France struggles to find an answer to its nuclear wastes
“No geologist can guarantee that there will never be water infiltration in the places intended for storage,”
Europeans Pursue Labyrinths of Nuclear Waste, NYTimes.com, By SUE LANDAU, June 2, 2011 BURE, FRANCE —……….France reprocesses its spent fuel, extracting plutonium and depleted uranium from the fuel rods, a process that leaves only a residue to be disposed of as nuclear waste. This residue, with a total volume of about 14,550 cubic meters, is a cocktail of radioactive elements with different chemical properties and half-lives. Containing some of the longest-lasting isotopes, it is the most dangerously radioactive waste.
Captured in molten glass and stocked in special warehouses at reprocessing plants for 40 to 50 years while it cools, it is this brew that, under present plans, is to be sent in special containment canisters for deep disposal……..
Gérald Ouzounian, the international director at Andra, said that research had found that this hard clay had a water content of just 15 percent, and that water remained in the clay rather than moving through it. This is critical for the repository, because it must prevent radioactivity seeping out into groundwater and contaminating soil, plants, animals, and ultimately, human beings.
“The enemy is water,” Mr. Ouzounian said. “Having only 15 percent water in clay is like not having any water at all.”…..
assurances cut little ice with opponents of the plan.
“No geologist can guarantee that there will never be water infiltration in the places intended for storage,” said Jean-Marie Brom, a research director in particle physics at C.R.N.S., the French national research institute, and a veteran anti-nuclear campaigner.
A Greenpeace review of research on geological repositories, published in September, listed several scientific caveats, including a lack of understanding of the multiple chemical interactions that may occur; doubts about the accuracy of computer modeling over long time scales; and the possibility of an earthquake or other disturbance to the site during the repository’s life.
“Are we really ready,” said Helen Wallace, the report’s author and a physicist who works with Greenpeace, “to say we understand enough about this option of putting it underground, which does mean at this stage of scientific knowledge crossing your fingers and hoping none of these things really do go wrong?”
No comments yet.
1 This month
of the week – Disrupting War & Militarism in Oceania. Active solidarity. Radical practice.
Antinuclear 
Leave a comment