Abstract
Retrieval (and various permutations of this term) of long-lived radioactive wastes/materials (LLRMs) from deep geological repositories is a “concept” currently believed to increase public confidence in, and acceptance of, national LLRM-repository programs. If the “retrievability concept” provides the missing link to increased public acceptance, which is imperative in a democratic society for the siting and development of a deep LLRM repository, then the understanding and expectations of the terms used must be clearly defined, and the associated benefits and shortcomings clearly explained, to the public. To quote the Danish mathematician and philosopher Piet Hein:
Knowing what you knowest not is in a sense omniscience.
Based on more than 20 years of involvement in the development of deep geological repositories for LLRMs in the United Sates of America and abroad, it is the preliminary conclusion of this author that retrievability conveys a false positive because it:
1. Does not add any appreciable post-closure physical safety to current and future generations and environments.
2. Could compromise (but does not necessarily have to) the long-term integrity of the disposal system.
3. Conveys the erroneous message that this generation does not have confidence in its ability to design, construct, decommission, and close a deep geological repository for LLRMs, in a manner that provides long-term containment and isolation of the emplaced LLRMs.
