Sources: Obama Cuts Funds for Nevada Nuclear Dump (Yucca Mountain)

[Hissyspit]

Source: Associated Press

Sources: Obama cuts funds for Nevada nuclear dump

By H. JOSEF HEBERT, Associated Press Writer – Thu Feb 26, 12:45 am ET

WASHINGTON – President Barack Obama is taking the first step toward blocking a nuclear waste dump at Nevada's Yucca Mountain by slashing money for the program in his first budget, according to congressional sources. Obama's budget to be announced Thursday will eliminate virtually all funding for the Yucca project with the exception of money needed for license applications submitted last year to the Nuclear Regulatory Commission.

"The Yucca Mountain program will be scaled back to those costs necessary to answer inquiries from the Nuclear Regulatory Commission while the administration devises a new strategy toward nuclear-waste disposal," the Energy Department will say as part of the budget document, said the sources, who asked not to be identified because the document had not been made public. Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid of Nevada, who has fought the Yucca dump for years, said Obama's decision to cut funding "represents our most significant victory to date in our battle to protect Nevada from becoming the country's toxic wasteland."

The site at Yucca Mountain, 90 miles northwest of Las Vegas, has been under consideration for a quarter-century, although Nevada officials have argued that the volcanic ridge line is not the most suitable place to store 70,000 tons of reactor waste from commercial power plants.

Obama during his presidential campaign said Yucca Mountain has not been shown to be the best site based on the science, and he promised to review the project. Earlier this week, House and Senate Democrats cut Yucca Mountain funding for the remainder of this fiscal year to $288 million, the lowest in recent years. Obama is not expected to provide a specific funding level in his budget, which instead will provide a general outline of spending for the 2010 fiscal year beginning in October. By cutting the waste program, said Reid in a statement, Obama has taken "a critical first step toward fulfilling his promise to end the Yucca Mountain project ... President Obama recognizes that the proposed dump threatens the health and safety of Nevadans and millions of Americans." Obama is expected to establish a commission to examine alternatives to Yucca Mountain, even as the Nuclear Regulatory Commission continues to consider the license application for the waste repository that was submitted by the Bush administration last year.

Read more: http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20090226/ap_on_go_pr_wh/obama_yucca_mountain

[Tikki]

1. YAY...now can we get serious about the....

waste that is poorly stored already!!....

Think Hanford...

Tikki

[GentryDixon]

2. Good news.

Now he needs to look at the waste dumping in Tooele County. Utah. Probably one of the most polluted counties in the Country.

Utah, EnergySolutions square off in court over hot waste:

http://www.sltrib.com/ci_11792331

[damntexdem]

3. Hurrah! We should all glow with approval.

And only with approval, not with radioactivity. ;-)

[Nevernose]

4. Yes! I've fought Yucca Mtn for 20 years...

And this is some of the most heartening news on the project yet.

[kiranon]

6. Agree. As a downwind kid, I have also fought this fight as I watch

the other kids I went to school with and my family members and pets die from cancer. When I go to my high school reunions that is what we talk about first - all the thyroid cancer from years ago, the ovarian and breast cancers, leukemia and other kinds of cancers in numbers too large to be caused by anything other than the testing from years ago. For my 5th grade science class, we were all taken outside, told to turn toward the building when the flash was to come and after the flash to watch the mushroom cloud float by. It was a great science lesson because we all remembered what happened to us. And, it happened over and over again. For those who want nuclear power, this time let it be in their backyard and store the left over radioactive material in their yards as well. Nevada and Utah have suffered enough. When the records were finally released through various lawsuits, it turns out that the government considered the people of Nevada and Utah to be - can't remember the exact word but it was like "disposable" - we didn't matter in the grand scheme of things and besides it was for the good of the country.

[Nevernose]

13. If you're ever in Vegas

Go to the new Atomic Testing Museum. Small, but good. It's what you may call a "beautiful horror." I was really impressed that they managed to get in all viewpoints, both positive and negative, make it educational, entertaining, and enlightening.

