Repository (nuclear technology)
In nuclear technology , a repository is a repository in which radioactive waste is to be permanently and securely stored for a long time. From a human perspective, these repositories will pose a risk for a very long time due to the long half-lives of some radionuclides . Therefore, precautions must be taken to prevent z. B. People of future generations come into contact with radioactivity .
Nuclear waste to be stored
Radioactive waste , commonly known as nuclear waste, is created by
- Nuclear fission , breeding reactions and neutron capture in nuclear reactors ,
- Overburden from uranium mining ,
- radioactive decay (e.g. daughter products of radionuclides from medical applications),
- other activation processes , for example in particle accelerators
as well as in many procedural steps of the processes mentioned ( uranium enrichment plants , residues from the decommissioning process of nuclear power plants , fuel element production and much more).
Depending on its origin, radioactive waste contains very different mixtures of different radionuclides. The activity of each individual nuclide decreases by half in each half-life . In a nuclide mixture, the intense radiation of the short-lived nuclides initially dominates until it has subsided to such an extent that the radiation of the longer-lived nuclides comes to the fore.
Low- and intermediate-level radioactive waste with short half-lives can be disposed of by him for so long between stores , has fallen to the activity under the allowable limit. The Radiation Protection Ordinance defines how decayed waste and measured for conventional disposal or re- released is. If the waste also contains nuclides with half-lives of decades or longer, it must be disposed of in a repository. Direct disposal can also be more economical than interim storage for short-lived, low-level waste.
Highly radioactive waste arises predominantly from the use of nuclear energy in nuclear reactors . Spent fuel elements contain a mixture of various fission products as well as incubated transuranium elements (uranium, neptunium, plutonium). They first have to be kept in a cooling basin for a few years before the activity of the shorter-lived fission products has dropped to such an extent that constant water cooling is no longer necessary and removal is possible. In a reprocessing plant , the fissile nuclides can then be separated, turning them into mixed oxide to use fuel elements. The mixture with the predominantly non-fissile nuclides is vitrified and taken to an interim storage facility, where it must continue to subside for a few decades before the heat development has decreased to such an extent that final storage is possible. A large nuclear power plant produces around 7 m³ of high-level radioactive waste per year (this corresponds to a cube with a side length of almost 2 m) as well as larger quantities of low and medium-level waste. In Germany, as a result of the nuclear phase-out, transports for reprocessing have no longer been permitted since 2005; Instead, spent fuel elements (around 50 m³ per year in a single large nuclear power plant) are temporarily stored in newly constructed interim storage facilities at the power plant sites with the aim of later direct disposal .
In principle, one could defuse the problem of long-lived, highly radioactive waste by separating the most problematic nuclides and converting them into short-lived or stable isotopes by means of neutron irradiation . Whether this transmutation is technically and economically feasible is currently (2017) still being investigated.
Repository concepts
Protection goal
Since radioactivity never goes back to zero, a benchmark must be used to determine how long nuclear waste must be safely segregated from the biosphere . The generally accepted benchmark for storage in deep geological formations is the radioactivity of natural uranium deposits. Depending on the type of uranium deposit considered, a longer or shorter isolation period may appear necessary. In Germany, the requirement has been increased to a million years: “Based on the requirements of the AkEnd (2002) and the safety criteria (Baltes et al. 2002), a necessary isolation period, i.e. H. the period for which the pollutants must be retained in the containment effective mountain area of the repository is in the order of 1 million years. "
Storage in deep geological formations
There is a worldwide consensus that highly radioactive waste must be disposed of by storage in deep geological formations in order to be able to guarantee a relative safety of containment. This creates a protective system made up of several barriers. The first technical barriers consist of enclosing the waste in glass canisters ( HAW glazing ) and other containers. Over a period of thousands of years, however, these barriers can become leaky, especially due to the effects of ionizing radiation, and local diffusion of radioactive nuclides can occur. In the long term, the geological barriers should then have an effect and prevent migration of the radionuclides into the biosphere.
The Oklo natural reactor provides an indication of the possibility of permanent geological confinement : under the site-specific conditions there, some of the radionuclides formed during nuclear fission have migrated less than 50 m within 2 billion years. However, shorter -lived nuclides such as iodine -129 could no longer be found. In the opinion of the Swiss National Cooperative for the Storage of Radioactive Waste, such analogies from nature can only be viewed as “indications” for the behavior of repositories. A decisive prerequisite for a safe enclosure is that the ingress of water does not lead to convective material transport.
