Despite there being no “Community” consent, no scientific underpinning, and no existing operational Geological Disposal Facility (Deep Nuclear Dump) anywhere in the world for heat generating nuclear wastes the Government are lining up the ducks ready with a “GDF Supplier Day”. (https://nda.blog.gov.uk/2021/10/27/gdf-supplier-day-we-absolutely-need-you/?fbclid=IwAR1JmVW5h49coXUfIIOxmUtq4Esydly0JeD0U3Fk81G4lMEKads5niwVC88).
The boss of the proposed controversial coal mine under the Irish Sea is a key player in all this as an “invaluable” advisor to Government and has put forward the same suppliers for the tunnel boring machines as those he proposes using for the theoretical coal mine. Here is an Extract from Mark Kirbride’s advice to Government on GDF published in Waste Disposal Drivers for a Range of Nuclear Power Systems, (A thesis submitted to the University of Manchester for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy in the Faculty of Science and Engineering) : “Appendix B: Cost of disposal facility excavation The following costs were sent by Mark Kirkbride (Committee on Radioactive Waste Management (CoRWM)) as example excavation costs, from which the excavation costs per scenario in Chapter 6 were derived. These costs do not include operation, handling or disposal. Where the calculated total does not add up to the total (tabulated ‘as specified’) as given by Kirkbride the discrepancy was attributed to items listed without itemised costs, underneath the total.” and so on and so forth ..”The decline should be driver using a Herrenknecht tunnelboring machine (TBM). The host rock type would determine TBM type, in medium to hard rock (as modelled in Paper 3) a double shield machine would likely be used (Herrenknecht, 2020b). ” see from page 233 https://www.research.manchester.ac.uk/portal/files/182559187/FULL_TEXT.PDF
As the government asked for comments on the “GDF Supplier Day” I posted the following -needless to say it hasn’t been published:
“potential bottlenecks” does that include the fact that there is no way to safely abandon high level nuclear wastes into eternity and that this diabolic plan is more about facilitating new nuclear build than containment of existing nuclear waste? Sellafield cannot safety contain the waste existing onsite above ground, eg multiple leaks in multiple areas of the Magnox Silos. This push for “delivery” of a GDF in order to justify new nuclear is a crime against humanity (and all living things ).”
Check out our Lakes Against Nuclear Dump campaign website for more information and how to get involved in stopping this crime against humanity (and all living things)