Nuclear Waste Dump Faces New Roadblocks

[NVMojo]

One fact to debate in this article: the dump is now only about 65 miles from LV due to morphing growth/sprawl.

Saturday, November 25, 2006; 1:05 AM

WASHINGTON -- When Congress targeted Nevada as the nation's nuclear waste dumping ground, the state didn't have the political power to say no. Twenty years later, the most ardent foe of the Yucca Mountain nuclear waste dump is about to become Senate majority leader. Nevada Democratic Sen. Harry Reid's new job, which gives him control over what legislation reaches the Senate floor, could deal a crippling blow to the already stumbling project.

Among Reid's first acts after this month's election was to convene a conference call with home-state reporters to declare Yucca Mountain "dead right now."

"It sure is different now than when I came (to the Senate) in 1986," the senator observed.

The dump 90 miles northwest of Las Vegas is planned as the first national repository for radioactive waste. It's supposed to hold 77,000 tons of the material _ from commercial power plants reactors and defense sites across the nation _ for thousands of years. About 50,000 tons of the waste is now stored in temporary sites at 65 power plants in 31 states. Reid would leave all of it in place.

more...

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/11/24/AR2006112400683.html

[lpbk2713]

1. Mean Jean Schmidthead wants it. Put it in her back yard.

Everybody oughtta be happy. :shrug:

[MadHound]

2. I wish Harry well in his quest to prevent this disaster from entering his state

Hell, they've done a dye test on the water underneath Yucca Mt. They inserted water into the cracks at the bottom of the Yucca Mt. complex, and found that within two weeks, that dye was in Las Vegas groundwater.

This is just one big reason that we need to let nuclear power die. There is absolutely, positively no safe way of disposing of the massive quantities of radioactive waste. Anywhere it goes, it is just a ticking time bomb, waiting around for tens of thousands of years.

[Earth_First]

3. Wonderful!

Considering that 80% of the Northeast waste will pass less than one mile from my house on it's was to Yucca on I-90, I wholeheartedly support any means necessary in order to prevent this project from transpiring.

[bluestateguy]

4. Nevada voted for this when they voted for Bush twice

So my sympathy is limited. I have moved on to other issues.

[enlightenment]

6. Please don't make remarks like that.

Nevada did go red, twice -- by the slimmest of margins. The state is extremely bifurcated; Northern Nevada has a preponderance of Republicans; Southern Nevada a majority of Dems.

Perhaps you could salvage a bit of sympathy for the 49% who tried to turn the tide in this state -- most of whom are within spitting distance of Yucca Mountain.

Or perhaps you could just leave off the snitty remarks and refrain from commenting on things you obviously do not clearly understand.

[NVMojo]

12. it's ok with you if this behavior continues? It impacts others besides NV

[Psephos]

5. So instead the waste stays in dozens of temporary sites? Classic NIMBY.

It's gotta go somewhere. Having all these temporary sites is begging for trouble. The laws of probability will catch up sooner or later.

So if the waste doesn't go to Yucca mountain, can someone tell me just where it IS going to end up?

Meanwhile, the atmosphere gets warmer as we dump more carbon into it. No national repository makes it even toughter to build new nuclear plants. I thought we were against global warming. This sounds like repug politics. I.e., do what's in your political best interests, not in the country's best interests.

Peace.

[enlightenment]

7. How about Deaf Smith County, Texas?

That location was at the top of the list in 1984 -- until Texas Republicans pulled a NIMBY of their own. Geologically, it's a better site than Yucca Mountain, but Nevada didn't have the political clout to stop Congress from amending the Nuclear Waste Policy Act in 1987 to exclude ANY location except Yucca Mountain.

You're right, it has to go somewhere; but do you think that sticking it in a geologically untenable area less than 70 miles from one of the fastest growing cities in the US is the right place? Once it's there, it's there - and to get it there it has to be shipped (by train, in the latest scenario) from all over the US. You want to talk laws of probability? Sheesh.

No state wants this crap - including the one you live in, I'm sure. Flinging NIMBY and repub politics around is pretty loose logic.

[Psephos]

8. I agree Deaf Smith County had advantages

and so did Hanford.

Deaf Smith County and Hanford also had disadvantages. If we can agree on one thing, it's that there's no such thing as a perfect site everyone would accept.

Hanford, of course, was eliminated by Tom Foley, same way the repugs eliminated DSC. I don't think this is a repug/Dem thing; I think it's more about the interests of the few versus the interests of the many.