A corrosion but the container could occur faster than previously thought.
Deep borehole disposal
So far, repositories for high-level radioactive waste have been designed as mines ; the storage chambers are typically a few hundred meters deep. Due to advances in deep drilling technology , it now also appears possible to store nuclear waste in boreholes several thousand meters deep, which can make permanent removal from the biosphere considerably safer. However, this concept runs counter to the trend towards retrievable storage.
It has also been proposed to drill these boreholes in subduction zones so that the nuclear waste is reliably transported to the interior of the earth due to the plate tectonics.
Disposal in the sea
Disposal on or under the seabed has been completely banned for HAW by the London Convention since 1974 and since 1993. This agreement is initially valid until 2018. The background is the extensive problematic nuclear waste disposal in the sea that took place before. Nonetheless, as an alternative to land-based disposal concepts, the possibility of disposing of radioactive waste in stable clay formations under the sea floor, creating an artificial island for this purpose or creating a repository located under the sea floor that can be reached through tunnels is occasionally discussed again. However, there have been no more research activities worth mentioning since 1990. Some expert studies do not see this option as very promising in the long term.
Retrievable disposal
In the first decades of the use of nuclear energy, repository concepts usually provided for the waste to be brought into deep geological formations so that there was no possibility of retrieval. In the meantime there is a strong tendency to make “final disposal” retrievable so that later generations retain the opportunity to react to changed assessments of long-term safety or to extract the required raw materials with advanced technical methods from what is currently not usable.
The greater difficulty of closing the access so that future civilizations cannot unknowingly intrude speaks against retrievable disposal.
The advantage of retrievability would be that a large proportion of the highly radioactive waste in breeder reactors can be used to generate energy again. Light water reactors (currently the majority among all reactors in the world) can utilize around 5% of the energy contained in the fuel elements. The remaining amount, mostly uranium- 238, can be converted into fissile plutonium- 239 through breeding reactions, which can be used to generate energy. The technology is a research topic in many countries and is currently (2015) partially available in only two commercial reactors ( BN-600 reactor and BN-800 reactor in Russia).
For the human ecologist Jürgen Manemann , the principle of the common good results in the demand for retrievable final storage. Otherwise, according to Manemann, there would be a double irreversibility for future generations: From today's perspective, the nuclear waste would be irreversible and the handling of it would then also be cemented as irreversible.
Worldwide situation
The planning and procedure for final disposal are the responsibility of each state; there are internationally binding basic requirements by the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA).
Repository for low and medium level radioactive waste
There are repositories for low and medium level radioactive waste in many countries, for example in France, Great Britain, Spain, the Czech Republic and in the USA. No repository is currently operated in Germany; Since 1998, no more waste has been stored in the Morsleben repository and the Konrad repository is still in the construction phase .
Repository for highly radioactive waste
There are at least six repositories for high-level radioactive waste:
- Carlsbad, United States of America: Waste Isolation Pilot Plant Mine in Salt Rock
- Dimitrovgrad, Russia: deep borehole, included in 2011
- Zheleznogorsk, Russia: Deep borehole, included in 2011
- Seversk, Russia: Deep borehole, included in 2011
- Ekores, Belarus: 10 stainless steel containers in concrete trays, locked in as a result of the Chernobyl accident in 1992
- Vector, Ukraine: trenches in sedimentary rock, as a result of the Chernobyl accident
In several countries there are repositories for high-level radioactive waste in different phases of implementation. In Finland z. B. the Olkiluoto repository is under construction. The containment of highly radioactive waste in Finland is expected to start in the twenties.
In France, the French nuclear waste authority advises ANDRA ( A gence N ational pour la Gestion des D Échets Ra dioactifs now) the construction of a repository for high and medium-level nuclear waste in Bure .
In July 2011 the EU Commission passed a new directive according to which all fourteen EU countries using nuclear energy must find a solution for the final disposal of nuclear waste by 2015. Otherwise there would be legal action against defaulting states and infringement proceedings before the European Court of Justice . So far, however, it has not happened.
In the past ten to fifteen years, considerable new problems have been discovered in this context, for example that of gas development in the repository or problems with proving long-term safety.
In addition to the scientific and technical problems, there are also political problems - as a rule, the population in the affected regions does not accept a repository, as can be seen in and around Gorleben , for example .
