In article , David
Nebenzahl wrote:
On 6/29/2008 1:59 PM Don Klipstein spake thus:

And I don't see any actual technical problems with dumping nuclear waste
into salt domes, or into uranium mines that held radioactive materials
just fine for many millions of years. Especially if the waste is
vitrified first.

Salt domes turn out to be one of the worst places to consider storing
radwaste, even though it was originally thought they'd be ideal. (I did
a lot of research on this very topic some years ago, so I do know
*something* about it.)

The thing that seemed attractive about salt domes for storing nuclear
waste was the property they had of "healing" cracks and voids in the
salt, so that if there was a potential leak, it would basically seal
itself over in a short time.

Turns out that the rate of "creep" in salt is far higher than the
geologists originally estimated. So high, in fact, that they determined
that if waste was stored there, it would soon be entombed by the
advancing salt. One of the requirements of any high-level radioactive
repository is that the waste containers must be accessible and
retrievable; salt makes this damn near impossible.

So any other bright ideas?

If the waste is a mile down in a salt dome, why is there need for it to
be retrievable?

And if it is vitrified, how would it leak into the surrounding salt?

- Don Klipstein )