Hostname: page-component-68945f75b7-zpsnj Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-08-06T10:15:54.145Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Nuclear Waste Disposal: The Interface Between Performance Assessment and Research

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  15 February 2011

R.B. Lyon
R.B. Lyon*
Affiliation:
Whiteshell Nuclear Research Establishment, Atomic Energy of Canada Ltd., Pinawa, Manitoba Roe 1L0
Get access

Abstract

The potential impact of the post-closure phase of a nuclear fuel waste disposal project is radiation dose to man. Radiation dose is estimated as the end product of a total systems analysis. Field and laboratory research must be assimilated in a form that can be accepted by the total systems analysis procedure. A central focus of this assimilation must be the consideration of uncertainties in the analysis and data used. Irreducible uncertainty arises because of the wide variability in natural systems and the unprecedented extrapolation into the distant future. The SYVAC computer program provides a framework for assimilation of the results of the field and laboratory research with a systematic treatment of uncertainty. A SYVAC assessment of the post-closure performance of a Canadian nuclear waste disposal facility is presented with particular illustrations of the interface between the assessment models and data and the field and laboratory research.

Type
Research Article
Information
MRS Online Proceedings Library (OPL) , Volume 6: Symposium D – Scientific Basis for Nuclear Waste Management IV , 1981 , 473
Copyright
Copyright © Materials Research Society 1982

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. Rosinger, E.L.J. and Rummery, T.E., “Nuclear Fuel Waste Disposal - Status of the Canadian Program”, presented at Waste Management ‘81’, Tucson, Arizona (1981).Google Scholar
2. Dormuth, K.W. and Sherman, G.R., Atomic Energy of Canada Limited Report, AECL 6814 (1981).Google Scholar
3. Wuschke, D.M. et al. ., Atomic Energy of Canada Limited Technical Record, TR–127–3 (1981).Google Scholar
4. Rosinger, E.L.J. and Tremaine, K.K.R., Atomic Energy of Canada Limited Report, AECL–6432 (1980).Google Scholar
5. Kharaka, Y.K. and Barnes, I., U.S. Geo. Surv. Comp. Cont. PB–215–899 (1973).Google Scholar
6. Lemire, R.J. and Tremaine, P.R., J. Chem. Eng. Data 25, 361 (1980).Google Scholar
7. Goodwin, B.W., Atomic Energy of Canada Limited Technical Record, TR–29 (1980).Google Scholar
8. Intera Environmental Consultants, Atomic Energy of Canada Limited Technical Record, TR–156 (in preparation).Google Scholar
9. Intera Environmental Consultants, Atomic Energy of Canada Limited Report, AECL 6800 (in preparation).Google Scholar
10. Brace, W.F., “Permeability of Crystalline and Argillaceous Rocks: Status and Problems”, Int. J. Rock Mech. Min. Sci. 17, 241–251.Google Scholar
11. Dormuth, K.W. and Betcher, R.M., Proceedings of the 9th Fuel Waste Management Information Meeting, Atomic Energy of Canada Limited Technical Record, TR–79, compiled by Wright, J.H., (1981).Google Scholar
12. Zach, R. and Iverson, S.L., Atomic Energy of Canada Limited Technical Record, TR–89 (1979).Google Scholar
13. Zach, R. and Mayoh, K.R., Atomic Energy of Canada Limited Technical Record, TR–24 (1980).Google Scholar
14. Zach, R., Atomic Energy of Canada Limited Report, AECL–6305 (1978).Google Scholar
15. Zach, R., Atomic Energy of Canada Limited Report, AECL–6450 (1980).Google Scholar
16. Webster's New Collegiate Dictionary (G.& C. Merriman Co. Springfield, Mass. 1975).Google Scholar
17. Oren, T.I., Communications of the ACM, 24 (4) 180 (1981).Google Scholar