Hostname: page-component-586b7cd67f-gb8f7 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-23T15:08:08.956Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Coupling Hydrological and Geochemical Simulations to Assess Spatial Heterogeneity and Chemical Evolution of Groundwaters at Two Candidate Repository Sites in Sweden

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  19 October 2011

Ignasi Puigdomenech ,
María José Gimeno ,
Javier B. Gómez  and
Ignasi Puigdomenech
Ignasi Puigdomenech
Affiliation:
[email protected], Swedish Nuclear Fuel and Waste Management Co (SKB), Safety and Science, Brahegatan 47, Box 5864, Stockholm, 10240, Sweden, +46 8 459 8403, +46 8 662 4974
María José Gimeno
Affiliation:
[email protected], Universidad de Zaragoza, Petrología y Geoquímica, Depto. Ciencias de la Tierra, Facultad de Ciencias, c/ Pedro Cerbuna 12, Zaragoza, E-50009, Spain
Javier B. Gómez
Affiliation:
[email protected], Universidad de Zaragoza, Petrología y Geoquímica, Depto. Ciencias de la Tierra, Facultad de Ciencias, c/ Pedro Cerbuna 12, Zaragoza, E-50009, Spain
Ignasi Puigdomenech
Affiliation:
[email protected], Swedish Nuclear Fuel and Waste Management Co (SKB), Safety and Science, Box 5864, Stockholm, SE-102 40, Sweden
Get access

Abstract

The chemical composition of groundwater surrounding a high level radioactive waste re-pository is of importance to many factors that affect repository performance. The geochemical characteristics of Swedish groundwater systems are governed by successive mixing events be-tween several end-member waters during their paleogeographical evolution. An approach is pro-posed here to investigate the spatial and temporal evolution of groundwater geochemical condi-tions by coupling hydrogeological and geochemical models in a sequential way.

The procedure combines hydrogeological results by others of a discrete fracture net-work using CONNECTFLOW with a mixing and reaction-path simulation using PHREEQC. The hydrological results contain mixing proportions of four reference waters (a deep brine, gla-cial meltwater, marine water, and meteoric infiltration) at each time step and at every node of the 3D model domain. In this work mixing fractions are fed into PHREEQC using software devel-oped to build formatted input files and to extract the information from output files for subsequent plotting and analysis. The geochemical calculations included both chemical mixing and equilib-rium reactions with selected minerals: calcite, chalcedony and an Fe(III) oxyhydroxide.

Some results for the Forsmark site, about 170 km north of Stockholm, Sweden, are graphi-cally presented. Cross sections, where each node is color-coded with respect to an important variable (pH, Eh or concentrations of main elements), are used to visualize the future evolution of the site. Sensitivity analyses were made to evaluate the effects of the different reactions and/or assumptions. The proposed methodology has proved useful for evaluating the future geochemical evolution of the repository sites and to increase the confidence in the site descriptions.

Keywords

waste managementchemical compositioninfiltration (chemical reaction)
Type
Research Article
Information
MRS Online Proceedings Library (OPL) , Volume 985: Symposium NN – Scientific Basis for Nuclear Waste Management XXX , 2006 , 0985-NN13-05
Copyright
Copyright © Materials Research Society 2007

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.)

References

1. Hartley, L., Hoch, A., Jackson, P., Joyce, S., McCarthy, R., Rodwell, W., Swift, B., and Marsic, N., Groundwater flow and transport modelling during the temperate period for the SRCan assessment: Forsmark area – Version 1.2, Report SKB R-06-98, 2006.Google Scholar
2. Hartley, L., Hoch, A., Jackson, P., Joyce, S., McCarthy, R., Swift, B., Gylling, B., and Marsic, N., Groundwater flow and transport modelling during the temperate period for the SR-Can assessment: Laxemar area – Version 1.2, Report SKB R-06-99, 2006.Google Scholar
3. SKB, Long-term safety for KBS-3 repositories at Forsmark and Laxemar - a first evaluation. Main report of the SR-Can project, Report SKB TR-06-09, 2006.Google Scholar
4. Auqué, L.F., Gimeno, M.J., Gómez, J.B., Puigdomenech, I., Smellie, J., and Tullborg, E.-L., Groundwater chemistry over a glacial cycle. Evaluation for SR-Can, Report SKB TR-06-31, 2006.Google Scholar
5. Laaksoharju, M., Tullborg, E.-L., Wikberg, P., Wallin, B., and Smellie, J., Appl. Geochem. 14, 835 (1999).Google Scholar
6. Laaksoharju, M. and Wallin, B., Evolution of the groundwater chemistry at the Äspö Hard Rock Laboratory. Proceedings of the second Äspö International Geochemistry Workshop, June 6-7, 1995, Report SKB-ICR-97-04, 1997.Google Scholar
7. SKB, Hydrogeochemical evaluation. Preliminary site description Forsmark area – version 1.2, Report SKB R-05-17, 2005.Google Scholar
8. Hartley, L., Cox, I., Hunter, F., Jackson, P., Joyce, S., Swift, B., Gylling, B., and Marsic, N., Regional hydrogeological simulations for Forsmark - numerical modelling using CONNECTFLOW. Preliminary site description Forsmark area - version 1.2, Report SKB R-05-32, 2005.Google Scholar
9. Hartley, L., Hunter, F., Jackson, P., McCarthy, R., Gylling, B., and Marsic, N., Regional hydrogeological simulations using CONNECTFLOW. Preliminary site description Laxemar subarea - version 1.2, Report SKB R-06-23, 2006.Google Scholar
10. Follin, S., Stigsson, M., and Svensson, U., Regional hydrogeological simulations for Forsmark - numerical modelling using DarcyTools. Preliminary site description Forsmark area - version 1.2, Report SKB R-05-60, 2005.Google Scholar
11. Parkhurst, D.L. and Appelo, C.A.J., User's guide to PHREEQC (Version 2) - A computer program for speciation, batch-reaction, one-dimensional transport, and inverse geochemical calculations, Report USGS/WRI-99-4259, 1999.Google Scholar
12. Grenthe, I., Stumm, W., Laaksoharju, M., Nilsson, A.-C., and Wikberg, P., Chem. Geol. 98, 131 (1992).Google Scholar
13. SKB, Hydrogeochemical evaluation. Preliminary site description Laxemar subarea – version 1.2, Report SKB R-06-12, 2006.Google Scholar