1. EURADWASTE´04 NET.EXCEL Network of Excellence Thematic Network: Networking for Research on Radioactive Waste Geological Disposal Christer Svemar, Juhani Vira, Julio Astudillo, Wernt Brewitz, Bernard Faucher, Markus Hugi, Philippe Lalieux, Alan Hooper, Tönis Papp, Marie Wiborgh

2. EURADWASTE´04 NET.EXCEL The project consists of 8 end users in Europe representing Sweden Finland Spain Germany France Switzerland Belgium UK

3. EURADWASTE´04 NET.EXCEL The “business idea” is very simple: address high and long-lived waste compare the participants´ RTD programmes and make a list of topics and issues in common develop tools for prioritization and use it on the list of issues and topics in common

4. EURADWASTE´04 NET.EXCEL The reality is, however, not so simple, as the project concerns different host rocks Salt Clay and clay sediments Crystalline rock

5. EURADWASTE´04 National states of progress

6. EURADWASTE´04 NET.EXCEL Methodology Establishing the network Present status of RTD Important future areas of RTD Shared basis for making priorities Highly ranked areas and issues for European co- operation on RTD

7. EURADWASTE´04 NET.EXCEL RTD areas addressed PA Radwaste Canister incl liner Buffer and backfill Plugs and seals Geosphere Construction of repository Monitoring

8. EURADWASTE´04 NET.EXCEL Results and conclusions 1 (5) The comparison is a first of its kind The same major basic principles have been acknowledge by all programmes Many tools for application of methods in RTD are primarily the same Many topics are worked at in many, if not all represented countries, though with different intensity Yet, there is a wide variety of national priorities Selected host rock and, even more, the state of progress dictate the contents of the RTD programmes

9. EURADWASTE´04 NET.EXCEL Results and conclusions 2 (5) No one of the participants claims to use a fully quantified and formalised evaluation process in the development of RTD programmes. Factors taken into account can be grouped into three broad categories Factors given by the political, geological and technical framework Factors stemming from the PA or standard engineering practice Factors based on subjective evaluations

10. EURADWASTE´04 NET.EXCEL Results and conclusions 3 (5) The priority methodology in NET.EXCEL is proposed to be based on National priority (factors on previous transparency) Added value due to international co-operation

11. EURADWASTE´04 NET.EXCEL Results and conclusions 4 (5) A list with approx 100 topics has been extracted from the combined comparison of the participants´ high priority RTD activities Nine of these came out with the highest grades at a joint effort to apply the priority methodology –Long term stability – HMC processes – primarily in clay and salt –RN retention – primarily in clay materials –Gas transport in rock –Plugs and seals strategy –High pH RN dissolution and migration –Backfilling techniques –Gas generation by organics –Criticality –Confirmation of diffusion data base

12. EURADWASTE´04 NET.EXCEL Results and conclusions 5 (5) The future A number of RTD similarities exist also between different media – not only PA methodology No obviously superior priority methodology is used today Finish the tools for prioritization of RTD needs List the high-priority activities in common for different countries and different media Use step-wise approach and seminar discussions

13. EURADWASTE´04 NET.EXCEL Thank you for your attention