ABSTRACT
The political basis of the nuclear fuel cycle is its links with considerations of wastes, hazards, longevity, and equity, all matters of public interest and concern. During the 1980s political conflict over civil nuclear power had become focused on the back end of the nuclear cycle. The technical issues surrounding radioactive waste management were difficult enough but were transcended by the failure of governments and the nuclear industry to establish politically acceptable solutions to the problem. Proposals for nuclear waste facilities are running into opposition and are bound to encourage deferred decommissioning. If costs of decommissioning escalate beyond those at present provided for in charges to the consumer there will be an incentive for delaying dismantlement. Thus geographical inertia, the continuing existence of the contemporary geography of nuclear power, is the likely outcome. ‘The most obvious class of persons who will probably bear higher health and financial risks, because of nuclear waste storage, are members of future generations.’
