Hostname: page-component-669899f699-tpknm Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2025-04-25T22:41:54.477Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Long-Term Thermomechanical and Thermohydrological Factors Controlling the Optimal Design of a Nuclear Waste Repository

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  21 February 2011

J. S. Y. Wang ,
D. C. Mangold  and
C. F. Tsang
J. S. Y. Wang
Affiliation:
Earth Sciences Division, Lawrence Berkeley Laboratory, University of California, Berkeley, California 94720
D. C. Mangold
Affiliation:
Earth Sciences Division, Lawrence Berkeley Laboratory, University of California, Berkeley, California 94720
C. F. Tsang
Affiliation:
Earth Sciences Division, Lawrence Berkeley Laboratory, University of California, Berkeley, California 94720
Get access

Abstract

Surface uplift and buoyancy flow are two of the major long-term, far-field perturbations to the geologic formations around a nuclear waste repository. The allowable surface uplift has been accepted in the literature as a criterion limiting the repository waste loading density. It has also been recognized in generic modeling studies that the buoyancy distortion of the ambient groundwater flow around a repository is a major mechanism for radionuclide transport. However, the buoyancy considerations have yet to be quantified for the purpose of optimal design of a radioactive waste repository. We suggest the possibility of using the buoyancy gradient when compared with the ambient regional (horizontal) gradient as a measurable thermohydrologic factor that controls the design of waste loading. This study indicates that the buoyancy gradient could in some cases become the main controlling factor. To decrease the buoyancy effects, much lower values of waste loading density should be considered in the design of the waste repository.

Type
Research Article
Information
MRS Online Proceedings Library (OPL) , Volume 15: Symposium D – Scientific Basis for Nuclear Waste Management VI , 1982 , 531
Copyright
Copyright © Materials Research Society 1983

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

Article purchase

Temporarily unavailable

References

REFERENCES

[1] Department of Energy, Management of commercially generated radioactive waste. U. S. Department of Energy, Washington, D. C., DOE/EIS-0046F (1980).Google Scholar
[2] Russell, J. E., Areal thermal loading recommendations for nuclear waste repositories in salt. Office of Waste Isolation, Oak Ridge, Tennessee, Y/OWI/TM-37 (1979).Google Scholar
[3] Science Applications, Inc., The selection and evaluation of thermal criteria for a geologic waste isolation facility in salt. Office of Waste Isolation, Oak Ridge, Tennessee, Y/OWI/SUB-76/07220 (1976).Google Scholar
[4] Cheverton, R. D., and Turner, W. D., Thermal analysis of the national radioactive waste repository: Progress through March 1972. Oak Ridge National Laboratory, Oak Ridge, Tennessee, ORNL 4789 (1972).Google Scholar
[5] Environmental Protection Agency, Technical support of standards for highlevel radioactive waste management. U. S. Environmental Protection Agency, Washington, D. C., EPA 520/4–79–007 (1977).Google Scholar
[6] Brace, W. F., Permeability of crystalline and argillaceous rocks. International Rock Mechanics and Mineral Science, 17(5), pp. 241–251 (1980).Google Scholar
[7] Wang, J. S. Y., Mangold, D. C., Spencer, R. K., and Tsang, C. F., Thermal impact of waste emplacement and surface cooling associated with geological disposal of nuclear waste. Lawrence Berkeley Laboratory, Berkeley, California, LBL-13341 (1982).Google Scholar
[8] Norton, D. and Knapp, R., Transport phenomena in hydrothermal systems: The nature of porosity. American Journal of Science, 277, pp. 913–936 (1977).Google Scholar
[9] Bourke, P. J., and Robinson, P. C., Comparison of thermally induced and naturally occurring waterborne leakages from hard rock depositories for radioactive waste. Radioactive Waste Management, 1(4), pp. 365–380 (1981).Google Scholar
[10] Dames and Moore, Technical support for GEIS: Radioactive waste isolation in geologic formations: Thermomechanical stress analysis and development of thermal loading guidelines. Dames and Moore, White Plains, New York, Y/OWI/TM-36/20 (1978).Google Scholar
[11] Dames and Moore, Technical support for GEIS: Radioactive waste isolation in geologic formations: Ground water movement and nuclide transport. Dames and Moore, White Plains, New York, Y/OWI/TM-36/21 (1978).Google Scholar
[12] Hardy, M. P. and Hocking, G., Numerical modeling of rock stresses within a basaltic nuclear waste repository: Phase II - Parametric design studies. Rockwell Hanford Operations, Richland, Washington, RHO-BWI-C-23, (1978).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
[13] Burgess, A.S., Charlwood, R. G., Skiba, E.L., Ratigan, J. L., Gnirk, P. E., Stille, H., and Lindblom, U. E., Analyses of groundwater flow around a highlevel waste repository in crystalline rock. OECD-NEA Workshop on Low-Flow, Low-Permeability Measurements in Impermeable Rocks, Paris, France, (1979).Google Scholar
[14] Hodgkinson, D. P., A mathematical model for hydrothermal convection around a radioactive waste depository in hard rock. Annals of Nuclear Energy, 7, pp. 313–334 (1980).Google Scholar
[15] Wang, J. S. Y. and Tsang, C. F., Buoyancy flow in fractures intersecting a nuclear waste repository. In “Heat Transfer in Nuclear Waste Disposal,” HTD-II, pp. 105–112, Proceedings of the Winter Meeting of the American Society of Mechanical Engineers, Chicago, Illinois (1980).Google Scholar