(30 January 2013, 15:02)BeardyMan Wrote: (30 January 2013, 14:38)BDG Wrote: I do not think Chalk and London clay create the geological stability for deep storage of nuclear wastes.
The site they are proposing has already been found to be geologically unsuitable. Even more investigation causes destruction of the area.
just a note London Clay is actually a very good medium for storing nuclear waste as it creates a barrier to radionucleotide escape
the thing is the reason that we want to stick the waste underground is that it the safest option. If TSHF and the waste is stored on the surface like it is how then then builds will fail and over time (could be 100s of years) the waste will eventually leak out. In a geologically sound deep repository using the multi-barrier approach the waste can be stored safely for 100,000s of years.
Oh it the waste was in the Lake District but in a DGP then I'd hav no issue going there compare to the current storage on the surface at Sellafield
Search
Calendar
Help
