A Fuzzy Inference System for the Economic Calculus in Radioactive Waste Management

  • Pierre Kunsch
  • Antonio Fiordaliso
  • Philippe Fortemps
Part of the Studies in Fuzziness and Soft Computing book series (STUDFUZZ, volume 38)


This chapter illustrates a fuzzy inference system (FIS) developed to assist the economic calculus in radioactive waste management (RWM). The extended time horizons and, in addition, the first-of-a-kind nature of many RWM systems induce large cost uncertainties in project funding. The traditional approach in economic calculus is to include contingency factors in basic cost estimates. A distinction is made between T-factors, used for technological uncertainties, and P-factors, used for project contingencies. In the particular case of nuclear projects, the Electric Power Research Institute (EPRI) has developed specific recommendations for defining both contingency factors. The approach is based on the statistical interpretation of past experience data in the field. As a generalisation of the EPRI results, a new methodology using fuzzy inference rules is proposed. The inputs to the FIS are derived from the answers of experts regarding both the degrees of technological maturity and project advancement. Inferred T- and P-factors proposed by the FIS are given either as single estimates as possibility intervals. The latter are shown to possess all suitable dynamic properties for cost estimates in RWM projects, compatible with the EPRI recommendations.


Fuzzy Rule Fuzzy Inference System Contingency Factor Inference Process Possibility Distribution 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.


Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.


  1. 1.
    Esch L., Kieffer R. et al. (1997) Value at Risk. De Boeck, BrusselsGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Electric Power Research Institute (1986) Technical Assessment Guide, vol. 1, P-4463s-SR. CA EPRI, Palo AltoGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Biewald, B., Bernow, S. (1991), Confronting uncertainty: contingency planning for decommissioning. The Energy Journal 12, 233–245CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    ONDRAF/NIRAS (1997) Report NIROND 97–04 on the disposal options for short-lived and low-level waste, BrusselsGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Dubois, D., Prade, II. (1996), What are fuzzy rules and how to use them. Fuzzy Sets and Systems 84, 169–185MathSciNetCrossRefMATHGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Kunsch, P.L., Ajdler, A. (1998) Determination of funding requirements in radioactive waste management projects using fuzzy reasoning. Proc. FLINS’98, 353–358Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    Dubois, D., Prade, H. (1996), Logique floue, interpolation et commande. RAIRO 30, 607–644Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 2000

Authors and Affiliations

  • Pierre Kunsch
    • 1
  • Antonio Fiordaliso
    • 2
  • Philippe Fortemps
    • 2
  1. 1.ONDRAF-NIRASBruxellesBelgique
  2. 2.Département de Mathématique et Recherche OpérationnelleFaculté Polytechnique de MonsMonsBelgique

Personalised recommendations