"The Huelva phosphogypsum project will mean a substantial improvement in the environmental conditions of the area"

Juan Carlos Lentijo, president of the Nuclear Safety Council (CSN), on Thursday at the headquarters of this organization in Madrid. Jaime Villanueva Sánchez

Juan Carlos Lentijo (1959, Pedrosa del Rey, Valladolid) has been the new president of the Nuclear Safety Council (CSN) for just over a month, an organization in which he started to work in 1984. He is the first president of the CSN who He comes from the coaching staff of the house, where he has held many positions.

He only separated from the Spanish supervisor during the nine years in which he was part of the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA), of which he held the position of deputy director general.

Lentijo was the Spanish expert who led the IAEA mission to assess the situation in Fukushima, Japan, after the nuclear accident.

In his first interview as president of the CSN, this industrial engineer defends the solution proposed for the Huelva phosphogypsum,

Ask.

Is it safe to bury phosphogypsum?

Response.

Yes. The plenary session of the CSN has analyzed a proposal from the Radiological Protection Technical Directorate, based on reports from the council areas, which have indicated that the project that the company Fertiberia has put on the table to achieve a good isolation of the most complicated materials and that favors that in the long term this isolation works from the point of view of radiological protection, which is what corresponds to us.

We must not forget that this project is larger and there are not only materials that emit ionizing radiation of natural origin, but also other heavy metals.

All this must be managed in an integrated manner.

P.

The National High Court gave them an ultimatum to issue this report.

Why has the CSN been delayed?

A.

I don't know the details very well, because I wasn't here, but the impression I have is that the evaluations that our technicians had to make were quite complex.

They included very diverse aspects, which have to do with hydrogeology, with the radiological impact, with the atmospheric situation... There are a series of elements that are complex and that has led to an interaction with

the owner

[Fertiberia]

to clarify quite a few technical issues.

Beyond the fact that the National Court has intervened, we were clear that we would inform when we were sufficiently clear about all the circumstances that concur in the project.

The owner also took his time in answering the questions that were put to him from here.

All things have been maturing in such a way that, when this ruling from the National High Court came, it actually caught us quite close to issuing the report.

P.

This project generates a lot of controversy in Huelva because it means leaving the waste there.

Is it feasible to remove these 120 million tons of waste from the area?

A.

I understand that there was an analysis of options and it was concluded that the best from all points of view was this coating and insulation

of the phosphogypsum.

We have already analyzed simply this option.

But I think it would have been very difficult to find other types of options, because removing phosphogypsum has other risks and elements that can make this solution difficult.

First of all, the volume.

We are talking about an immense amount of material.

Second, you have to find a place to carry it.

And third, in the end, perhaps the only thing that would be done with that is a geographical transfer of the situation, which would lead to having to adopt a solution very similar to this one, but in another place.

Is that really worth it?

We have experience of dealing with situations similar to this one that have more to do with the nuclear industry, for example, with the old mines.

In all cases, here and in the rest of the world, these types of situations are resolved

.

With a project like the one we are dealing with, which guarantees sufficient long-term isolation from hazardous materials, I think the solution is adequate.

The project that we have reported favorably will lead to a substantial improvement in environmental conditions in the area.

P.

But it leaves Huelva with a mortgage forever, as happens with places where there are nuclear installations.

When projects of this type are started, is it really explained to the population what it will mean in the long term?

R.

Not only in the case of what I know best, which is the nuclear and radiological environment, but also for issues that have to do with the environment and the use of the territory, the situation, fortunately, has changed drastically in the last years.

I am sure that what happened in the sixties of the last century when these activities started is very different from what would happen now if they started.

The problem of phosphogypsum comes from the past, with legislation that was surely not as protective, not only nuclear or radiological, but also environmental in general.

And now we have to put a solution.

Surely it was not communicated at the time what those mortgages were.

Right now I think it would be unthinkable if they didn't communicate.

P.

To a certain extent, this situation is reminiscent of the scenario that awaits the seven nuclear power plants in Spain, which seem to each have to house a store for radioactive waste when they close.

A.

Well, that's different.

In this case, the fundamental objective is the complete liberation of the site for other purposes.

Therefore, that the restrictions to the uses are none or minimal.

The ATI [temporary warehouses for plant waste] are a temporary solution.

This is not a mortgage for the distant future.

It is simply a transitory situation that allows these wastes, in this case spent fuel, to be managed safely while a definitive solution is sought.

Juan Carlos Lentijo, president of the Nuclear Safety Council, during the interview. Jaime Villanueva Sánchez

P.

