Читать книгу Management of Radioactive Waste - Jean-Claude Amiard - Страница 15

As regards the classification of radioactive waste, there are two main approaches: one by a waste management channel and the other by a waste production channel. The latter approach is partly inherited from the historical concept of radiation protection.

The management pathway approach often combines the activity and lifetime parameters of the radionuclides constituting the waste. This classification was recommended by the IAEA in the Joint Convention on the Safety of Spent Fuel Management and on the Safety of Radioactive Waste Management. This classification is used in France, Belgium and Spain. Sometimes this approach is based only on activity. In Canada, for example, there are only three main categories of radioactive waste (ILW, HLW and spent fuel), except for the specific management of waste from mines. In the Netherlands, the classification has a larger number of categories, but no distinction is made between short- and long-lived waste and consequently there are no plans for surface disposal. In Germany, the classification is based mainly on the exothermic character of the waste.

The production chain approach leads to a more complex classification, with specific chains for certain types of waste, and combining activity and lifespan. This is the approach of the United States, Japan and Sweden (in fact in Sweden, the two types of approach coexist). In Finland, a category is sometimes added for waste from hospitals, universities, etc.

There are also national specificities, as in Belgium, which treats 50% of the radium sources used in the world (the result of uranium mining in the Congo, which is historically Belgian), or in Canada, which has large uranium mines. Similarly, in France, it should be noted that there is no release threshold for waste containing, or likely to contain, only very small quantities of radioactive elements [AMI 13].