Final storage of radioactive waste in Germany
history
The German disposal concept provides for all types of radioactive waste (from nuclear power plants, medicine and technology) to be disposed of in deep geological formations. It is controversial whether this should be done in a single repository or separately for heat-generating waste and waste that does not or only weakly heat-generating waste in different repositories. For heat-generating waste (forecast quantity: a total of 21,000 m³ / 27,000 m³ according to the BMUB / Final Storage Commission ) there is a need for final storage from around 2030 at the earliest (the decay heat requires a few decades of cooling in order to avoid excessive heat input), for non-heat-generating waste (forecast quantity: 300,000 m³ / 600,000 m³ disposal commission) earlier.
Research and development work for final disposal only began after the commissioning of nuclear power plants. As part of the second nuclear program of the federal government (1963 to 1967), the planning of possible steps for the realization of a waste disposal facility was announced.
In the Asse mine was led research and development work for the disposal by and disposed of from 1967 to 1978 as part of experimental and demonstration programs radioactive wastes. In January 2010, the Federal Office for Radiation Protection (BfS) presented a plan to retrieve all 126,000 barrels of radioactive and chemotoxic waste from the Asse. The catastrophic location conditions and years of misjudgment by the institutions involved had become known beforehand.
After the nuclear phase-out in the summer of 2011 and a change of government in Lower Saxony in 2013 , the black and yellow federal government ( Merkel II cabinet ) changed its policy and, after long negotiations with the opposition and the federal states, passed a new cross-party repository search law, the site selection law. It is now open to search for a suitable final repository for nuclear waste. The Gorleben salt dome is still a possible option, but it does not make a preliminary determination.
In 2015 the Federal Government decided to look for a single repository for low and medium level radioactive waste as well as for high level radioactive waste. The BGR , which was commissioned by the government to search for a repository , and the working group for the selection process for repository sites (AkEnd) have taken a clear position against the single repository concept for technical reasons. This is not only dangerous due to the possible mixture of different types of waste, but a repository that can meet the safety requirements for high-level radioactive waste and at the same time offers enough volume to store all waste is also more difficult to find.
According to the report of the Repository Commission , the final disposal of high-level radioactive waste in Germany will drag on well into the 22nd century . The commission expects the end of the emplacement between the years 2075 and 2130, while the "condition of a closed repository mine between 2095 and 2170 or later" is to be achieved. Accordingly, highly radioactive waste could be stored in interim storage facilities until after 2100. At the same time, final storage costs of around 49 to 170 billion euros are forecast; significantly more than the 23 billion euros in payments that the nuclear power plant operators transferred to the state for this purpose on July 3, 2017. Since then, final disposal has officially been a matter of the state and is no longer the responsibility of the power plant operators who generated the highly radioactive waste. The schedule envisages finding a repository by 2031 and then expanding it. This would mean that the originally set deadlines for interim storage facilities and castors, which are designed for 40 years, would be significantly exceeded.
Possible repository formations
All over the world, salt , clay and granite formations are being examined for their suitability as repositories. In Germany, the currently known Zwischenahn , Gorleben , Wahn (Hümmling) , Gülze- Sumte and Waddekath salt domes come into consideration.
The clay formations also focus on northern German locations, because the southern German formations are either in seismically active areas or in karst regions ( Swabian Alb ), which appear to be of limited suitability due to the high water inflow. In contrast to the less disturbed granites of Finland and Sweden, which are being investigated there with a view to their use as a repository, the formations occurring in Germany are in southern Germany, Saxony, Thuringia and in the Upper Palatinate, according to the Federal Institute for Geosciences and Raw Materials (BGR ) more rugged and therefore less suitable. The advantage of salt formations is their deformability, with which they react to mechanical stress and shield the repository from the environment. The possible damage caused by radiolysis of the salt, as it was caused by the Ionic Materials Group of the Zernike Institute of the University of Groningen and led by the Dutch physicist HW den Hartog , is negligible in the opinion of the Reactor Safety Commission , but is still discussed controversially in science. However, salt has the serious disadvantage that it is water-soluble. If water gets in, there is a risk that the natural barrier system in the salt will fail and the radionuclides will be released.
Like salt, clay formations have the advantage of being malleable. The Cigar Lake uranium deposit in Saskatchewan has been shielded from the environment by layers of clay for more than a billion years. At low temperatures, radioactive isotopes can also be adsorbed in the intermediate layers of the clay minerals . However, this ability is lost due to the heat generated during the radioactive decay of the nuclear waste. However, this could be prevented by a sufficiently large distance between the various heat-emitting containers. A certain disadvantage of clay formations is the lower stability compared to salt. A major advantage of clay stone over salt is its insolubility.
