Nuclear waste decision provokes storm of protest

New Scientist ^ | 18:20 18 February 02 | Rob Edwards

[Rain-maker]

 

Nuclear waste decision provokes storm of protest

US President George W. Bush's decision to turn Yucca Mountain into one of the world's biggest underground radioactive waste dumps has provoked a storm of protest from politicians and environmentalists.

The flat-topped ridge in the Nevada desert, 100 miles north west of Las Vegas, is now destined to become the final resting place for 77,000 tonnes of US nuclear waste. Waste from civil and military operations is currently stored above the ground in 131 facilities across 39 states.

In endorsing a recommendation from his energy secretary, Spencer Abraham, on 15 February, Bush argued that proceeding with Yucca Mountain would protect public safety, health and national security. "Successful completion of this project would isolate in a geological repository at a remote location highly radioactive materials now scattered throughout the nation," he said.

But opponents warn that transporting 100,000 truck-loads of radioactive waste to Nevada could tempt terrorists to attack and explode them. "President Bush has dropped the equivalent of 100,000 dirty bombs on America," said local Democratic senator, Harry Reid.

Law suits

The Republican governor of Nevada, Kenny Guinn, has filed the latest in a series of law suits in an attempt to force Bush to revoke his decision. He has also promised to veto the decision in Congress, which will trigger a full-scale congressional debate.

Environmentalists are also worried that Bush has chosen the wrong site, because of mounting scientific evidence that it might not be safe. They cite a report from Congress's US Nuclear Waste Technical Review Board in January, 2002, which described the technical basis for predicting the performance of Yucca Mountain as "weak to moderate".

The fear is that radioactivity could leak from the burial ground, and contaminate water supplies.

"The site is crisscrossed with geologic faults, official computer models used to assess site suitability are riddled with uncertainties, and federal regulations have been changed or set aside several times to accommodate it," said Arjun Makhijani, president of the Institute for Energy and Environmental Research, in Takoma Park, Maryland. "President Bush should reverse his decision."

Last November, a report by the General Accounting Office urged Bush to indefinitely postpone his decision on Yucca Mountain, because of doubts over whether it could be built as planned.

Makhijani believes that a deep repository could be the best long-term solution to the US's nuclear waste storage problem. But an ideal site has yet to be found, he says.

Rob Edwards

18:20 18 February 02

 

 

 

 

 

[westnews]

Excuse me?? It is build sir, and has been for quite awhile.

[westnews]

build ---> built

[chimera]

Bah! Learn something first. I have been in those tunnels. They are exploratory tunnels only. Everything that has been done there is for site study. It is highly, no, extremely doubtful that anything has been built that will be used for the actual storage. The engineering criteria are just too different. I mean, they might make use of the site roadways that are there now when the actual shipments are made, but the repository rooms themselves? Nonsense!

I was down in those tunnels back in late 2000 for some consultation work on geological measurements related to fission product transport in the native rock strata. Unless they got done in a year an a half the kind of work that would normally take about 7 or eight years to do (not counting the NIMBY-Luddite obstructionism sure to come), the repository isn't built yet. Just exploratory work related to the site studies, get it?

Hey, people, its time her to make one last appeal, please, please get some technical study in and do your own research before you come on these threads and embarrass yourself. FR is a large community and there are people out here who really do know what they're talking about, and do have some background in the field, and have done work at the sites themselves, and maybe do have a little more expertise than just reading something from a biased website, or listening to some Luddite crackpot news conference/media circus.

[68-69TonkinGulfYachtClub]

"The longer I read your stuff, the more convinced I become that you smoked too much bad dope over there at the "TonkinGulfYachtClub", and it hasn't worn off yet. Your rants didn't make much sense at first---they make none at all now."

You best retract this slanderous statement!
How dare you insult me and at the same time all Viet Nam Vets by inferring that anyone there was a dope smoker!
I give you facts how the leagl process for this is done and you call it ranting?
Learn to follow and obey the law.!

[68-69TonkinGulfYachtClub]

"I mean, WHO CARES if it is the DOE, the NRC or the XYZ."

