The new storage facility, meant to safeguard Denmark’s existing nuclear waste at Risø near Roskilde against storm surges and climate change, has once again been delayed.
Originally, it was supposed to open in 2023, but construction has been postponed several times. The updated forecast now suggests it will be ready by 2030, seven years after the initial deadline. Until recently, the plan was to start construction this September and use the storage facility by 2029, but that is no longer feasible.
Dansk Dekommissionering, the state enterprise responsible for the storage of radioactive waste, disclosed this information to Politiken.
»The work on the new storage facility has proven to be quite extensive. It’s also become clear that many authorities are involved. As we detail the project, it becomes evident that certain aspects require further discussion at different decision-making levels,« says Mikkel Øberg, Director of Radiation Protection at Dansk Dekommissionering.
According to Dansk Dekommissionering, there are between 10,000 and 15,000 cubic meters of waste. That’s roughly twice the volume of the Rundetårn, or enough to cover an area of up to 150 by 100 meters if spread out to a height of one meter.
The news of the latest delay comes amid intense political debate over whether to lift Denmark’s ban on nuclear power.
For Steffen Foss Hansen, an associate professor at the Technical University of Denmark (DTU) and a member of an independent expert panel on nuclear waste disposal, the delay is central to the current debate on reconsidering nuclear power in Denmark.
Fundamentally, the long timeframe for the interim storage facility at Risø raises doubts about Denmark’s ability to manage a new wave of nuclear waste from potential new power plants, he argues.
»The delay suggests to me that we are not currently ready for nuclear power in Denmark. If we can’t efficiently handle the waste generated in the 1970s, I’d definitely want to see a thorough plan for managing future waste if we pursue nuclear power,« he says.
Mayor of Roskilde Municipality Tomas Breddam (Socialdemokratiet) calls the delay »really unfortunate« and emphasizes the need for a long-term solution to the waste problem:
»This was already a stopgap solution because Parliament couldn’t make the decision they intended about finding a final disposal site. It’s really unfortunate because Risø is one of the worst places in Denmark to store nuclear waste,« he says, adding:
»I think the waste issues indicate significant immaturity among those advocating for nuclear power. The story of the delay in the new upgraded storage facility shows how challenging it is to handle nuclear waste.«
»Not particularly worried«
Professor of Nuclear Physics at Aarhus University Hans Otto Uldall Fynbo believes the issue is primarily political rather than technical.
He also notes that there isn’t a substantial reason to link the storage delay to technical challenges of incorporating nuclear power into Denmark’s energy system. Regarding the specific risk of having the waste at the current storage facility, he urges calm:
»From a safety perspective, I’m not particularly worried about the delay since the material is stored under the supervision of relevant authorities. In my assessment, it would take a highly hypothetical scenario for floodwaters to come into contact with the radioactive material,« he says.
Until the new storage facility is ready, Dansk Dekommissionering mitigates flood risk with ’water tubes,’ which can be deployed as mobile barriers against storm surges like the one during Storm Bodil in 2013. At that time, the water level was less than a meter from reaching the drums containing low-level waste.
Additionally, the current storage has been expanded to accommodate incoming waste.
Mikkel Øberg emphasizes that all safety requirements are met in accordance with regulations and in close dialogue with emergency authorities. The area is staffed with around-the-clock surveillance, and weekly inspections are conducted for damage and radioactive contamination.
»A political fiasco«
At Christiansborg, Denmark’s nuclear waste issue has long been contentious.
The decision to build a safer storage facility at Risø was unanimously made by Parliament in 2018. The new storage will be used until 2073, when the waste will be permanently placed in an unknown underground location to decay safely over the next several hundred years.
Emergency Minister Torsten Schack Pedersen (Venstre) holds the highest political responsibility for the storage of Denmark’s nuclear waste.
»It’s important that progress continues on establishing the new upgraded storage facility. Therefore, my ministry and the Agency for Emergency Management closely follow the project,« he says in a written statement.
Henrik Frandsen, energy spokesperson for the Moderaterne, who recently supported reopening the door to nuclear power in Denmark, sees solving the waste problem as crucial in the government’s upcoming analysis of nuclear power prospects:
»This highlights the challenges we will encounter when conducting the analysis. In my view, it would be entirely reckless to proceed with nuclear power without a plan for handling the waste.«
Why is it appropriate to consider nuclear power when we still have many unresolved questions about waste after decades of political debate?
»The purpose of the analysis is to create a solid foundation for decision-making so we don’t go in blindly. It might reveal challenges we haven’t been able to solve in the past. And it’s possible we won’t be able to solve them in the future, and we must be open to acknowledging that.«
Dina Raabjerg, energy spokesperson for Konservative Folkeparti, who support a future with nuclear power in Denmark, believes the first step to solving the waste issue is lifting the nuclear power ban to drive targeted solutions:
»No one claims that Risø is the right place to store nuclear waste in Denmark. Therefore, lifting the ban on nuclear power is a good idea so we can seriously address the waste.«
Emergency spokesperson Sascha Faxe from Alternativet sees Denmark’s nuclear waste situation as a strong argument against nuclear power:
»I think it’s a political fiasco,« she says, adding, »We know the weather is becoming much more extreme, so we don’t know when a severe storm surge will hit the area. It’s a ticking bomb.«
read next