Locations
The salt dome near Gorleben
In Gorleben a salt dome was tested for its suitability as a repository for all types of radioactive waste from 1979 to 2000. The location was not determined based on its geological suitability, but primarily for political and regional economic considerations. It was not one of the salt domes examined by the Federal Institute for Geosciences and Raw Materials (BGR) by Gerd Lüttig on behalf of the nuclear fuel reprocessing company between 1972 and 1975 for the storage of nuclear residues. The exploration of the salt dome was interrupted in 2000 at the instigation of the then red-green federal government. The three to ten year moratorium should be used to clarify conceptual and safety-related questions about disposal. An important question is whether the repository will be geologically safe for several centuries. For example, tectonic activities must not lead to the penetration of groundwater into the salt dome. This and other scenarios cannot currently be ruled out with certainty. The moratorium ended in March 2010. The extent to which the Kohl government at the time influenced the interim report of the Physikalisch-Technische Bundesanstalt from 1983 on the site investigation was examined by the black-red coalition in 2009 and was the subject of an investigation committee. The State Office for Mining, Energy and Geology ordered the formal immediate execution to resume exploration work on November 9, 2010. The planned final storage of nuclear waste in the Gorleben salt dome and the associated Castor transports are regular reasons for violent protests, demonstrations and blockade actions by tens of thousands of opponents of nuclear power .
As of today (2015), only the BGR has carried out underground investigations in Gorleben. The summary statement of the BGR on this location is: "Despite the ongoing exploration of the Gorleben salt dome, it can be determined from the previous investigations that from a geoscientific perspective there is no evidence against the suitability of the salt dome"
Konrad shaft
The former Konrad iron ore mine in Salzgitter is currently being converted into a repository (" Konrad Shaft ") for radioactive waste that does not produce any heat, or only weakly. The planning approval decision was granted in 2002; the last legal remedy failed in 2008. According to information from the contracted construction company Deutsche Gesellschaft zur Bau und Betrieb von Repository für Abfallstoffe (DBE) from 2010, completion and commissioning is not expected before 2019. The operation of the shaft will be delayed by another five years as of 2019.
Morsleben
In 1979 the GDR began using the disused salt mine as a repository for low and medium level radioactive waste. The repository was taken over by the federal government in connection with German reunification . By the end of the emplacement operations in 1998, a total of around 37,000 m³ of radioactive waste had been emplaced in Morsleben . The approval process for decommissioning is currently ongoing.
Asse test repository
In the former Asse II potash and rock salt mine , the final storage of radioactive waste was tested and practiced on an industrial scale between 1967 and 1978. 125,787 containers with low-level radioactive waste and 16,100 containers with medium-level radioactive waste were stored. In the years 1979 to 1995, tests were carried out to store medium and high-level radioactive waste below the existing mine in the unscratched mountains, under conditions very similar to those in the planned Gorleben repository. After critics had pointed out the lack of stability of the mine building and the risk of drowning early on, and in 1988 solutions had been added from the adjoining rock, unused excavation cavities were filled in from 1995 to 2004. After further negative assessments of the stability and the discovery of radioactively contaminated caustic, it was decided in 2010 to retrieve all radioactive waste.
Combined repository
From 2015, the repository commission began to increasingly grapple with the question of whether low and medium-level radioactive waste could be stored together with high-level radioactive waste in a repository - a so-called combined repository . The low- and medium-level radioactive waste only makes up a fraction of the radioactivity but the majority of the volume, which makes the search for a repository difficult.
Disposal of radioactive waste in other countries
There are currently repositories for low and medium level radioactive waste in operation in 19 of the 41 countries that use nuclear energy. In most cases, waste with a short half-life (<30 years) is stored in near-surface chambers at a depth of up to 10 m. After the emplacement operation has ended, a monitoring phase of around 300 years follows, during which the use of the site is normally restricted but possible. In Sweden and Finland there are repositories in the form of rock caverns close to the surface at depths of around 70 to 100 m below the surface.
