published Tuesday, May 31st, 2011

Politics and nuclear waste

Probably not many communities would be eager to have the nation’s stockpile of nuclear waste stored close to them. Although the United States has an excellent track record for nuclear safety, there’s just a certain hesitation about the waste.

For that reason, Congress long ago picked an extremely isolated area of Nevada as a storage site for America’s nuclear waste. The government did thorough research and spent billions of dollars to prepare the location, known as Yucca Mountain. It is about 100 miles from Las Vegas.

But in 2009, the Obama administration decided it didn’t want Yucca Mountain to be the location for nuclear waste storage. So it canceled funding for the site, closed Yucca Mountain’s administrative offices in Las Vegas and laid off workers involved in the project.

Many Republicans suspected that politics was behind the move. Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid, D-Nev., opposed the project, so the decision to end it was seen as a political favor to him by the administration.

Now, it’s not only Republicans who believe that politics was behind the decision. The nonpartisan Government Accountability Office, a federal watchdog agency, has reached the same conclusion.

The decision to halt the Yucca Mountain project “was made for policy reasons, not technical or safety reasons,” the GAO stated in a recent report.

The agency said the closing was a hurried process as well.

“Several [Department of Energy] officials told us that they had never seen such a large program with so much pressure to close down so quickly,” the report said.

It’s bad enough that political concerns outranked concerns about our nation’s nuclear waste storage. But it gets worse. The GAO report determined that shutting down Yucca Mountain means it could take several decades before the United States comes up with an alternative means of storing the waste.

“It is alarming for this administration to discard 30 years of research and billions of taxpayer dollars spent, not for technical or safety reasons, but rather to satisfy temporary political calculations,” U.S. Rep. Fred Upton, R-Mich., said in a statement.

Now, the administration says it has formed a “blue ribbon” panel to look for other places to store the waste.

But massive amounts of research had already shown Yucca Mountain to be the right choice. It’s regrettable that politics will delay proper nuclear storage, and cost U.S. taxpayers billions of dollars.

Comments do not represent the opinions of the Chattanooga Times Free Press, nor does it review every comment. Profanities, slurs and libelous remarks are prohibited. For more information you can view our Terms & Conditions and/or Ethics policy.
nucanuck said...

The downside of current nuclear technology is pretty horrific. Justify it as we will, we are still creating a problem without a solution for future generations.

We should proceed with extreme caution.

May 31, 2011 at 12:55 a.m.
Leaf said...

This sounds wacky, but the science behind it is sound. Create a large hollow nickel ball with a hole in the top. Stick it in the middle of the desert. A conveyor belt drops a certain amount of spent fuel into it and then drops a plug into the nickel ball. The ball will heat up enough, and it will be heavy enough, that it will melt through the earth's crust and make it's way to the mantle, where it will return the radioactive material to where it came from in the first place. The hole the sphere leaves will cool and seal itself behind it, like a rock dropping through mud.

Neat, huh?

May 31, 2011 at 4:56 p.m.
please login to post a comment

videos »         

photos »         

e-edition »


Find a Business

400 East 11th St., Chattanooga, TN 37403
General Information (423) 756-6900
Copyright, Permissions, Terms & Conditions, Privacy Policy, Ethics policy - Copyright ©2014, Chattanooga Publishing Company, Inc. All rights reserved.
This document may not be reprinted without the express written permission of Chattanooga Publishing Company, Inc.