We'd like to see the Obama administration come up with a better plan for the nation's nuclear wastes.
We really would.
If science and a rational energy policy ever ruled the day, the federal government wouldn't be burying spent reactor fuel at Yucca Mountain in Nevada or anywhere else.
At least not until the useful isotopes were recycled and the leftover wastes turned into glass logs.
Throwing away an abundant energy source -- one that releases no greenhouse gases -- was never a good idea.
With today's growing concerns over global warming
and America's dependence on foreign oil, the idea seems downright wacky.
Unfortunately, there's no reason to think the administration's decision to abandon the Yucca Mountain repository and rethink the nation's plans for handling spent fuel will lead to a better solution.
That's not a knock on Energy Secretary Steven Chu or the expert panel on nuclear wastes that he's supposed to appoint.
It's simply a recognition that politics and emotions have always trumped science when it comes to this issue.
Given the history, we're afraid that another run at this political hot potato is likely to impede the much-needed resurgence of nuclear power.
In the Northwest, we worry about what will happen to Hanford's tank wastes if Yucca Mountain never opens, but the implications for the nation's energy supply are even more troubling.
Halting progress on a national repository for nuclear wastes plays into the hands of anti-nuclear activists to the detriment of the nation.
The inability to find a permanent solution for spent fuel has been the foundation of the anti-nuclear movement's opposition for decades.
The closed-loop argument -- no new reactors until a waste repository is operating, no repository site is ever safe enough -- has succeeded in keeping the U.S. dependent on fossil fuels.
The nation appears on the verge of adopting a nuclear policy that makes sense for the economy and the environment.
More and more people who care about the future of the planet recognize that nuclear power provides the only realistic means to reduce greenhouse gas emissions significantly.
The waste issue -- which has always been dominated by politics, NIMBY sentiments and irrational fears -- shouldn't be allowed to derail the momentum starting to build behind a nuclear renaissance.
If not Yucca Mountain, then where?
Progress on meeting the world's growing demand for energy while reducing greenhouse gases depends on a quick answer to that question.
Technically, temporary onsite storage -- in dry casks if cooling ponds are full -- could easily take care of the waste problem until all the bugs are worked out of fuel recycling and a place found for the glass logs left at the end of that process.
But realistically, the U.S. nuclear power industry is stalled until a permanent solution for the waste "problem" is found.
Recent polls show Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid is in trouble with Nevada voters. If Reid lost his re-election bid, what would it mean for Yucca Mountain?
Maybe a change in the political landscape will turn nuclear waste policy back toward Nevada, but for now uncertainty prevails.
No one wants to invest in uncertainties.
There's a real danger that the Obama administration's decision to reopen the waste issue will leave the U.S. without any plan for spent fuel.
Chu's experts can certainly come up with a scientifically sound proposal, but technical merit has never been a match for political clout.
We'd like a better plan, but we know better than to count on it.
Similar stories:
GOP candidates disappoint with nuclear waste policy
GOP candidates disappoint with nuclear waste policy
If you're looking for an example of what's wrong with the way we nominate presidential candidates, the recent GOP debate in Las Vegas ought to suffice.
Republican hopefuls -- Newt Gingrich excepted -- rushed to align themselves with President Obama and Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid on the issue of nuclear waste disposal.
Few Herald readers will need reminding that last year the Obama administration unilaterally ordered the Department of Energy to shut down the Yucca Mountain nuclear waste repository program near Las Vegas.
Blue Ribbon Commission says U.S. should start looking for Yucca alternative
Blue Ribbon Commission says U.S. should start looking for Yucca alternative
WASHINGTON -- The United States should immediately start looking for an alternative to replace the Yucca Mountain nuclear waste repository in Nevada, which cost an estimated
$15 billion but was never completed, a presidential commission said Thursday.
In its final report, the 15-member Blue Ribbon Commission recommended immediate efforts to develop at least one geologic disposal facility for long-term handling of nuclear waste. Any effort to site a disposal facility must have community support, it said.
The report also suggested building regional storage sites that would be open for up to 100 years while officials seek to complete a permanent burial site.
A whole lot of nothing in panel's recommendation
A whole lot of nothing in panel's recommendation
A little more than two years ago, we supported the idea of a blue ribbon commission back when President Obama suggested it -- with reservations.
It seemed like a good idea to have an independent group look at a nuclear future for this country.
At the same time, we saw the absurdity of manipulating the focus of the scientific review to guarantee a politically expedient outcome.
Panel urges handling Hanford waste
Panel urges handling Hanford waste
The possibility of disposing of Hanford's high-level radioactive waste while a solution continues to be worked out for spent commercial nuclear fuel was raised Thursday at a Senate hearing.
Sen. Maria Cantwell, D-Wash., questioned leaders of the Blue Ribbon Commission on America's Nuclear Future on its findings at a hearing before the Committee on Energy and Natural Resources. On Wednesday, Rep. Jay Inslee, D-Wash., a candidate for governor, questioned commission leaders at a hearing before the House Subcommittee on Environment and Economy.
The commission issued its final recommendation last week, calling for the nation to look for a location "by consensus" where a new national repository for high-level defense waste and used commercial fuel will be welcome. It also called for the development of storage sites to be used in the meantime.
DOE looks at expanding research of small nuclear reactors
DOE looks at expanding research of small nuclear reactors
RICHLAND -- Research will be moving forward this year toward development and design certification of small modular nuclear reactors, said Peter Lyons, the Department of Energy assistant secretary of nuclear energy.
Lyons, the primary policy adviser to Energy Secretary Steven Chu on nuclear energy research and international nuclear activities, visited Pacific Northwest National Laboratory in Richland on Tuesday and then spoke at a meeting of the Eastern Washington Chapter of the American Nuclear Society.
While no one source alone can meet increasing demand for electricity, both in the United States and also in developing countries, nuclear energy must be part of the mix as a clean and reliable source, he said.
Print
Email Story