For highly radioactive and long-lived waste, the aim is to dispose of it in deep geological formations worldwide. A corresponding repository is under construction in Olkiluoto (Finland). Corresponding repositories are specifically planned in Yucca Mountain (USA) and Forsmark (Sweden). In Forsmark, they also start from the Swedish premise of wanting to transport spent fuel elements as little as possible.
The following (incomplete) list (see also list of nuclear power plants ) states planned repositories for various types of radioactive waste as well as existing repositories for low and medium level radioactive waste :
| country | Name of the repository or region | Waste class | Status |
|---|---|---|---|
 Argentina
|
Sierra del Medio | highly radioactive waste | planned |
 Bulgaria
|
Nowi Chan | low level radioactive waste | in operation |
 People's Republic of China
|
Lop Nor Nuclear Weapons Test Site | highly radioactive waste | planned |
 Finland
|
Loviisa | low and medium level radioactive waste | in operation |
|
Finland
|
Olkiluoto | low and medium level radioactive waste (high level radioactive waste under construction) | in operation |
 France
|
Bure (rock laboratory) | medium and high level radioactive waste (reversible test facility) | planned |
|
France
|
Center de l'Aube | low and medium level radioactive waste | in operation |
|
France
|
Center de la Manche | low and medium level radioactive waste | |
 United Kingdom
|
Drigg | low level radioactive waste | in operation |
 Japan
|
Rokkasho | low level radioactive waste | in operation |
 Marshall Islands
|
The Runit Dome on Runit (island) | Radioactive waste from nuclear weapons tests | in operation |
 Norway
|
Himdalen | in operation | |
 Sweden
|
SFR Forsmark | Low and medium level radioactive waste (high level radioactive waste in planning) | in operation |
|
Sweden
|
Oskarshamn | planned | |
 Switzerland
|
Zurich North-East (wine country) | low, medium and high level radioactive waste | in evaluation ( see also under NAGRA ) |
|
Switzerland
|
Jura East (Bözberg) | low, medium and high level radioactive waste | in evaluation |
 Spain
|
El Cabril | low and medium level radioactive waste | in operation |
 Czech Republic
|
Bratrství | Waste containing natural radionuclides | in operation |
|
Czech Republic
|
Dukovany | low and medium level radioactive waste | in operation |
|
Czech Republic
|
Hostím | low and medium level radioactive waste | in inclusion |
|
Czech Republic
|
Richard | Waste with artificially generated radionuclides | in operation |
 Hungary
|
Püspökszilágy | low and medium level radioactive waste | in operation |
 United States
|
WIPP | Transuranium waste | in operation |
|
United States
|
Yucca Mountain | highly radioactive waste | planned |
See also
literature
- Achim Brunnengräber (Ed.): Problem trap repository. Social challenges in dealing with nuclear waste. Baden-Baden 2016, ISBN 978-3-8487-3510-5 .
- Julia Mareike Neles, Christoph Pistner (Ed.): Nuclear energy. A technology for the future? Berlin - Heidelberg 2012, ISBN 978-3-642-24329-5 .
- Klaus-Jürgen Röhlig, Horst Geckeis, Kurt Mengel: Disposal of radioactive waste. Part 1: Facts and Concepts . In: Chemistry in our time 46 (3), pp. 140-149 (2012), ISSN 0009-2851
- Klaus-Jürgen Röhlig, Horst Geckeis, Kurt Mengel: Disposal of radioactive waste. Part 2: The host rocks: mudstone, granite, rock salt . In: Chemistry in our time 46 (4), pp. 208-217 (2012), ISSN 0009-2851
- Klaus-Jürgen Röhlig, Horst Geckeis, Kurt Mengel: Disposal of radioactive waste. Part 3: Chemistry in the repository system . In: Chemistry in Our Time . tape 46 , no. 5 , 2012, ISSN 0009-2851 , p. 282–293 , doi : 10.1002 / ciuz.201200583 .
Web links
- Information from the Federal Office for Radiation Protection on repositories ( memento from January 18, 2007 in the Internet Archive )
- Information from the Society for Plant and Reactor Safety on the evaluation of repository concepts
- Nuclear Waste Conference (AMK) of citizens' initiatives at repository sites
- “Searching for a nuclear waste repository: Jobs for the ages” by Malte Kreutzfeldt: “In order to look for a nuclear waste repository, new authorities and companies were created. They are now fighting for influence and employees. ”In: Die Tageszeitung (taz) from October 26, 2017
Individual evidence
- ↑ Conceptual and safety-related issues relating to the final storage of radioactive waste. Host rocks in comparison. Synthesis report by the Federal Office for Radiation Protection, Salzgitter, November 4, 2005, p. 39.
