Tuesday, May 8, 2012

Bruce deep silly thing gets more questions


Once a year I look at how the horrible env. ass. is going.  I'm totally with Harper that you might as well cut this whole procedure down to nothing.

We got a few interesting questions, but nothing on grout, and only a slight touch on the Precambrian.

Provide further information on the location, salient features, 
evaluation criteria used, and a summary presentation of the 
comparison and selection process for alternative locations 
considered for the DGR. 

Justify and validate the modelling assumptions used to 
establish the presence or absence of faults or structural 
geological features in the vicinity of the repository footprint in 
a geoscientific validation plan. Include a discussion of the 
methods and their reliability in the response

My prediction is that by the time they sink that shaft a couple of hundred feet, they will have broken every promise.  :)

Update:  This article is popular so a clarification is necessary.  Please see Geofish Clarified for background on the Bruce Deep Waste Respository.  This silliness goes beyond building a reactor in a tsunami zone, building a brick town on a swamp, or a circular tunnel in high horizontal stress.  This has gone to situation where you can't even start building it.

No comments: