Difference between revisions of "Maintenance long-term"
| Line 46: | Line 46: | ||
[[Nuclear knowledge management]] | [[Nuclear knowledge management]] | ||
| + | |||
| + | [[Category:Benefits]] | ||
| + | [[Category:Benefits unique to nuclear]] | ||
| + | [[Category:Maintenance benefits]] | ||
| + | [[Category:Transformation benefits]] | ||
| + | [[Category:Validation benefits]] | ||
| + | |||
| + | |||
[[Category:Challenges]] | [[Category:Challenges]] | ||
| Line 51: | Line 59: | ||
[[Category:Maintenance challenges]] | [[Category:Maintenance challenges]] | ||
[[Category:Transformation challenges]] | [[Category:Transformation challenges]] | ||
| + | [[Category:Validation challenges]] | ||
| − | |||
[[Category:Knowledge processes]] | [[Category:Knowledge processes]] | ||
[[Category:Maintenance processes]] | [[Category:Maintenance processes]] | ||
Revision as of 10:28, 12 February 2014
,
,
Definition
Maintenance long-term is The process of keeping knowledge in good condition that is complete, current and usable over an extended period Source: [[]]
Summary
Description
Description
The time period over which the nuclear community will want to ‘know’ about the radioactive waste it is responsible for, is unusually long. Furthermore, society will understandably expect that those, directly responsible for their safety and protection of the environment, have the necessary ‘know-how’ and ‘know-what’.
The general public is aware that radioactive waste can remain hazardous for many years — they, and the groups representing the public’s wider interests, are unlikely to support the industry if it is thought that knowledge has not been retained.
There are few other examples where knowledge, so critical to the long term safety and wellbeing of the planet, has been created. The need, then, to retain this critical knowledge for thousands of years is almost without parallel. Such an enormous and important undertaking requires planning and commitment.
It is a legitimate argument that suggests we do not know enough about future societal needs, values or technology to be able to guarantee the survival of certain knowledge. However, this does not absolve us from creating what we believe to be the knowledge needed for the long term safety of radioactive waste, and to transfer this to our individual and corporate successors. Thus, our plans for knowledge management should not attempt to influence long term unknowns and challenges, but the nearer future over which we have some control. Intergenerational transfer of knowledge should be the focus of our strategic objective, rather than long term preservation of knowledge.
Of all the stages in radioactive waste management, the stage which will involve the most challenging knowledge management timescales is disposal. The period of time over which knowledge will be required will vary depending on the disposal facility and the waste type.
In order to illustrate typical time scales, Table 1 shows the differences between high level waste (HLW), including spent fuel, and intermediate level wastes (ILW), low level waste (LLW), and very low level waste (VLLW). These waste types are according to the new IAEA waste classification scheme [10] and are not uniformly defined or recognized by Member States — they are used here to aid comparison.
The knowledge management approach should be as simple as possible if it is to be robust and sustainable over long periods of time. Technology will come and go, regulations will change, and societal values will evolve. Limited reliance on technology, straightforward and easy to implement processes and clear objectives should be used to capture, share and transfer the knowledge necessary for the safe and effective operation of disposal facilities over their lifetimes. The need for knowledge after closure of the disposal facility should not be ignored, but in most instances, we have little influence how this will be achieved.
The very long time period of managing an HLW disposal facility demands that decisions are made step-by-step, incorporating design or operational provisions to facilitate reversibility, including retrievability of waste. This suggests that there is a need for:
- Continuous validation of knowledge relating to long-term waste disposal programmes;
- Continuous assessment and improvement of knowledge for LLW disposal programmes;
- Evaluation of knowledge management system at HLW disposal facilities to ensure the radioactive waste management system continues to achieve operational objectives.
Source: Knowledge management for radioactive waste management organisations
References
[1]