I've known downwinders and their families, and it was one of the volunteers at this museum that said to me, "We just didn't know any better. We were all in such a rush to beat the Russians, that we just didn't know, and we didn't think to ask." This man was amazing. He'd worked there 40 years, and had a depth of knowledge that I can't begin to describe.

My stepfather, the reason we moved to Las Vegas, used to bring his wife and kids up on the roof of their house and set up lawn chairs for "the show." In my kitchen (near the microwave oven) I have a framed photo of theater seats set up on top of the old Sands hotel, where people paid good money to watch the above-ground explosions. People came from all over the world to watch those tests, and never considered the consequences.

Coincidentally, one of my favorite students (I had her in 9th grade and again in 12th) was terrified that Obama would win, because rumor had it that we would shut down the test site, leaving her mother unemployed and the family destitute. I explained to her that, while the Test Site isn't as active as before the '93 moratorium, it's more vital than ever. Experiments are safely conducted there that can't be performed anywhere else. It's the only place in the United States where there are no EPA rules -- the only rule being that nothing can travel, by water or air, more than 20 miles.

Factoid: The amount of nuclear waste the want to store at Yucca Mountain is the equivalent of taking all the radiation produced from every test we've ever done, every day for a hundred thousand years.

[izquierdista]

15. No EPA rules

I guess you haven't been to Texas. After 6 years of Gov. and 8 years of Pres. Bush, a 4-year old with a tin badge and a toy gun has more enforcement authority than the EPA.

[kiranon]

22. Will definitely go - I'm in Las Vegas about 4x a year. Thanks for info.

[closeupready]

20. Agree with every word in your post.

:hi:

[struggle4progress]

5. "Hey, let's just stick it to Nevada" was never a very scientific approach

[northernlights]

7. even if it had been safe to store it there

(which it's not) there was never a safe way to get it there!

Can you imagine all that nuclear waste being hauled by rail and highways, through highly populated areas? Talk about an easy target for terrorists and crappy drivers... :grr:


GOBAMA!!!!

[Politicalboi]

8. This is good

The site at Yucca Mountain, 90 miles northwest of Las Vegas, has been under consideration for a quarter-century, although Nevada officials have argued that the volcanic ridge line is not the most suitable place to store 70,000 tons of reactor waste from commercial power plants.

How could they even consider putting toxic waste around a volcanic ridge line. Let's see 25 years ago 1984 Reagan.

[jmj217]

9. This shows you what irrational fear and

a crappy science education can do for you. The nuclear waste that they want to store in Yucca mountain could possibly be a threat...if you vaporized it and dispersed it into the atmosphere or water supply. But I'm pretty sure that isn't the plan and it is probably thermodynamically impossible based on the waste storage method.

You would receive a higher dose of radiation on a flight from Memphis to DC or eating a banana every day for a year than you would receive from a nuclear waste storage facility even if you spent your entire life living close to one.

Coal power plants discharge much more radioactive particulates to the environment than nuclear plants ever have but are much less regulated. But Americans aren't afraid of coal because it isn't spelled n-u-c-l-e-a-r. And because they are ignorant.

More sustainable forms of power such as solar panels and wind turbines will be a great way to supply much of our future energy needs. But solar, wind, and hydro will never be able to meet all of our energy needs. Nuclear power is the best way to bridge the gap between the hippie fantasy of a solar powered world and practical reality.

There is a place for a well regulated nuclear industry in this country and Yucca mountain will eventually be a storage facility for radioactive waste...it is inevitable. I bet that after "the administration devises a new strategy toward nuclear-waste disposal" it will actually look a heck of a lot like the current plan. Unless they decide to magically evaporate the waste away using hope and taxes.

[ConcernedCanuk]

10. I think most of us here would like to have links to some of your claims . .

.
.
.

