Hostname: page-component-586b7cd67f-r5fsc Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-24T21:01:43.829Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Geochemical Indicators of Groundwater Stability

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  01 February 2011

Adrian Bath  and
Bo Strömberg
Adrian Bath
Affiliation:
Intellisci Ltd, Loughborough LE12 6SZ, [email protected]
Bo Strömberg
Affiliation:
Swedish Nuclear Power Inspectorate (SKI), Stockholm S-10658, Sweden. [email protected]
Get access

Abstract

The interpretation of geochemical and isotopic data as indicators of past hydrodynamic stability of groundwaters in fractured rock is discussed. Knowledge of the conditions and timing of past groundwater stability supports scenarios for safety assessments. Stratification of water masses according to densities is an important factor affecting stability. Chloride variations and concentration gradients are therefore diagnostic of mixing and the duration of stable conditions. Further evidence of timescales is provided by carbon-14 and tritium data although sampling difficulties and other uncertainties may allow only qualitative interpretations. Data from Äspö and other Swedish sites, Sellafield (UK) and Olkiluoto (Finland) are used to illustrate the approach. The palaeohydrogeology of such sites has been strongly influenced by distributions of saline waters. Scenarios for groundwater stability should consider these as well as glacial melt waters.

Type
Research Article
Information
MRS Online Proceedings Library (OPL) , Volume 807: Symposium Scientific Basis for Nuclear Waste Management XXVII , 2003 , 773
Copyright
Copyright © Materials Research Society 2004

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. Puigdomenech, I. (editor), Technical Report 01–28, SKB, Stockholm (2001).Google Scholar
2. Laaksoharju, M., Tullborg, E-L., Wikberg, P., Wallin, B. and Smellie, J., Applied Geochemistry 4, 835–859 (1999).Google Scholar
3. Domenico, P.A. and Schwartz, F.W., Physical and Chemical Hydrogeology (John Wiley & Sons, Inc., 1990).Google Scholar
4. Smellie, J. and Laaksoharju, M., Technical Report 92–31, SKB Stockholm (1992).Google Scholar
5. Laaksoharju, M., Technical Report 99–42, SKB Stockholm (1999).Google Scholar
6. Bath, A.H., McCartney, R.A., Richards, H.G., Metcalfe, R. and Crawford, M.B., Quarterly Journal of Engineering Geology 29, Supplement 1, pp. S39–S59 (1996).Google Scholar
7. Richards, H.G., Bath, A.H. and Metcalfe, R., Report SA/97/089, UK Nirex Ltd., Harwell.Google Scholar
8. Milodowski, A.E., Gillespie, M.R., Naden, J., Fortey, N.J., Shepherd, T.J., Pearce, J.M. and Metcalfe, R., Proceedings of the Yorkshire Geological Society 52, 215–241 (1998).Google Scholar
9. Bath, A., Milodowski, A., Tullborg, E-L., Kärki, A., Ruotsalainen, P., Shepherd, T., Cortés Ruiz, A. and Aranyossy, J-F., Submitted to Chemical Geology.Google Scholar
10. Glynn, P.D. and Voss, C.I., Report 96:29, SKI Stockholm (1999).Google Scholar
11. Bath, A.H., Report 02:13, SKI Stockholm (2002).Google Scholar
12. Fritz, P., Fontes, J-Ch., Frape, S.K., Louvat, D., Michelot, J-L. and Balderer, W., Geochim. Cosmochim. Acta 53, 1765–1775 (1989).Google Scholar
13. Smellie, J., Larsson, N-Å., Wikberg, P. and Carlsson, L., Technical Report 85–11, SKB Stockholm (1985).Google Scholar
14. Pitkänen, P., Luukkonen, A., Ruotsalainen, P., Leino-Forsman, H. and Vuorinen, U., Report 98–10, Posiva Oy, Helsinki (1999).Google Scholar
15. Louvat, D., Michelot, J.L. and Aranyossy, J.F., Applied Geochemistry 4, 917–925 (1999).Google Scholar
16. Metcalfe, R., Crawford, M.B., Bath, A.H. and Richards, H.G., In preparation.Google Scholar