Disposing of Denmark's nuclear waste - On the difficulties of finding a solution: On the difficulties of finding a solution
Translated title
Disposing of Denmark's nuclear waste - On the difficulties of finding a solution
Authors
Hermansen, Niklas Kølle ; Stevnsvig, Jacob Erik ; Sigbrand, Emil
Term
4. term
Education
Publication year
2013
Submitted on
2013-09-13
Pages
95
Abstract
Danmark tøver stadig med, hvordan landets kerneaffald skal håndteres. To løsninger står over for hinanden: regeringens plan om et permanent slutdepot og borgeres ønske om mellemlagring. Forhandlingerne er gået i hårdknude, og parterne mangler et fælles udgangspunkt. Formålet med dette speciale er at afdække de motiver, der har ført til denne situation og de to forslag. Vi bruger Callons begreb om oversættelse til at undersøge, hvordan aktørerne opstiller problemet og søger opbakning. For at strukturere og vurdere disse motiver inddrager vi også Mols begreber om muligheder, steder og interferenser, som hjælper os med at se på valg, placeringer og indbyrdes påvirkninger. Denne tilgang peger på en mulig vej til at genoptage dialogen. Ifølge EURATOM-direktivernes artikel 21 skal medlemsstater håndtere lav- til mellemaktivt affald med et nær-overfladisk slutdepot. Offentligheden er imidlertid stærkt imod, at affald deponeres under overfladen. Med henvisning til artikel 24 kan der være mulighed for undtagelse, hvis Danmark kan påvise, at et underjordisk depot vil lægge en urimelig byrde på fremtidige generationer. Det kan åbne for, at regeringen undersøger depoter over jorden og dermed skabe fælles grund med offentligheden. Vi konkluderer, at selv om planen indebærer mange forbehold, kan den være tilstrækkelig til, at regering og borgere indleder et fælles arbejde for at finde en løsning, begge kan acceptere.
Denmark remains undecided about how to manage its nuclear waste. Two options are in conflict: the government’s plan for a permanent final repository and the public’s preference for intermediate storage. Negotiations have stalled, and there is no shared basis for agreement. This thesis aims to uncover the motives behind these positions and how the situation arose. We apply Callon’s concept of translation to explore how each actor defines the problem and seeks support. To further structure and assess these motives, we also use Mol’s concepts of options, sites, and interferences, which help us examine choices, locations, and how they affect one another. This framework suggests a way to restart dialogue. Under Article 21 of the EURATOM directives, Member States are required to manage low- to intermediate-level waste with a near-surface final repository. The public, however, strongly opposes depositing waste below the surface. Considering Article 24, there may be an exception if Denmark can show that an underground repository would place an undue burden on future generations. This could allow the government to investigate above-ground repositories and create common ground with the public. We conclude that, although our proposal involves many uncertainties, it may be enough for the government and the public to begin working together to find a solution they can both accept.
[This abstract was generated with the help of AI]
Keywords
Documents