- ↑ National Cooperative for the Storage of Radioactive Waste (NAGRA): How nature conserved and disposed of. In: Nagra info November 22 , 2006, accessed January 18, 2020 .
- ↑ Xiaolei Guo, Stephane Gin u. a .: Self-accelerated corrosion of nuclear waste forms at material interfaces. In: Nature Materials. 2020, doi : 10.1038 / s41563-019-0579-x .
- ↑ Nadja Podbregar: Repository: Container corrosion underestimated. Common combinations of materials used in nuclear waste containers accelerate corrosion. In: scinexx.de. January 28, 2020, accessed January 28, 2020 .
- ↑ Archive link ( Memento of the original from April 3, 2012 in the Internet Archive ) Info: The archive link was inserted automatically and has not yet been checked. Please check the original and archive link according to the instructions and then remove this notice.
- ↑ http://www.imo.org/OurWork/Environment/SpecialProgrammesAndInitiatives/Pages/London-Convention-and-Protocol.aspx
- ↑ IAEA TECDOC-1105 Inventory of radioactive waste disposals at sea August 1999 http://www-pub.iaea.org/MTCD/Publications/PDF/te_1105_prn.pdf
- ↑ http://www.scientiapress.com/nuclearwaste
- ↑ Archive link ( Memento of the original from April 3, 2012 in the Internet Archive ) Info: The archive link was inserted automatically and has not yet been checked. Please check the original and archive link according to the instructions and then remove this notice.
- ↑ http://philosophie-indebate.de/2365/indebate-die-endlagersuche-und-das-gemeinwohl-eine-politikethische-eroerterung/ .
- ↑ Radioactive Waste Disposal Facilities. IAEA, accessed March 17, 2011 .
- ↑ https://www.iaea.org/sites/default/files/publications/magazines/bulletin/bull39-1/39102683341.pdf
- ↑ Archive link ( Memento of the original dated February 2, 2014 in the Internet Archive ) Info: The archive link was inserted automatically and has not yet been checked. Please check the original and archive link according to the instructions and then remove this notice.
- ↑ https://inis.iaea.org/search/search.aspx?orig_q=RN:45115219
- ↑ https://www.world-nuclear.org/information-library/nuclear-fuel-cycle/nuclear-waste/storage-and-disposal-of-radioactive-waste.aspx
- ↑ https://www.world-nuclear.org/information-library/nuclear-fuel-cycle/nuclear-waste/storage-and-disposal-of-radioactive-waste.aspx
- ↑ https://www.world-nuclear.org/information-library/nuclear-fuel-cycle/nuclear-waste/storage-and-disposal-of-radioactive-waste.aspx
- ↑ https://inis.iaea.org/collection/NCLCollectionStore/_Public/32/053/32053273.pdf?r=1&r=1
- ↑ https://newmdb.iaea.org/admin/Reports/Published/Framework/Site.aspx?ID=158&IsoCode=UA&PeriodID=11&Pub=1
- ↑ a b Worldwide activities for the construction of repositories, DBE GmbH ( Memento of the original of August 17, 2011 in the Internet Archive ) Info: The archive link was automatically inserted and not yet checked. Please check the original and archive link according to the instructions and then remove this notice.
- ↑ http://www.posiva.fi/en/final_disposal/general_time_schedule_for_final_disposal
- ↑ APA / AFN, November 22, 2011: The French are working flat out on nuclear waste repositories In : wirtschaftsblatt.at, International ( Memento of December 28, 2015 in the Internet Archive ) (December 3, 2011).
- ↑ Brussels forces an answer to the German repository question
- ↑ Federal Office for Radiation Protection : Investigation of the gas formation mechanisms in a repository for radioactive waste and the associated effects on the management of evidence of repository safety : Final report (PDF; 775 kB) bfs.de. May 2005. Archived from the original on November 11, 2011. Info: The archive link was automatically inserted and has not yet been checked. Please check the original and archive link according to the instructions and then remove this notice. Retrieved July 10, 2011.
- ↑ Gases in the repository - statement of the RSK (PDF; 86 kB) rskonline.de. January 27, 2005. Archived from the original on November 16, 2011. Info: The archive link was automatically inserted and not yet checked. Please check the original and archive link according to the instructions and then remove this notice. Retrieved July 10, 2011.
