Can argillaceous formations isolate nuclear waste? Insights from isotopic, noble gas, and geochemical profiles
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract There is considerable interest in the use of thick argillaceous geologic formations to contain nuclear waste. Here, we show that diffusion can be the controlling transport process in these formations and diffusional time scales for δ18O and δ2H in water, dissolved He, and Cl transport in shale‐dominated aquitards are typically over 106 years, well exceeding the regulatory requirements for isolation in most countries. Our scientific understanding of diffusive solute transport processes through argillaceous formations would benefit from the application of additional isotopic tracers (e.g., using new 4He sampling technology), multidimensional diffusive‐dispersive modeling of groundwater flow and diffusive‐dispersive solute transport over long geologic time scales, and an improved understanding of spatial heterogeneity as well as time‐dependent changes in the subsurface conditions and properties of argillaceous formations in response to events such as glaciation. Based on our current isotopic and geochemical understanding of transport, we argue that argillaceous formations can provide favorable long‐term conditions for isolating nuclear wastes.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".