Euradwaste '08 - EU Bookshop - Europa

Summary of the Panel Discussion on the Topic:
"Consensus Views on Key Remaining Issues in Far-Field Processes"
Panel members:
Jörg Hadermann (Chair), PSI, Switzerland
Gunnar Buckau, FZK-INE, Germany
Pierre Toulhoat, University of Lyon, CNRS Lyon, and INERIS, France
Scott Altmann, ANDRA, France
The objective of the panel discussion was to reach consensus views on the key remaining issues in
the area of far-field processes that are of importance for the geological safety case and could be
used as a contribution to identifying research topics for FP7. This goal was reached as far as can be
expected in a 50 minutes panel discussion.
The questions put forward for discussion were:
� What were the major scientific highlights for far-field considerations in the safety case in the
last five years?
� Relevant issues tend to be the same over many years. Where is science expected to make the
largest progress and impact in the next five years?
� Transferability between host rocks is limited. Will commonalities further decrease, and where
would be fruitful interactions?
� Site characterisation is an important step in all projects. What of general scientific interest, in
terms of tools and data, do we expect from site investigations?
In a short introductory remark, the chairman reminded the audience that the remaining issues are
not putting into doubt the safety of repositories, be they in clay, in crystalline or in salt. The main
work in the future will be in the fields of site characterisation and monitoring of the far-field. But
scientific investigations will continue, as is the case in every ripe field. The goal of such investigations
is to enhance the understanding of far-field processes. As an example the competition of species
in the process of diffusion through clays was mentioned. The investigations will help to reduce
uncertainties, contribute to optimisation, and eventually help reducing costs.
The panellists then presented their statements before the word was given to the floor.
Gunnar Buckau emphasized that the remaining issues are no showstoppers but rather objectives,
strategies and issues that deserve attention. He distinguished between different characters of issues:
Those responding to problems emerging from specific safety cases and those related to confidence
building and underpinning the safety statements with basic process understanding. Both, he saw in
the frame of implementation oriented research. As a consequence he called for improving general
basic data and knowledge (which he considered less interesting for advanced programmes), and for
361