- ↑ a b Waste prognoses ( memento of the original from July 5, 2016 in the Internet Archive ) Info: The archive link was inserted automatically and has not yet been checked. Please check the original and archive link according to the instructions and then remove this notice. , Federal Office for Radiation Protection (BfS), accessed on July 5, 2016
- ↑ Responsibility for the future, a fair and transparent procedure for the selection of a national repository site , final report of the Commission for the Storage of Highly Radioactive Waste, preliminary version, July 4, 2016, p. 87
- ↑ Responsibility for the future, a fair and transparent procedure for the selection of a national repository site , final report of the Commission for the Storage of Highly Radioactive Waste, preliminary draft, July 4, 2016, p. 27
- ↑ endlager-asse.de ( Memento of the original from January 3, 2012 in the Internet Archive ) Info: The archive link was inserted automatically and has not yet been checked. Please check the original and archive link according to the instructions and then remove this notice.
- ↑ spiegel.de April 7, 2013: Nuclear waste: Altmaier expects billions in costs for a repository search
- ↑ It's the mixture that makes it dangerous ( Memento from September 19, 2015 in the Internet Archive ), Frankfurter Rundschau, August 28, 2015
- ↑ Selection process for repository sites , Working group for the selection process for repository sites (AkEnd), 2002
- ↑ Final storage was nationalized.
- ↑ How to invest 24 billion euros safely and profitably? . In: Frankfurter Allgemeine Zeitung , July 3, 2017. Retrieved July 6, 2017.
- ↑ Taxpayers should dispose of nuclear companies . In: Manager-Magazin , April 27, 2016. Retrieved July 7, 2017.
- ↑ Nuclear waste no longer in this century . In: Frankfurter Allgemeine Zeitung , April 20, 2015. Retrieved April 20, 2015.
- ↑ Nuclear disposal is becoming a reality . In: n-tv , April 20, 2015. Accessed April 20, 2015.
- ↑ Radiation damage in rock salt ( Memento of the original dated November 16, 2011 in the Internet Archive ) Info: The archive link was inserted automatically and has not yet been checked. Please check the original and archive link according to the instructions and then remove this notice. (PDF; 44 kB)
- ^ State of the art
- ↑ Dagmar Röhrlich : So check whoever binds himself forever , Deutschlandfunk - Wissenschaft im Brennpunkt, December 3, 2006
- ↑ Video Frontal21: Interview with Prof. Lüttig on Gorleben (April 2010) in the ZDFmediathek , accessed on January 26, 2014.
- ↑ Gorleben is being explored further: The focus is on transparency and reliability of the decision-making process
- ↑ Press release (September 10, 2009) of the BMU on the agreement between the Chancellery, BMU, BMWi and BMBF to review the Gorleben files. The government was voted out of office shortly afterwards ( 2009 Bundestag election ).
- ↑ 1. Investigation Committee (Gorleben) ( Memento of the original from September 5, 2013 in the Internet Archive ) Info: The archive link was inserted automatically and has not yet been checked. Please check the original and archive link according to the instructions and then remove this notice.
- ↑ Gorleben repository can be explored further ( Memento from November 12, 2010 in the Internet Archive )
- ↑ Repository site, Gorleben exploration site ( Memento of the original dated July 4, 2015 in the Internet Archive ) Info: The archive link was inserted automatically and has not yet been checked. Please check the original and archive link according to the instructions and then remove this notice. , Federal Institute for Geosciences and Natural Resources. Retrieved September 8, 2015
- ↑ Article Schacht Konrad: City not complainable ( Memento from September 21, 2011 in the Internet Archive ), website of the city of Salzgitter with further evidence
- ↑ M. Bauchmüller: Nuclear waste repository will not be ready in time. Nuclear policy: Konrad mine. sueddeutsche.de, September 23, 2010, accessed on March 25, 2011 .
- ↑ Schacht Konrad comes later. Retrieved June 16, 2019 .
- ↑ Combined repository topic in the repository commission , German Bundestag, 2015
- ↑ Since the Hungarian security authorities ordered the retrievability of the waste a few years ago, the waste is no longer fixed with cement. The facility only serves as an interim storage facility. See DBE GmbH: Worldwide activities ( Memento of the original from August 17, 2011 in the Internet Archive ) Info: The archive link was automatically inserted and not yet checked. Please check the original and archive link according to the instructions and then remove this notice.
