On 6/29/2008 8:09 PM Don Klipstein spake thus:

In article , David
Nebenzahl wrote:

On 6/29/2008 6:01 PM Don Klipstein spake thus:

In article , David
Nebenzahl wrote:

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?

I don't know if it's a DOE/NRC requirement, but it is definitely a
preference that any stored waste be retrievable, for several reasons:

o In order to be able to determine the state of the storage container,
to detect any leaks, and to monitor its temperature, any radiation
leaks, etc.

o Because future generations might conceivably be able to use this
buried waste with new technology.

Your several reasons amount to 2.

Yes, I knew that: I gave you two out of several.

The second is an argument against "permanent" waste disposal, and *I
Wonder Why* a nuclear power opponent likes arguments against schemes for
the permanent waste disposal that nuclear power opponents claim is
necessary (and claim is unsolved) to make nuclear power safe?

I didn't say I liked, or even agreed with this argument: I'm telling you
the reasons the people who are pushing for *permanent* repositories want
the waste to be retrievable. I don't write the rules, just reporting them.


--
"Wikipedia ... it reminds me ... of dogs barking idiotically through
endless nights. It is so bad that a sort of grandeur creeps into it.
It drags itself out of the dark abyss of pish, and crawls insanely up
the topmost pinnacle of posh. It is rumble and bumble. It is flap and
doodle. It is balder and dash."

- With apologies to H. L. Mencken