"You would receive a higher dose of radiation on a flight from Memphis to DC or eating a banana every day for a year than you would receive from a nuclear waste storage facility even if you spent your entire life living close to one."

I find that hard to believe

convince me . . .

[neverforget]

11. You have all the answers then you had better back it up with links

[jmj217]

12. OK Concerned Canuk and neverforget...

First of all Toshay...

My previous assertions were not 100% correct and I admit that they were based on gut recall and not actual research.

OK, so I chugged the numbers. I should have taken a few minutes to analyze what I posted last time before actually posting it.

I can't back it all up with links because I used actual books from my own collection and the library. Here is what I've got so far.

Here are definitions to some terms I will use later.

REM - Roentgen Equivalent Man is a unit of dose actually absorbed taking biological effects into account.

CEDE - Committed Effective Dose Equivalent is a dose estimate that is based on inhaling or ingesting a given amount of radioactive substance. The following calculations will use it to discuss a Whole Body dose but it could also be used to take sensitivities of different organs into account.

Curie - A unit of radiation activity. Think about it as an amout of energy. It's kind of like REM but REM takes into account the biological effects of that energy.

mrem = .001 rem = 1E-03 Rem
micro curie = .000001 curies = 1E-06 curies
pico curie =.000000000001 curies = 1E-12 curies
K = Elemental symbol for potassium, K-40 is a radioactive isotope of postassium.
Isotopes are different types of atoms of the same chemical element. Basically atoms that have the same number of protons but different number of neutrons.
The element potassium has several natural isotopes that exist in varying abundance. K-40 is an isotope of potassium that is unstable and radioactive.

So here are my revised claims:

1. Bananas - If you eat a banana per day for a year you will recieve a higher dose of radiation than if you live for 36 years near an American Nuclear Power plant. Here is how that works out.


OK. To give some context.

From the DOE the dose limit for the public is .1 rem/year. The local control levels are .025 rem/year...this means that the the federal guidelines allow .1 rem per year but local monitoring sets a lower limit for exposure to 25% of the federal limit. The reason they do this is because it is easily accomplished and will prevent exceeding any federal limits. The Nuclear Regulatory Commission provides oversight to monitor civillian exposure.

Those are the limits but they are not what a typical person living near a nuclear power plant will actually be exposed to.

In reality living near a nuclear power plant will actually result in less 1 mrem per year of exposure (See NRC). The real answer is probably closer to 0 than 1. But for the sake of argument lets say that it is 1 mrem per year and you spend 36 years of your life actually living near a nuclear power plant you would receive a dose of 36 mrem from that nuclear power plant.

In the CRD Handbook on Rad Measurement and Protection, the concentration of K-40 (a radioactive isotope of potassium, which is found in bananas) in a Banana is 3520 picocuries (or micro-micro curies if you prefer ;) ) per kilogram of banana. This equals 3.52E-6 microcuries of K-40 per gram of banana.

An average bananas mass is about 200 grams (Averaging several sources) So, a typical Banana contains about 7.04E-4 microcuries of radioactive K-40.

Federal Guidance Report number 11 says the ingestion dose (committed effective dose equivalent) for K-40 is 1.86 rem per microcurie ingested.

So, CEDE from ingestion of a Reference Banana is 7.04E-4 x 1.86 =1.3E-4 rem or just round it down to 0.1 mrem.

Let's say that you eat 365 bananas in a year. Therefore your CEDE due to K-40 in those bananas is .1*365=36.5 mrem

Basically eating a banana per day for a year gives you a dose greater than living near a nuclear power plant for 36 years.

2. According to the office of research services division a 5 hour airplane flight will result in an exposure of .5mrem/hour.

So the 2 hour flight from memphis to DC results in 1 mrem of exposure or equivalent of living near a nuclear power plant for 1 year.

I'm sure that the more technically minded among you may find flaws in the math but that's all the effort I feel like putting forth right now.

