Nuclear Waste Will Never Be Laid To Rest At YuccaMountain
8/24/2013 @ 6:55AM
Some thought the idea of using Yucca Mountain that is 90-miles outside of Las Vegas as a permanent nuclear waste disposal site was, well, buried. Not so, now that a federal appeals court has ordered the Nuclear Regulatory Commission to continue the licensing process.
The big question is whether the U.S. Congress will pony up so that those nuclear regulators can finish the job. Right now, the fund to continue the research has withered to just $11 million. Potentially wasting more money is one issue. So is “flouting the law,” which is what one of the judge’s said has been going on — a slap in the face to “our constitutional system.” Congress authorized the study of this site back in 1987 and unless or until it pulls the plug on it, lawmakers must bankroll it and regulators must carry out their will.
“By making it a permanent repository, we opened the flood gates for every theory as to why not to do it,” says former Energy Secretary Spencer Abraham, in a phone conversation with this reporter. “We have given critics and opponents the grounds on which to make their case. But centralizing a facility, as opposed to on-site situations, is a much safer approach. Settings in metropolitan areas are not safer than storing nuclear waste under a mountain that is 1,000 feet below the earth.”
Abraham, who is now the board chair for Uranium EnergyUEC -1.74% Corp., goes on to say that the “wiser approach” would have been to recommend a 250-year repository to store nuclear waste. Yucca Mountain, by comparison, is a 10,000-year site. Such a “compromise,” would be political feasible, he says, adding that national policy provides incentives to New Mexico to store low-level radioactive waste.
Abraham’s vision is similar to that of one by a blue ribbon commission appointed by the U.S. Department of Energy. That body, which crafted its positions two years ago, says that these decisions must be removed from the political realm and put into the hands of those who have the authority to take action. Best idea: Take the nuclear waste from the current interim storage facilities and move it into a series of regional repositories.
The political undertone: Since 1987, when Congress first approved the study of Yucca Mountain, the American people have contributed $31 million — a process in which the state of Nevada fully complied, and one in which it has received plenty of financial benefits. But the folks there — and it’s hard to blame them — don’t want 70,000 plus tons of nuclear waste in their backyard.
So, President Obama joined forces with Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid to “kill” Yucca Mountain in 2008. In 2009, Reid’s former staffer, Greg Jaczko, headed the Nuclear Regulatory Commission. The Energy Department then nixed the licensing process in 2010.
But this past week, the D.C. Court of Appeals ruled in a 2-to-1 decision that the nuclear regulators must follow the law. Doing otherwise is simply an act of defiance. A year earlier, this same court had ruled that the Nuclear Regulatory Commission could not extend the current interim storage facilities from 30-years to 60-years without more detailed environmental analyses. Today’s storage is on-site and in above-ground concrete-encased casks.
In 1983, nuclear energy companies such as Dominion ResourcesD +1.02%, Duke EnergyDUK +0.57%EntergyETR +0.96% Corp, Exelon Corp. and Southern Co. began signing contracts and paying fees to enable a permanent waste disposal site. In 2002, Yucca Mountain became the designated site. Today, electric utility customers pay a fraction of their bill towards the study of this site.
Beside the political obstacles, engineers have expressed concerns that some of the spent nuclear material could eventually escape from its encasements and cause damage to ground water supplies in the area. That may be true but it does not obviate the need to comply with the law and to officially complete the analysis as to whether Yucca Mountain would be a viable location.
“This case is not so much about Yucca Mountain as it is about due process,” says Philip Jones, president of the National Association of Regulatory Utility Commissioners. “Existing law requires the Nuclear Regulatory Commission to determine whether the facility and location is safe for storing spent-nuclear fuel. Even if it does, the fate of Yucca Mountain remains uncertain.”
Yucca Mountain may get studied some more. But it will never be used as a permanent nuclear waste storage facility. Too many political, economic and engineering hurdles stand in the way. The time spent examining the issue, though, has not been wasted. The lessons learned are that 250-year disposal sites that are regionally placed could be more practical.