0

Full Content is available to subscribers

Subscribe/Learn More  >

Safety Assessment Input for Site Selection: The Swedish Example

[+] Author Affiliations
Johan Andersson

JA Streamflow AB, Stockholm, Sweden

Paper No. ICEM2011-59031, pp. 1179-1184; 6 pages
doi:10.1115/ICEM2011-59031
From:
  • ASME 2011 14th International Conference on Environmental Remediation and Radioactive Waste Management
  • ASME 2011 14th International Conference on Environmental Remediation and Radioactive Waste Management, Parts A and B
  • Reims, France, September 25–29, 2011
  • Conference Sponsors: Nuclear Engineering Division and Environmental Engineering Division
  • ISBN: 978-0-7918-5498-3
  • Copyright © 2011 by ASME

abstract

Svensk Kärnbränslehantering AB (SKB) has performed comprehensive investigations of two candidate sites for a final repository for Sweden’s spent nuclear fuel. In March 2011 SKB decided to submit licence applications for a final repository at Forsmark. Before selection, SKB stated that the site that offers the best prospects for achieving long-term safety in practice would be selected. Based on experiences previous safety assessments, a number of issues related to long-term safety need to be considered in the context of site comparison. The factors include sensitivity to climate change such as periods of permafrost and glaciations, rock mechanics evolution including the potential for thermally induced spalling and sensitivity to potential future earthquakes, current and future groundwater flow, evolution of groundwater composition and proximity to mineral resources. Each of these factors related to long-term safety for the two candidate sites is assessed in a comparative analysis of site characteristics. The assessment also considers differences in biosphere conditions and in the confidence of the site descriptions. The comparison is concluded by an assessment on how the identified differences would affect the estimated radiological risk from a repository located at either of the sites. The assessment concludes that there are a number of safety related site characteristics for which the analyses do not show any decisive differences in terms of implications on safety, between the sites Forsmark and Laxemar. However, the frequency of water conducting fractures at repository depth is much smaller at Forsmark than at Laxemar. This difference, in turn, affects the future stability of the current favourable groundwater composition, which combined with the much higher flows at Laxemar would, for the current repository design, lead to a breach in the safety functions for the buffer and the canister for many more deposition positions at Laxemar than at Forsmark. Thereby the calculated risk for Forsmark will be considerably lower than that for Laxemar. What decided the choice is that Forsmark is thus mainly that it was judged to offer better prospects for achieving long-term safety in the final repository. Other factors considered included implications regarding repository construction and operation, difference in the footprint of the repository, comparisons regarding environment and health as well as social resources and local support.

Copyright © 2011 by ASME
Topics: Safety

Figures

Tables

Interactive Graphics

Video

Country-Specific Mortality and Growth Failure in Infancy and Yound Children and Association With Material Stature

Use interactive graphics and maps to view and sort country-specific infant and early dhildhood mortality and growth failure data and their association with maternal

NOTE:
Citing articles are presented as examples only. In non-demo SCM6 implementation, integration with CrossRef’s "Cited By" API will populate this tab (http://www.crossref.org/citedby.html).

Some tools below are only available to our subscribers or users with an online account.

Related Content

Customize your page view by dragging and repositioning the boxes below.

Related eBook Content
Topic Collections

Sorry! You do not have access to this content. For assistance or to subscribe, please contact us:

  • TELEPHONE: 1-800-843-2763 (Toll-free in the USA)
  • EMAIL: asmedigitalcollection@asme.org
Sign In