Ted Case Studies

1. The Issue

British Nuclear Fuels Limited (BNFL), the largest nuclear reprocessing plant in the world, recently began operation of its new Thermal Oxide Reprocessing (Thorp) Plant in northwest England. This plant, located on BNFL's Sellafield site, is the third reprocessing plant to be constructed at Sellafield, and has been a hot topic of debate in recent years among nuclear industries and environmental activists. The reprocessing plant created a number of employment opportunities, and welcomed trade with many countries including Germany and Japan. However, concerns have been raised regarding Thorp's impact on the environment and the health of citizens working at the site and those living in the nearby vicinity. On one hand, Thorp is recognized for providing the means by which new energy resources and jobs may be created, as well as for trade opportunities. On the other hand, the dangers posed to the environment and human safety must also be weighed in the analysis.

2. The Description

Nuclear energy is one of the most controversial alternative energy sources. The advantages of nuclear energy include: a small amount of uranium producing a vast amount of energy, minimal waste, no CO2 produced like fossil fuels, and more energy production than any other alternative. These advantages have been met by a similar number of disadvantages arising from processes carried out on behalf of creating nuclear energy, including: birth defects linked to radioactive waste, contamination of seas and rivers causing serious pollution problems, and for some countries, minimal cost effectiveness.

The process by which nuclear energy is created is referred to as reprocessing. Technically, reprocessing is the chemical treatment of spent reactor fuel to separate the plutonium and uranium from spent fuel rods and from each other, to be used again as fuel (1). Typically, nuclear reprocessing plants, such as Thorp plant, carry out a chemical operation which separates the elements of the fuel rods; thereby extracting 97% uranium and plutonium which can be utilized again for energy purposes. The other 3% is referred to as the waste product. The waste is conditioned; however, by converting it into a glass product through a process called vitrification, and then returned for disposal to the country from which it came. Plutonium extracted can also be used as fuel after it is combined with uranium, a product named mixed oxide fuel (MOX), which is even more rich in energy than the uranium (2).

According to BNFL, there are several good reasons for reprocessing nuclear fuel. For instance, reprocessing has been technically proved as an efficient way to treat nuclear fuel. It reduces the volume of nuclear waste by 25% compared to direct disposal of fuel after one use. Additionally, the reprocessed fuel provides the source for electricity for many years. Indeed, reprocessing also reduces the amount of uranium to be mined; which in turn, lowers the radiation dose produced through mining fresh uranium. In fact, reprocessing does not produce radioactivity. If the waste is not reprocessed; however, it must be stored above ground until a decision is made to either reprocess it , or bury it underground. Currently, there is no specialized means of burying used fuel underground, but there are ways to treat waste from reprocessing. Therefore, if nuclear fuel is not reprocessed, all the used fuel becomes waste, thus producing a larger volume of radioactive waste than if the fuel would have been reprocessed (3).

A new business for BNFL is production of MOX fuel. Sellafield, in the UK, is the home of the new Thorp plant which reprocesses used fuel, thus creating MOX fuel. Thorp is the third reprocessing plant constructed at Sellafield. Initial ideas for the plant began as early as 1974 with realization that the world demand for reprocessed and recycled fuel was continuously growing. Thorp underwent a series of trial tests before its reprocessing activities were authorized in order to preview the plant's operations and to consider safety and environmental impacts (4). British officials granted authorizations for the plant to begin operations in 1994.

A number of electricity generating companies have decided to use reprocessing for spent nuclear fuel. Both Japan and Germany welcomed the 1992 decision in the UK for Thorp's operation. Conveniently, they are also the plant's two largest customers (5). In fact, the Japanese nuclear industry has a long-established nuclear transporting and reprocessing relationship with BNFL dating back to 1969. Recently, in 1995, BNFL, supported by the British Energy Minister and the British Government, opened its new BNFL office in Tokyo. Furthermore, Japan has begun construction of its own reprocessing plant, to begin operation by 2000 (6). The German case is somewhat more complicated. German officials are attempting to establish operations at Gorleben, which is Germany's proposed nuclear waste disposal site. However, this site has been the center of hostile anti-nuclear campaigning by protesters who would rather not have a high-level nuclear waste site in their back yard. Until German authorities at state and national levels agree on the waste disposal site, the German nuclear industry will rely on its reprocessing contracts with BNFL's Thorp plant, as well as with France's Cogema plant for recycling nuclear waste (7). Overall, BNFL has supplied nuclear fuel services to overseas customers for over forty years.

