A Review of the Swedish KBS-3 Plan for Final Storage of Spent Nuclear Fuel (1984) / Chapter Skim
Currently Skimming:
'Introduction'
'Introduction'
Pages 8-13
The Chapter Skim interface presents what we've algorithmically identified as the most significant single chunk of text within every page in the chapter.
Select key terms on the right to highlight them within pages of the chapter.
From page 8... ...
The KBS organization, enlisting the aid of scientists and engineers from academia, industry, and government agencies, put together in remarkably short time two reports with accompanying technical documents intended to show that safe disposal could indeed be accomplished. The reports are Handling of Spent Nuclear Fuel and Final Storage of Vitrified High Level Reprocessing Waste, known as KBS-l, dealing with vitrified reprocessing waste (late 1977)
|
From page 9... ...
To ensure that the review would be consistent with the earlier one and with current thinking about waste management and disposal in the BRWM, the panel was set up to include two members from the KBS-2 subcommittee and two from the BRWM panel that prepared the recently published Study of the Isolation System for Geologic Disposal of Radioactive Wastes (NRC, 1983)
|
From page 10... ...
There seems little need to repeat here the background material from the earlier review or those parts of the earlier document where neither the KBS data nor the reviewers' opinion regarding them has changed appreciably. Emphasis in this review is on the considerable expansion of the technical data base by Swedish scientists and engineers since KBS-2 appeared, especially on an evaluation of the extent to which this recent work has filled gaps in data and supplied additional evidence about questionable aspects of the earlier conclusions.
|
From page 11... ...
The heavy dependence on data and opinions from enthusiastic advocates could easily lead to unconscious bias, but the panel tried to avoid this by maintaining a hearty skepticism, by perusing critical comments in previous reviews of KBS-1 and KBS-2, and by querying the Swedish experts as to their own opinions of weaknesses in the program. Because the quantitative data could not be directly checked, this review necessarily consists, like its predecessor, primarily of the panel's subjective evaluation of the quality and completeness of the Swedish research and the logic used in relating the research to the conclusions drawn.
|
From page 12... ...
This review, like its predecessor, is organized around three major topics: the adequacy of technical and scientific data on the geology and hydrogeochemistry of the sites suggested as suitable for repository construction; the adequacy of metallurgical data on the mechanical properties and corrosion resistance of the copper canisters in the expected geologic environment; and the adequacy of the data describing the possible movement of radionuclides in groundwater when the canisters are ultimately breached. These topics are considered in the following three chapters of the review.
|
From page 13... ...
Two differences in nomenclature between KBS-2 and KBS-3 should be noted: "permeability" in KBS-2 (and in the KBS-2 review) is changed to "hydraulic conductivity" in KBS-3, and the "bentonite overpack" is changed to "bentonite buffer." Both of these changes are in accord with current international usage, and the new terms are used in this review.
|
Key Terms
This material may be derived from roughly machine-read images, and so is provided only to facilitate research.
More
information on Chapter Skim is available.