company (SKB) in the 1970s.

5. The method is based on three protective barriers. The spent nuclear fuel must first be encapsulated in copper. The impermeable copper canisters are then placed in crystalline basement rock at a depth of about 500 m, embedded in bentonite clay. After disposal, the tunnels and rock caverns are sealed.