Hostname: page-component-8448b6f56d-t5pn6 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-04-25T04:46:46.976Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

An overview of near-field evolution research in support of the UK geological disposal programme

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  05 July 2018

T. M. Beattie  and
S. J. Williams
T. M. Beattie
Affiliation:
Nuclear Decommissioning Authority, Radioactive Waste Management Directorate, NDA Harwell Office, Building 587, Curie Avenue, Harwell, Didcot, Oxfordshire OX11 0RH, UK
S. J. Williams*
Affiliation:
Nuclear Decommissioning Authority, Radioactive Waste Management Directorate, NDA Harwell Office, Building 587, Curie Avenue, Harwell, Didcot, Oxfordshire OX11 0RH, UK
*
*E-mail: steve.williams@nda.gov.uk
Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Core share and HTML view are not available for this content. However, as you have access to this content, a full PDF is available via the ‘Save PDF’ action button.

The near field, together with the containment and isolation provided by the geosphere, contributes to the long-term safety provided by a geological disposal facility (GDF) after closure. The different engineered barriers can prevent or limit the release of radionuclides and their migration to the undisturbed host rock or geosphere and are expected to fulfil their post-closure safety functions for many thousands to hundreds of thousands of years. They will continue to contribute to containment after their eventual degradation when there would no longer be confidence that they would continue to fulfil all of their safety functions in their totality. By that time, significant radioactive decay will have occurred, substantially reducing the hazard associated with the wastes. Therefore, demonstration of long-term safety requires an understanding of the evolution of the engineered barriers and the consequences for the generic safety functions that the different barriers provide. This paper provides an overview of the research of the Nuclear Decommissioning Authority Radioactive Waste Management Directorate into the evolution of the near field of a GDF.

Keywords

engineered barriersgeological disposal facilitynear-field evolution
Type
Research Article
Information
Mineralogical Magazine , Volume 76 , Issue 8 , December 2012 , pp. 2995 - 3001
Creative Commons
Creative Common License - CCCreative Common License - BY
© [2012] The Mineralogical Society of Great Britain and Ireland. This is an open access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution (CC BY) licence (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.
Copyright
Copyright © The Mineralogical Society of Great Britain and Ireland 2012

References

Arcos, D., Hernán, P., de la Cruz, B., Herbert, H.-J., Savage, D., Smart, N.R., Villar, M.V. and Van Loon L.R. (2005) NF-PRO: Understanding and physical and numerical modelling of the key processes in the near field and their coupling for different host rocks and repository strategies, EDZ development and evolution. RTDC-2 Synthesis report, EC integrated project NF-PRO Deliverable D-No:2.6.4.Google Scholar
Atkinson, A., Everitt, N.M. and Guppy, R.M. (1988) Evolution of pH in a radwaste repository: Internal reactions between concrete constituents. UKAEA Report AERE-R12939.Google Scholar
Baldwin, T.D., Chapman, N.A. and Neall, F.B. (2008) Geological disposal options for high level waste and spent fuel. Galson Sciences Report to NDA RWMD.Google Scholar
Carlsson, T. and Muurinen, A. (2008) A Practical and Theoretical Basis for Performing Redox-measurements in compacted Bentonite - A Literature Survey. Posiva Working Report 2008–51. Posiva, Eurajoki, Finland.Google Scholar
Fernández, A.M. Baeyens, B., Bradbury, M. and Rivas, P. (2004) Analysis of the porewater chemical composition of a Spanish compacted bentonite used in an engineered barrier. Physics and Chemistry of the Earth, 29, 105–119.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hicks, T.W., Baldwin, T.D., Hooker, P.J., Richardson, P.J., Chapman, N.A., McKinley, I.G. and Neall, F.B. (2008) Concepts for the Geological Disposal of Intermediate-level Radioactive Waste. Galson Sciences Report 0736-1. to NDA RWMD.Google Scholar
Humphreys, P.N., West, J.M. and Metcalfe, R. (2009) Microbial Effects on Repository Performance. Quintessa report QRS-1378Q-1, Version 2.0.Google Scholar
Nagra (2008) Effects of post-disposal gas generation in a repository for low- and intermediate-level waste sited in the Opalinus clay of Northern Switzerland. Nagra Report TR 08–07. Nagra, Wettingen, Switzerland.Google Scholar
Nagra (2009) The Nagra Research, Development and Demonstration (RD&D) Plan for the Disposal of Radioactive Waste in Switzerland. Nagra Technical Report 09–06. Nagra, Wettingen, Switzerland.Google Scholar
Nirex (2005) The viability of a phased geological repository concept for the long-term management of the UK’s radioactive waste. Nirex report N/122. Nirex, Harwell, Didcot, Oxfordshire, UK.Google Scholar
Nuclear Decommissioning Authority (2010) Near-field Evolution Status Report. NDA Report NDA/ RWMD/033.Google Scholar
Posiva Oy (2010) Nuclear Waste Management at Olkiluoto and Loviisa Power Plants: Review of Current Status and Future Plans for 2010–2012. Posiva report TKS-2009. Posiva Oy, Eurajoki, Finlan.Google Scholar
Small, J.S. and Thompson, O.R.(2010) Development of a spatial and temporal evolution of pH in cementitious backfill of a geological repository. Nexia Solutions Report (07) 8869, Issue 3.Google Scholar
Stührenberg, D. and Heusermann, S. (2007) Laboratory investigation on backfill and rock salt within the BAMBUS II Project. Federal Institute for Geosciences and Natural Resources (BGR), Germany.Google Scholar
SKB (1999) Thermal Dimensioning of the Deep Repository. SKB Report TR-03–09. Swedish Nuclear Fuel and Waste Management Company, Stockholm, Sweden.Google Scholar
Swift, B.T., Bamforth, P.B., Hoch, A.R., Jackson, C.P., Roberts D.A. and Baston, G.M.N. (2010) Cracking, Flow and Chemistry in NRVB. Serco report SERCO/ TAS/000505/002, Issue 2.Google Scholar
Wilson, J., Savage, D., Bond, A., Watson, S., Pusch, R. and Bennett, D. (2011) Bentonite: A review of key properties, processes and issues for consideration in the UK context. Quintessa report QRS-1378ZG-1 Version 1.1.Google Scholar
Worth, S.V. and Faulkner, A. (2009) ILW repository thermal analysis using ABAQUS. Pöyry ABS Consulting, PE/200579/001, Revision 3.Google Scholar