Site Characterization
Posted by Myla Reson on May 20, 1999 at 16:05:52:In Reply to: Myla Reson comments posted by John Tauxe on May 20, 1999 at 08:52:23:
Mr. Tauxe -
Just because the DoE and Westinghouse and EPA have spent a pile of taxpayer money on site characterization, that doesn't mean that they have accurately characterized the site. It just means that they have wasted a great deal of money so that WIPP looks good on paper. Unfortunately, the characterization that they have done does not reflect reality.
The WIPP is located in one of the largest areas of karst in North America. The DoE and EPA claim that it exists in an island where no karst exists. They do not dispute that it is surrounded by karst.
Karst terrain is not suitable for the disposal of any toxic material because of the potential for rapid discharge to the accessible environment. In the case of WIPP it could lead to the contamination of the Pecos River, the Rio Grande and the gulf of Mexico. I thought that I had written that in the reply that I sent you. Unfortunately, I wrote directly to you and did not post it for purposes of this discusion. Did you edit my reply?
There are three simple and relatively inexspensive tests that could be used to determine whether karst exists at WIPP. They are: (1) sorber dye tracer test, (2) strategic multi-well pump tests, and; (3) slant drilling.
- Karst at WIPP John Tauxe 5/24/99 (2)
- John Tauxe credentials Myla Reson 5/26/99 (1)
- credentials John Tauxe 6/07/99 (0)