Reply to “Commentary: Assessment of past infiltration fluxes through Yucca Mountain on the basis of the secondary mineral record—Is it a viable methodology?” by Y.V. Dublyansky and S.Z. Smirnov

Journal of Contaminant Hydrology
By: , and 

Links

Abstract

Many of the comments by Dublyansky and Smirnov (2005) on Marshall et al. (2003) reflect a longstanding debate over the origin of secondary calcite and opal deposits found in cavities and on fracture surfaces at Yucca Mountain, Nevada, site of a proposed high-level nuclear waste repository (US Department of Energy, 2001). These comments require consideration of data and interpretations beyond the scope of Marshall et al. (2003). Dublyansky et al. (2004) and Dublyansky et al. (2005) also have commented on papers published by Whelan et al. (2002) and Wilson et al. (2003), and we will refer to the replies to those comments (Whelan et al., 2004, Wilson and Cline, 2005) in addressing the comments that go beyond the scope of Marshall et al. (2003).

Study Area

Publication type Article
Publication Subtype Journal Article
Title Reply to “Commentary: Assessment of past infiltration fluxes through Yucca Mountain on the basis of the secondary mineral record—Is it a viable methodology?” by Y.V. Dublyansky and S.Z. Smirnov
Series title Journal of Contaminant Hydrology
DOI 10.1016/j.jconhyd.2005.01.002
Volume 77
Issue 3
Year Published 2005
Language English
Publisher Elsevier
Contributing office(s) Geology, Geophysics, and Geochemistry Science Center
Description 6 p.
First page 219
Last page 224
Country United States
State Nevada
Other Geospatial Yucca Mountain
Google Analytic Metrics Metrics page
Additional publication details