Euradwaste '08 - EU Bookshop - Europa
Euradwaste '08 - EU Bookshop - Europa Euradwaste '08 - EU Bookshop - Europa
Future directions There seemed to be consensus amongst the participants that future studies should focus on on-site experimentation at potential repository sites. Mr Patrik Sellin of SKB in Sweden expressed questions that remain for the study of geological disposal: ‘How can we upscale results of short-term studies to long-term projections? How can we be sure we’re extrapolating results correctly to project to hundreds of thousands of years? Which questions do we address for which periods of time?’ Laboratory studies can be very limiting. For example, the act of crushing rock can change its properties, so studying the migration of radionuclides on a micro-scale can be expected to generate far different results from studying the same phenomenon in larger pieces of rock or in the rock on-site. Similarly, because it is extremely difficult to reproduce water-flow conditions in a laboratory, work in this area must be done on-site. ‘Advanced geochemical modelling on sites helps generate understanding we can’t obtain in a laboratory,’ said Dr Missana of CIEMAT. ‘It is important for making projections into the future.’ ‘We need to have several layers, several models because the system is so complex,’ added Dr Altmann of ANDRA. ‘We need to use models that are appropriate for each scale.’ ‘Data from lab and in situ experiments need to be placed in context with those from natural systems,’ said Dr Savage of Quintessa. ‘It is unrewarding to have separate programmes for experimental and analogue studies.’ Mr Lemmens of SCK-CEN added, ‘Natural analogues give better stability than we see in our labs. Natural analogues need to be understood better to explain this gap.’ Mr Buckau of FZK spoke about the need to invest resources in confidence-building, a sentiment shared by Mr Wolf K. Seidler of ANDRA in France. ‘I am encouraged that there will be a new technology platform,’ said Mr Seidler. ‘A complete cycle demonstration would do more for confidence-building than anything I can think of. If the whole process was well documented and videos well publicised, I think you could do a lot of good.’ Dr Simon Löw of ETH in Switzerland remarked, ‘One thing we’ve failed to do is conduct projects with adequately long attention spans. Some of these questions need to be looked at for 20 years for it to be useful. We need studies on a longer timescale.’ Mr Johnson of Nagra concluded, ‘It’s going to take decades to have a ready repository. I favour moving ahead because we have a solid basis in fundamental research. In recent years we’ve started spinning our wheels a bit because we can’t do our work on sites. If we were all doing this work on site we’d learn our lessons along the way. Moving to the next step would make the quality of the science better.’ 12
KEYNOTES BY THE EUROPEAN COMMISSION 13
- Page 2 and 3: Interested in European research? Re
- Page 4 and 5: LEGAL NOTICE Neither the European C
- Page 7 and 8: TABLE OF CONTENTS FOREWORD iii CONF
- Page 9 and 10: “Impact of advanced fuel cycle sc
- Page 11 and 12: “Sensitivity analysis techniques
- Page 13 and 14: Topic: Support actions SAPIERR-II -
- Page 15: CONFERENCE SUMMARIES
- Page 18 and 19: supported. The Commission believes
- Page 20 and 21: Ms Monika Hammarström of SKB in Sw
- Page 22 and 23: Dr Bruno of Amphos 21 urged the swi
- Page 24 and 25: measurements of actinides to determ
- Page 26 and 27: Dr Peter Blümling of Nagra in Swit
- Page 31 and 32: 1. Introduction Keynote Address Pet
- Page 33 and 34: tive waste management, a considerab
- Page 35 and 36: the decision making process. The se
- Page 37: All initiatives leading to encourag
- Page 40 and 41: tegrating them as part of advanced
- Page 43: General introduction and objectives
- Page 47 and 48: Radioactive waste management: Where
- Page 49 and 50: The intense development in nuclear
- Page 51 and 52: Figure 3: Schematic diagram of the
- Page 53 and 54: contributed to enhance knowledge ab
- Page 55 and 56: the first time in French history, a
- Page 57 and 58: PANEL DISCUSSION Summary of the Pan
- Page 59: With the support of IAEA preliminar
- Page 63 and 64: Assessment of Financial Provisions
- Page 65 and 66: collected in the cost of the nuclea
- Page 67 and 68: erated by Fortum) and one PWR unit
- Page 69 and 70: pected. As to tunnel backfilling, t
- Page 71 and 72: ferent, the technological solutions
- Page 73 and 74: PANEL DISCUSSION Summary of the Pan
- Page 75: Discussion: As a response to a ques
KEYNOTES BY THE <strong>EU</strong>ROPEAN COMMISSION<br />
13
Change language