There are many cases for and against BNFL's construction and operation of its newly developed Thorp plant. Those in favor of the plant argue for its positive environmental, safety and economic impacts. Those against authorization of the Thorp plant argue that reprocessing has a negative impact on the environment and on human health. Also, these arguments claim that reprocessing activities create optimal chances for terrorists or others to obtain nuclear fuel, thus enhancing the proliferation risk.

BNFL's announcement in 1990 regarding construction of Thorp, the new MOX plant at Sellafield, was met by both acceptance and displeasure. From one point, " This (process) would allow a substantial contribution towards energy conservation, an objective supported by most people concerned about the environment." (8) Additionally, reprocessing met the standards for both near and long-term waste management, control of radioactive waste materials contained in spent fuel, and eventual safe disposal (9). Moreover, Thorp would generate revenue from overseas customers, from which approximately 75% of BNFL's profits derived.

Yet, arguments abounded against the planned nuclear reprocessing operations at Thorp. Environmental groups, such as Greenpeace, conveyed that activities carried out on behalf of Thorp caused potential threats to the environment. For example, concerns were raised regarding emergency procedures in the event of a shipping accident while en route between Europe and Japan. Accordingly, BNFL has published standards for shipping nuclear materials overseas, which illustrate the various safety precautions which must be enforced. For example, special ships are utilized which have a range of safety features, such as double hulls to with stand collision damage, and enhanced buoyancy to prevent against sinking if an accident should occur (10). These ships have a perfect safety record, having traveled over three million miles without an accident or nuclear spill (11). In addition, nuclear materials must be packaged according to strict international standards (see picture).

Accordingly, procedures have been established in the event of an emergency. The ships are tracked by various methods, one of which is through sonar location devices. Also, an emergency team of trained specialists is on twenty four hour standby. Therefore, if one of the ships were to meet problems, a team would be dispatched to manage the situation without depending on assistance from nearby countries (12). Overall, BNFL has ensured that all aspects of the transportation arrangements have been considered.

Unsurprisingly, concerns regarding the dangers associated with radiation and its effects on humans, as part of the environment, were revisited following BNFL's announcement of construction of Thorp. In the past, studies were conducted in an effort to determine if nuclear activities being carried out at the Sellafield, where Thorp is being constructed, were contributing to incidents of cancer in plant workers and their offspring. Although it is too early to determine what effect, if any, Thorp will have on workers or on the environment, there is a well acknowledged case from November 1983 relating to the dangers imposed by nuclear operations at Sellafield. A controversial television documentary, "Windscale, the nuclear laundry," drew attention to the cases of leukemia in children in the vicinity of Sellafield, as opposed to in other areas where nuclear facilities operated (13). The government immediately responded to the documentary by establishing a commission, lead by Sir Douglas Black, a medical scientist, to review the accusations presented in the program (14).

The Black Commission's study found that the risks imposed by living near Sellafield, or working within its concrete walls, posed no greater challenge than the risks people face in any other daily events (15). When the public was questioned about the outcome of the report, they replied with mixed responses ranging from reassurance, to feelings of outrage that the report's results were just a reassurance exercise extended by the government to answer a public outcry(16).

Another vital part of the environment claimed to have been effected by radiation from activities at Sellafield are shellfish in the North Irish Sea. Since 1952, Sellafield has been dumping radioactive waste into the Irish Sea and subsequently, "this sea is now considered one of the most radioactive bodies of water in the world" (17). In December 1996, it was reported that radioactive lobsters, winkles, limpets, mussels, and scampi had been found all along the coast as a result of discharges from Sellafield (18). Yet, sales of lobsters to restaurants continued because these discharge levels were considered to be routine, and not because of an accident(19). It appears that even if these claims are valid, consumers are still purchasing the shellfish.

Nuclear energy has been the source of debate in the United Kingdom for many years. Thus, when BNFL announced production of its new reprocessing plant at Sellafield, this sparked a renewed interest in the impact that reprocessing activities may have on trade and the environment. Although it is too early to determine exactly how the activities at Thorp will impact trade and the environment, it is not difficult to recognize that concerns are being raised based on past experiences.

3. Related Cases