Hostname: page-component-76fb5796d-2lccl Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-04-25T11:58:43.227Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Comparison of Granite, Tuff, and Basalt as Geologic Media for Long-Term Storage of High-Level Nuclear Waste

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  28 February 2011

D. E. Grandstaff ,
V. J. Grassi ,
A. C. Lee  and
G. C. Ulmer
D. E. Grandstaff
Affiliation:
Geology Department 016-00, Temple University, Philadelphia, PA 19122U.S.A.
V. J. Grassi
Affiliation:
Geology Department 016-00, Temple University, Philadelphia, PA 19122U.S.A.
G. C. Ulmer
Affiliation:
Geology Department 016-00, Temple University, Philadelphia, PA 19122U.S.A.
Get access

Abstract

Systematic differences in pH, cation/proton ion activity ratios, and redox have been observed between solutions produced in rock-water hydrothermal experiments with tuff, granite, and basalt. Stable pH values in tuff-water experiments may be as much as 1.5 pH units more acidic than basalt-water experiments at the same temperature and ionic strength. Redox (log fO2) values in 300°C tuff experiments are 4–7 orders of magnitude more oxidizing than basalt experiments and ca. 4 log units more oxidizing than the magnetite-hematite buffer. Such fluid differences could significantly affect the performance of a high-level nuclear waste repository and should be considered in repository design and siting.

Type
Research Article
Information
MRS Online Proceedings Library (OPL) , Volume 212: Symposium P – Scientific Basis for Nuclear Waste Management XIV , 1990 , 849
Copyright
Copyright © Materials Research Society 1991

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

REFERENCES

1. Arnórsson, S., Gunnlaugsson, E., and Svavarsson, H.. Geochim. Cosmochim. Acta 47, 547, (1983).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
2. Kacandes, G. H. and Grandstaff, D. E.. Geochim. Cosmochim. Acta 53, 343 (1989).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
3. Grandstaff, D.E., Ulmer, G.C., and Kacandes, G.H., in Nuclear Waste Management III: Ceramic Transactions, Vol. 9, edited by Mellinger, G.B. (Amer. Ceramic Soc., Westerville, OH 1990) pp. 347–362.Google Scholar
4. Moore, E.L., Ulmer, G.C., and Grandstaff, D.E., Chem. Geol., 49, 53 (1985).Google Scholar
5. Seyfried, W.E. Jr., Janecky, D.R., and Berndt, M.E., in Hydrothermal Experimental Techniques, edited by Ulmer, G.C. and Barnes, H.L. (Wiley and Sons, New York, 1987).Google Scholar
6. Kishima, N. and Sakai, H.. Geochem J., 18, 19 (1984).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
7. Kacandes, G.H., Ulmer, G.C., and Grandstaff, D.E., in Proceedings of the 6th International Water-rock Interaction Symposium, edited by Miles, D. (Balkema, Amsterdam 1989), p. 353–356.Google Scholar
8. Oversby, V.M.. UCRL-53629, 26 p. (1985).Google Scholar
9. Knauss, K.G., Beiriger, W.J., and Peifer, D.W.. UCRL-53630 (1985).Google Scholar
10. Knauss, K.G. and Peifer, D.W.. UCRL-53795, 39p. (1986).Google Scholar
11. Lee, A. C., unpublished M.A. Thesis, Temple University 1990;Google Scholar
Lee, A. C., Ulmer, G.C., Grandstaff, D.E., Trans. Am. Geophys. Union 71, 663 (1990).Google Scholar
12. Savage, D., Cave, M.R., Milodowski, A.E., and George, I.. Contr. Min. Pet., 96, 391, (1987).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
13. Savage, D.. Chem. Geol., 54, 81, (1986).Google Scholar
14. Korn, R., Ulmer, G.C., and Grandstaff, D.E., in Proceedings of the Fifth International Symposium on Water-Rock Interactions (Orkustofnun, Reykjavik 1986) pp. 333–336.Google Scholar
15. Lane, D.L., Apted, M.J., Allen, C.C., Myers, J., in Scientific Basis for Nuclear Waste Management VII, edited by McVay, G.L. (North-Holland, New York 1984), pp. 95–103.Google Scholar
16. Allen, C.C. and Rawson, S-A., unpublished manuscript.Google Scholar
17. Guven, N., in Hydrous Phyllosilicates (exclusive of micas), edited by Bailey, S.W. (Mineral. Soc. Amer., Washington, DC 1988), pp. 497–552.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
18. Allen, C.C. and Strope, M.B., Hanford Document: RHO-BW-SA-924P, (1983).Google Scholar
19. Hoag, R.B. and Stewart, G.W.. U.S. ERDA. Doc No. COO-2720–1 (1977).Google Scholar