§ Mr. Bestasked the Secretary of State for the Environment (1) further to the answer of 10 December, Official Report, column 589, to the hon. Member for Ynys Môn, if he will state why lead is not regarded as the most suitable containment material for nuclear waste; why no studies have been carried out by his Department; and if he will make a cost and efficiency comparison between lead, mild steel and stainless steel, and concrete as containment material for nuclear waste;
(2) further to the answer of 10 December, Official Report, column 589, to the hon. Member for Ynys Môn, if he will give further details of the studies into mild steel and stainless steel containers for nuclear waste.
§ Mrs. RumboldLead is not regarded as suitable containment material because of its high commodity value, its relatively poor mechanical strength and the pollution hazards that may arise from its use in the long term. In these circumstances we have seen no need to initiate detailed studies on the use of lead containers and the question of making cost and efficiency comparisons between lead and other materials consequently does not arise.
Studies funded by my Department and the European Community on the corrosion of carbon steel external packaging for high-level radioactive waste have been carried out and a report of the first phase, which has been completed, is publicly available from the British Library. Research and development work is continuing with the support of European Community funding. A three-year programme is under way to study the use of steel containers for intermediate-level waste with joint funding from my Department and NIREX.