Solid Radioactive Waste Strategy Report.pdf - UK EPR

More documents

Recommendations

Info

EPR UK N° NESH-G/2008/en/0123 REV. A PAGE 64 / 257 Design Data · Segregation is carried out by hand. Advantages · Simplifies downstream waste treatment. Disadvantages · Requires the worker to be in close proximity to the contaminated items resulting in potential operator doses. 7.3.7 Solid Waste Drum Compaction An in-drum compactor or bailing press will be used to reduce the volume of the solid waste generated. The compactor can be integrated into the sorting box or be used as a standalone unit permitting pre-compaction of the waste prior to disposal and/or supercompaction. The typical pressing force applied is 200 kN. Application · Treatment of solid waste with high voidage. Design Data · Volume reduction factors for compaction vary according to the compaction force and the feed material but are typically between 3 and 10. Advantages · Significant waste volume reduction. Disadvantages · Not suitable for: o Non-compactable objects; o Free liquors; o High moisture content wastes.
EPR UK N° NESH-G/2008/en/0123 REV. A PAGE 65 / 257 FIGURE 13: IN-DRUM COMPACTOR FOR REDUCTION OF SOLID WASTE 7.3.8 Solid Waste Drying Drying of the solid waste reduces the mobility of the waste and prevents degradation of the waste container through internal corrosion. Drying will be carried out using a drum drying device equipped with an electrical heater. This consists of a bottom heater and shell heaters which fully enclose the drum permitting heating of the outer surface of the drum. An isolated hood connects the drum to the ventilation system and allows the vapour to be vented to the ventilation system. All solid waste must be dried prior to sending it to a supercompactor and/or long term storage. Application · Wastes with high moisture content. Advantages · End product is dry waste which is suitable for disposal. Disadvantages · Drying by high heat application is not suitable for all wastes.
Page 1 and 2:
A 2008-11-26 Sarah Greenwood Gary C
Page 3 and 4:
EPR UK N° NESH-G/2008/en/0123 REV.
Page 5 and 6:
Page 7 and 8:
Page 9 and 10:
Page 11 and 12:
Page 13 and 14: EPR UK N° NESH-G/2008/en/0123 REV.
Page 51 and 52: 10 13 16 19 22 46 49 EPR UK N° NES
Page 63: EPR UK N° NESH-G/2008/en/0123 REV.
Page 115 and 116:
Page 117 and 118:
Page 119 and 120:
Page 121 and 122:
Page 123 and 124:
Page 125 and 126:
Page 127 and 128:
Page 129 and 130:
Page 131 and 132:
Page 133 and 134:
Page 135 and 136:
Page 137 and 138:
Page 139 and 140:
Page 141 and 142:
Page 143 and 144:
Page 145 and 146:
Page 147 and 148:
Page 149 and 150:
Page 151 and 152:
Page 153 and 154:
Page 155 and 156:
Page 157 and 158:
Page 159 and 160:
Page 161 and 162:
Page 163 and 164:
Page 165 and 166:
Page 167 and 168:
Page 169 and 170:
Page 171 and 172:
Page 173 and 174:
Page 175 and 176:
Page 177 and 178:
Page 179 and 180:
Page 181 and 182:
Page 183 and 184:
Page 185 and 186:
Page 187 and 188:
Page 189 and 190:
Page 191 and 192:
Page 193 and 194:
Page 195 and 196:
Page 197 and 198:
Page 199 and 200:
Page 201 and 202:
Page 203 and 204:
Page 205 and 206:
Page 207 and 208:
Page 209 and 210:
Page 211 and 212:
Page 213 and 214:
Page 215 and 216:
Page 217 and 218:
Page 219 and 220:
Page 221 and 222:
Page 223 and 224:
Page 225 and 226:
Page 227 and 228:
Page 229 and 230:
Page 231 and 232:
Page 233 and 234:
Page 235 and 236:
Page 237 and 238:
Page 239 and 240:
Page 241 and 242:
Page 243 and 244:
Page 245 and 246:
Page 247 and 248:
Page 249 and 250:
Page 251 and 252:
Page 253 and 254:
Page 255 and 256:
Page 257:
show all

Solid Radioactive Waste Strategy Report.pdf - UK EPR

Create successful ePaper yourself

Delete template?

Save as template?