Hostname: page-component-586b7cd67f-t8hqh Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-23T04:26:53.406Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Source Trends for Performance Assessment of HLW Glass and Spent Fuel as Waste Forms

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  10 February 2011

B. Grambow
B. Grambow*
Affiliation:
Forschungszentrum Karlsruhe, INE, Postfach 3640, D-76021 Karlsmhe, Germany, [email protected]
Get access

Abstract

with respect to the state of validation for source term development. Consequences of the various mechanism on mass half lives of the waste forms are calculated with analytical equations. For glass the largest uncertainty stems from the yet unclear dissolution mechanism under silica saturated conditions. Source terms based on silica solubility coupled to Si-mass transfer are probably neither conservative nor realistic. For spent fuel the largest uncertainty is in the extrapolation of radiolytic fuel oxidation for long periods of time. Considering the uncertainties involved, reaction rates cannot yet be extrapolated reliably to values much lower than the lowest reliable experimental measurements.

Type
Research Article
Information
MRS Online Proceedings Library (OPL) , Volume 506: Symposium – Scientific Basis for Nuclear Waste Management XXI , 1997 , 141
Copyright
Copyright © Materials Research Society 1998

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

REFERENCES

1 “Glass as a Waste Form and Vitrification Technology – Summary of an international Workshop”, National Research Council, National Academy Press, Washington D.C. (1997)Google Scholar
2 Cadelli, N. et al., Commission of the European Communities, EUR-1 1775 EN (1988)Google Scholar
3 Kristallin, I, Conclusions. NAGRA Technical Report 93-09E (1994)Google Scholar
4 SKB 91, SKB technical report 92-20, Stockholm (1992)Google Scholar
5 Jollivet, P., Montanelli, T., Vernaz, E., Global' 95, Versailles, 1,766-773 (1995)Google Scholar
6 Stroes-Gascoyne, S., Journal of Nuclear Materials 190, 87–100 (1992)Google Scholar
7 Grambow, B. et al., European Commission, EUR 17543 EN (1997)Google Scholar
8 Loida, A., Grambow, B., Geckeis, H., J. Nucl. Mater. 238, 3–10 (1996)Google Scholar
9 Helgeson, H. C., Murphy, W. M. and AagaardGeochim, P.. Cosm. Acta 48, 2405–2432 (1984)Google Scholar
10 Advocat, T., Thése du doctorat, Université Louis Pasteur, Strasbourg, 1991 Google Scholar
11 Grambow, B., Mater. Res. Soc. Symp. Proc. 44, 15–27. (1985)Google Scholar
12 Grambow, B., Lutze, W., Kahl, L., Geckeis, H. Bohnert, E. Loida, A., Dressier, P., Pejsa, R., Commission of the European Union : EU 17114 EN (1997)Google Scholar
13 Grambow, B., Lutze, W., Muiller, R.; Mater. Res. Soc. Symp. Proc. 257, 143 (1992)Google Scholar
14 Delage, F., Ghaleb, D., Dussossy, J.L., Chevallier, O., Vernaz, E., J. Nucl. Mater., 1992, 190 191–197 Google Scholar
15 Marx, G., pers. communication, based on electrochem. measurements (1997)Google Scholar
16 Gray, W.J., Wilson, C.N., Pacific Northwest National Laboratory, PNL-10540 (1995)Google Scholar
17 Forsyth, R., Swedish Nuclear Fuel and Waste Management Co., Stockholm, SKB-TR--95-23 (1995)Google Scholar
18 Loida, A. et al., Forschungszentrum Karlsruhe, FZKA 5674 (1995)Google Scholar
19 Finn, P.A., Hoh, J. C., Wolf, S. F., Surchik, M. T., Buck, E. C., and Bates, J. K., presented at “Scientific Basis for Nuclear Waste Management XX”, Materials Research Society, Pittsburgh, PA. (1997)Google Scholar
20 Brenner, J., Buhmann, D., Storck, R., GSF-Forschungszentrum fur Umwelt und Gesundheit GmbH, Neuherberg, GSF-Bericht 13/93 (1993)Google Scholar
21 Johnson, L. H. et al., AECL Report-I 1494-2, Vol. 2 (1996)Google Scholar
22 Grambow, B. et al., EUR 17111 EN, European Commission (1997)Google Scholar
23 Hauser, W., calculation with programm PRODOSS/Version Hp-Vectra, ha 1989-03, KfK/INE (1994)Google Scholar
24 Shoesmith, D.W., Sunder, S., Swedish Nuclear Fuel and Waste Management Co., Stockholm (Sweden), SKB-TR--91-63 (1991)Google Scholar
25 Grambow, B., SKB Technical Report 89-13 (1989)Google Scholar
26 SKB-Annual Report 1996, SKB technical report 96-25, Stockholm (1997)Google Scholar
27 Eriksen, T. E., Eklund, U.B., Werme, L., Bruno, J., Journal of Nuclear Materials (1995) 227, 76–82 Google Scholar
28 SR 95, SKB technical report 96-05 (1995)Google Scholar
29 Janeczek, J., Ewing, R. C., Mat. Res. Soc. Symp. Proc. 257, 497–504 (1992)Google Scholar
30 Pablo, J. de et al., this conferenceGoogle Scholar
31 Grambow, B., Smailos, E., Geckeis, H., Mfiller, R., Hentschel, H., Radiochimica Acta 74, 149–154 (1996)Google Scholar
32 Murphy, W. M., Oelkers, E. H. and Lichtner, P. C., Chemical Geology (1989) 78, 357–380 Google Scholar
33 Baudoin, P. et al., EVEREST Vol. 4, European Commission EUR 17449/4 EN (1997)Google Scholar
34 Ricol, S., Thése du doctorat (1995)Google Scholar