If you really need a link then follow this one.

http://www.epa.gov/rpdweb00/docs/402-k-07-006.pdf

I know it is made by the evil EPA but my point is that the risks due to radiation exposure from American nuclear power are low.

I don't feel like arguing anymore tonight. I freely admit that my previous claims were bogus and based on my gut recall and not on actual research. These numbers are better but probably not perfect.

[MadHound]

17. The thing is that if you ingested even a modicum of radioactive material, you're screwed

That's part of what's happening over in Iraq with DU, it becomes dust and is either ingested or inhaled, and while DU is a weak alpha and beta emitter, once it gets inside your body, which has no protection against internal radiation, you're screwed.

It is, if you go look at the incident reports from the NRC, a rather common occurrence for tritium to leak from pipes or containment pools at nuclear sites. This gets into the groundwater, gets ingested, and even though it's a weak radioactive source, you're screwed.

That's where the real danger lies.

[Nevernose]

14. It's not the production so much

It's the transport. Packing plutonium on the backs of semi trucks and driving across 45 states to get to Yucca Mountain is a bad idea. If nuclear waste is so incredibly safe, why not leave it where it is?

It's also concentrating all of the nation's nuclear waste, both current and future, in a dormant volcano crisscrossed with 17 active fault lines 60 miles from a major metropolitan area that was selected based on the premise that in 1988 Nevada had little political power.

It also leaks.

Note that I'm not arguing against nuclear power (which does have drawbacks, especially the storage of waste and the cost of mining a finite supply of uranium), but specifically arguing against the wisdom of storing it at Yuccas Mountain. If there does need to be a central repository, Yucca ain't the place for it. The Yucca site was based on a political decision, as better sites were found in Texas, Vermont, and California. However, Texas, California, and New England had more clout in congress in the 80s, so the "Screw Nevada Bill" was passed, specifically limiting the search range for the best possible nuclear waste site to the state of Nevada.

[MadHound]

16. Umm, you're talking out your ass there friend

Having packed up and shipped out some of that radioactive waste that would have gone into Yucca, I can tell you that the waste is much hotter than what you're trying to portray.

Furthermore, if you go peruse the seismic information on Yucca Mt. you would find that it sits at the intersection of three fault lines, not a real bright location for nuclear waste. Consider that earthquakes have regularly flooded the depths of the Yucca Mt. facility with rising groundwater, and perhaps you get some idea of the problem. Flooding caverns means corroded waste containers, means getting radioactive material into the groundwater system. The EPA did a dye test on the Yucca Mt. groundwater and found that anything entering the groundwater system at Yucca Mt. would turn up in Las Vegas groundwater supply within two weeks.

As far as wind and solar goes, you're wrong. The DOE did a survey of our wind resources in 1991 and found that there is enough potential wind power in three states alone, North Dakota, Kansas and Texas to completely power our country, with growth factored in, through the year 2030. And this was using 1991 wind tech, which has advanced substantially since then. This doesn't mean that we should pave over these three states with turbines, but it does go to show you that we have more than adequate wind resources throughout this country.

I truly suggest that you go educate yourself before posting on this subject, failure to do so simply makes you look foolish.

[kiranon]

23. If you believe what you wrote, then offer your backyard for storing the nuclear waste.

[Optical.Catalyst]

24. Why does the Federal Government (and all taxpayers) have to foot the bill for nuclear waste?

The cost of disposing of radioactive waste should fall on those that generated it. Each source should pay its fair share of the costs. The military, power generating utilities, hospitals, and all the rest need to come up with both the solution and the funding for this problem.

Putting this whole tar baby on the taxpayers and the state of Nevada is wrong.

[Renew Deal]

18. This will make him a hero in NV

And it's partly why he beat McCain there.

[closeupready]

19. Good.

n/t

[babylonsister]

21. Talk about having his finger on the pulse of America...

I'm impressed!