Advertisement

Bringing Transparency and Voice into the Search for a Deep Geological Repository

Nuclear Waste Governance in Germany and the Role of the National Civil Society Board - Nationales Begleitgremium (NBG)
  • Miranda A. SchreursEmail author
  • Jorina Suckow
Chapter
Part of the Energiepolitik und Klimaschutz. Energy Policy and Climate Protection book series (EPKS)

Abstract

The search for a repository for high-level radioactive waste (HLW) has begun anew in Germany: The new Repository Site Selection Act stipulates a transparent restart based on scientific criteria in which the best suitable site is to be determined. A completely new actor in this process is the National Civil Society Board (Nationales Begleitgremium – NBG), a group of people who have the task of mediating and independently monitoring the process in the public interest. The NBG is still in its early stages of operation and it will mature with time. In a short two-year period of time, the NBG has covered many issues. This has required setting priorities and reevaluating past decisions.

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. Appun, K. (2017). What to do with the nuclear waste — the storage question. Clean Energy Wire, 31 March 2017. https://www.cleanenergywire.org/factsheets/what-do-nuclear-waste-storagequestion, last accessed 6 March 2019.
  2. Brunnengräber, A. (2019). The Wicked Problem of Long Term Radioactive Waste Governance. Ten Characteristics of a Complex Technical and Societal Challenge. In: Brunnengräber, A. and Di Nucci, M. R. (Eds.) (2019). Conflicts, Participation and Acceptability in Nuclear Waste Governance, Volume III, Wiesbaden: Springer VS, 335-355.Google Scholar
  3. Frenz, W. (2019). Atomrecht. Atomgesetz und Ausstiegsgesetze. Nomos Kommentar.Google Scholar
  4. German Commission on the Storage of High-Level Radioactive Waste (2016). Report of the German Commission on the Storage of High-Level Radioactive Waste, July 2016, English Translation provided by the Language Service of the German Bundestag. https://www.gruenebundestag.de/fileadmin/media/gruenebundestag_de/themen_az/Gorleben_PUA/Report-German-Commission-Storage-High-Level-Radioactive-Waste.pdf, last accessed on 9 March 2019.
  5. Hocke, P. and Kuppler, S. (2015). Always the Same Story? Nuclear Waste Governance in Germany. In: Brunngräber, A.; Mez, L.; Di Nucci, M. R. and Schreurs, M. (Eds.) (2015): Nuclear waste governance. An International comparison. Wiesbaden: Springer VS, 177-201.Google Scholar
  6. Koch, H.-J. and John, M. (2018). Rechtsgutachten. Aufgaben, Zuständigkeiten und Befugnisse des Bundesamtes für kerntechnische Entsorgungssicherheit (BfE) bezüglich bestehender Endlagerprojekte und für die Suche und Auswahl eines nationalen Endlagerstandortes für hochradioaktive Abfälle. Beauftragt vom Bundesamt für kerntechnische Entsorgungssicherheit. https://www.bfe.bund.de/SharedDocs/IP6/BfE/DE/2018_08_01_Rechtsgutachten_Aufsicht_lang.pdf?__blob=publicationFile&v=3, last accessed on 24 February 2019.
  7. Tiggemann, A. (2019). The Elephant in the Room. The Role of Gorleben and its Site Selection in the German Nuclear Waste Debate. In: Brunnengräber, A. and Di Nucci, M. R. (Eds.) (2019). Conflicts, Participation and Acceptability in Nuclear Waste Governance, Volume III, Wiesbaden: Springer VS, 69-87.Google Scholar
  8. Wollenteit, U. (2018). Das neue Standortauswahlgesetz: Von der „weißen Landkarte“ bis zum Standort mit der „bestmöglichen Sicherheit“ In: Natur und Recht, 40, 746–753.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Fachmedien Wiesbaden GmbH, part of Springer Nature 2019

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Technical University of MunichMünchenGermany
  2. 2.Hamburg UniversityHamburgGermany

Personalised recommendations