On 05/02/17 09:21, Nightjar wrote:
On 04-Feb-17 9:00 PM, Chris Hogg wrote:
On Sat, 4 Feb 2017 17:41:53 +0000, Nightjar wrote:


As an aside, we know, from nature, how high level radioactive waste
behaves when put into deep geological storage. About 2 billion years
ago, there was a natural nuclear fission reaction deep under what is now
Gabon. The radioactive by-products of this reaction, which, unlike man
produced high level waste, were not encapsulated in any way, have, in
all that time, managed to migrate about 10 metres into the surrounding
rocks.

I've quoted that fact myself on occasion, but in truth it would be
unwise to apply the circumstances of Oklo to every deep nuclear waste
depository. How far the elements in the radioactive waste would
migrate if they leached out of their immediate encapsulation, would
depend very much on the geology and hydrology local to that
depository.

I was under the impression that it was an area that we would consider to
be unsuitable for deep geological storage.

If you read the guardian, you will be given the impression that
everywhere is unsuitable for deep geological storage.


--
€œSome people like to travel by train because it combines the slowness of
a car with the cramped public exposure of €¨an airplane.€�

Dennis Miller