I've read a lot of filtered information (and outright disinformation) about Yucca Mountain (both pro and con) from those who treat this as a political, not scientific, issue. I do not trust the admixture of politics and science, for precisely the same reason I do not trust religious intrusion into science. I refuse to read politically-based literature or websites on the matter.

Billions of dollars and millions of man-hours have been spent evaluating Yucca Mountain's suitability. The consensus is that the repository will be safe. The risk has been quantified, and is below 0.001% chance of failure during the waste's hot period. I wish we had another place...a perfect place...but we don't. We have to get something going soon. It's been almost 25 years since this thing was authorized, and it STILL won't be until 2017 that the facility will open. Assuming, of course, that no one messes with it in the meantime.

No one will be convinced by what their political opponents say at this point. We must give this matter to the scientists, and proceed upon their best recommendation...and that's what has been done. Yes, it's a risk. But so is not building one, and that risk looms larger every day. Yes there are dissenters. The only large-scale projects where opinion was (publicly) unanimous have been those done under totalitarian governments. (The USSR is a particularly ripe object for historical study in this regard.) There will never be anything near unanimity about Yucca Mountain, or any other waste site, anywhere.

If politics was a bad thing for the repugs to drag into this in 1984, it's still a bad thing in 2006. Harry Reid probably does not know what welded tuff is. He does know who votes for him, however. The world's most experienced geologists and waste experts are in consensus that Yucca Mountain should proceed. No one votes for them.

You're quite right, no one wants this stuff. But it's gotta go somewhere. It's going to go by rail no matter where it goes (in Canada, they use barges, too). Special crash-proof transportation containers have already been developed and shown safe under extraordinary punishment. The alternative is that the waste won't go by rail, because it will stay in the current 65+ temporary sites, where it's just a matter of time before there is a major problem. Those temp sites were designed to hold spent fuel until it could be picked up, nothing more.

Most of the NIMBYs don't offer a credible alternative. Kicking the can down the road is not a credible alternative. IMO, that's like letting our grandkids pay the national debt, "some day." I see it as an immoral posture.

You make excellent points, enlightenment. My view may be different, but that doesn't stop me from enjoying a civil discussion about it with you.

Peace.

[enlightenment]

10. Psephos, I would respectfully disagree with your

statement that the "world's most experienced geologists and waste experts are in consensus that Yucca Mountain should proceed." I live in Nevada and teach Nevada history (among other histories) and try to present a balanced perspective on this issue to my students; as such, I try to find the most recent and accurate information on Yucca Mountain. I have not seen evidence that there is a consensus at all; indeed, it seems that there is profound disagreement within the scientific community over the viability of Yucca as a "safe" repository. I'll be happy to supply references, if you'll be patient (I'm getting ready to do my orals for the PhD and I'm a bit tied up with that at present - just don't have the time for a major detour!)

As much as we would like to leave politics at the door, this is and always has been a political issue - to ignore the part that politics plays is as much of a filter as any other. The situation must be viewed in its totality, and that includes the politics. Think for a moment where all those billions of dollars for the studies came from; who authorized the spending, who was hired, who was appointed, who was on which "task force" -- it is all politically based.

Just a thought!:-)

Now -- must run and read some more . . .

[Psephos]

11. I have a small favor to ask

You sound busy, so please don't go crazy on this. I'll be glad to do my own homework.

The last time I looked at the Yucca Mountain issue in depth was a year or so ago. I'm aware there have been some significant developments since then. I appreciate that as a local and as a teacher, you have a valuable perspective. Do you have a (mostly) nonpolitical link or two you think are especially worth my time? I'll read them in depth.

My major concern is that if Yucca Mountain is scotched, what will we do instead? I think Yucca Mountain is hardly ideal, but it's clear there's no place that all will agree to. So what do we do? Doing nothing is not an option, IMO.

Thanks. B-)

Accused of changing his mind on an issue, John Maynard Keynes responded, 'When the facts change, I change my opinion. What do you do, sir?'

[enlightenment]

14. Sure -- but it will be a bit!

I'm up to my eyebrows in angst at the moment . . . definitely not relishing this exam!
It's on the 6th, so after that I'll be able to return to normal (whatever that means!:eyes: ) -- I've permalinked this so I won't forget!
And it's my pleasure,
e.

[clixtox]

9. Cheyenne Mountain, CO is now apparently available

and could be a perfect alternative to Yucca Mountain. A mountain already carved out at incredible expense to the taxpayers and very secure, I imagine...

[NVMojo]

13. good idea!