If consensus has not been achieved to achieve a centralized warehouse for that temporary phase that stores the waste from the seven plants, thinking that a definitive geological one is going to be achieved does not seem like a realistic scenario, right?

R.

Well, we'll see.

This is a question of approach not only technical, but also social.

I am sure that, as in other countries, Spain will find a solution.

We have the case right now of Finland, Sweden or France, which are working not only on the search for sites, but also on the construction of deep geological deposits and which represent a definitive solution.

There are practically no mortgages there anymore, because there are no restrictions that could affect the municipality where they are.

In Spain we have an example, which is El Cabril, in Córdoba, for medium and low level waste, which is working well.

Q.

Why did the project to build the centralized temporary warehouse (ATC) in Villar de Cañas, Cuenca fail?

R.

Formally, what there is at the moment is a request from the authorities so that the processing of the project in the CSN is frozen.

Right now it is waiting for the seventh radioactive waste plan, which is being drawn up.

I find it very difficult to analyze what happened.

I have the feeling that it was surely a combination of circumstances.

Some have to do with social aspects, there were other technical aspects that made the project slower than initially expected and surely that also contributed to generating some tension.

Perhaps also the complete non-concurrence of all the authorities... I have to say that the start of the search for sites for this project was very good, really.

Then other things failed...

Q.

Is it safe for Spanish nuclear power plants to operate beyond 40 years, as the CSN is now authorizing?

R.

The answer has to be yes, because the CSN has already given authorization to extend the life of some of these plants beyond 40 years.

The 40 years is a border that was originally set in the original design and as the initial operating life.

What happened next?

Well, there have been some life management programs, aging management of the different components of the plants, which have made it possible to either prolong the life of existing components or replace them with new ones.

And this means that some plants can operate beyond that initial design life with even more demanding requirements than those they originally had, because the regulations have evolved.

Unfortunately we have suffered accidents, such as in Chernobyl or Fukushima, from which we have learned and regulations have been refined,

specifically security.

When in Spain you want to extend the life of one of these facilities, it is done as an exam, as if it were an ITV.

Almost all the plants in Spain are of American origin and we are inspired by the regulations and practices that the US Nuclear Regulatory Commission imposes on facilities that request an extension of life.

There are dozens of plants in the US similar to ours, from the same period, which are already operating with a life extension of over 40 years.

Almost all the plants in Spain are of American origin and we are inspired by the regulations and practices that the US Nuclear Regulatory Commission imposes on facilities that request an extension of life.

There are dozens of plants in the US similar to ours, from the same period, which are already operating with a life extension of over 40 years.

Almost all the plants in Spain are of American origin and we are inspired by the regulations and practices that the US Nuclear Regulatory Commission imposes on facilities that request an extension of life.

There are dozens of plants in the US similar to ours, from the same period, which are already operating with a life extension of over 40 years.

P.

The invasion of Ukraine has put nuclear power in the spotlight.

Can nuclear energy be considered an added risk in a war?

R.

There is no doubt that nuclear energy, like many other activities, carries risks.

Everything in the nuclear sector, and the rest of the sectors,

it is designed to be managed in a normal situation.

War is not part of normality.

In the normal situation, accidents and even attacks or sabotage are prevented.

What the situation in Ukraine does is reveal that indeed these installations have to be treated in a very special way, even in a conflict.

And that is why the international community, in all its orders and through the IAEA, has tried to influence as far as possible so that there would be exquisite respect for the situation of these nuclear facilities, both those that are in operation such as those in an accidental situation, such as Chernobyl.

The situation has alerted us all and a lot.

We have been supporting the work of the IAEA, and continue to do so,

to mediate in some way and ensure that the security elements in these facilities are respected.

The physical situation must be respected, a physical threat from the facilities cannot be accepted.

But there are other situations that have to do with the professionals who are operating these facilities and that have caused great concern.

Because they have been subjected to psychological stress, including their well-being.

Unfortunately, this has not been respected at all times and there have been situations that seemed to us to pose a risk that was not acceptable.

that they have to do with the professionals who are operating those facilities and that have caused a lot of concern.

Because they have been subjected to psychological stress, including their well-being.

Unfortunately, this has not been respected at all times and there have been situations that seemed to us to pose a risk that was not acceptable.

that they have to do with the professionals who are operating those facilities and that have caused a lot of concern.

Because they have been subjected to psychological stress, including their well-being.

Unfortunately, this has not been respected at all times and there have been situations that seemed to us to pose a risk that was not acceptable.

You can follow CLIMA Y MEDIO AMBIENTE on

Exclusive content for subscribers

read without limits

subscribe

I'm already a subscriber