BECAUSE IT IS THE WAY THE LAW IS SET UP!
What don't you understand about following the law?

[kidd]

Now maybe people will realize that the "decision" on Yuuca Mt has not yet been made, just an ok to get to the real scientific studies done. Kind of proves that the idea that "all this has been studied to death for 20 years" and "all the data is in" and "all saftey issues have been addressed" and "it's totally safe" are all false statements.

Um, no. The scientific studies are done. There has been 20 years of scientific studies. The DOE, who was responsible for the construction and most of the studies, has reviewed the data - and in their opinion, the Yucca site is acceptable. Under DOE standards, the site is safe, all issues have been addressed, all the data is in and the place has been studied to death.

The President has agreed with the DOE. Nevada has disagreed with the DOE. The Congress will decide if they agree with the DOE in light of their overdue obligation to provide a storage site. If Congress decides to not use Yucca, the Nuclear industry will go to court to get their money back (and its a lot). If Congress agrees with the DOE, then the EPA will set up standards and rules, based on the studies. The NRC will then decide whether or not to issue a license, based on the studies and the EPA standards. Part of the license will probably include a requirement to monitor water and seismic issues during operation. Part of the licensing may question the studies that have already been conducted, which may result in more studies.

However, the studies are done. They may be clarified by related studies, but the main studies are done. There are some 300 issues that require clarification before the NRC will issue a license, some of which may require additional studies.

[kidd]

No, it hasn't been built yet. It will not be completed for another 10 years or so.

[68-69TonkinGulfYachtClub]

"Hey, people, its time her to make one last appeal, please, please get some technical study in and do your own research before you come on these threads and embarrass yourself. FR is a large community and there are people out here who really do know what they're talking about, and do have some background in the field, and have done work at the sites themselves, and maybe do have a little more expertise than just reading something from a biased website, or listening to some Luddite crackpot news conference/media circus."

Time for YOU to get your head out of the scientific books, and look at the rest of Free Republic and see what happens when people do not follow the law of the land.
If YOU don't like the way the law is and how it relates to the final ok on Yucca, go do something about it instead of advocating "everything is done" and "all is safe"
Many on Free Republic will be glad to teach you how to FReep and make a difference in getting laws changed.

[68-69TonkinGulfYachtClub]

"However, the studies are done. They may be clarified by related studies, but the main studies are done. There are some 300 issues that require clarification before the NRC will issue a license, some of which may require additional studies."

So bottom line is that all 300 issues must be clarified (some of which MAY need further study)
before the NRC gives the FINAL OK. Correct?
Until then it's just really an educated guess, based upon the findings and studies so far. Correct?
Now I understand why the laws are set up the way they are, ALL data and questions answered 1st, then the final OK.

[kidd]

Tempers are getting out of control here. Yes, Vietnam Vets don't need any more cheap shots.

Chimera is a bright guy. He has not fabricated anything. He's a bit emotional, but I can understand his fustration with people who have gotten their information from the leftist media only. And he makes a good general point - you need to understand this issue, not just those links that have anti-Yucca articles. Know the process. Know the studies.

Assume that the DOE and 20 years of exhaustive studies are correct and the site is completely safe. Ask yourself this: How am I affected?

[kidd]

So bottom line is that all 300 issues must be clarified (some of which MAY need further study) before the NRC gives the FINAL OK. Correct?

Correct.

Until then it's just really an educated guess, based upon the findings and studies so far. Correct?

Probably better than an educated guess. The NRC will review everything from calibration records to differing professional opinions. DOE's opinion will carry considerable weight. However the NRC will not let an immediate pulic safety concern go unanswered, if one exists.

Now I understand why the laws are set up the way they are, ALL data and questions answered 1st, then the final OK

Yes. The final ok is still a long way away.

[chimera]

Time for YOU to get your head out of the scientific books, and look at the rest of Free Republic and see what happens when people do not follow the law of the land.

Oooh. Serious threat, there. Now I'm scared...LOL!

If YOU don't like the way the law is and how it relates to the final ok on Yucca, go do something about it instead of advocating "everything is done" and "all is safe"

LOL! Just what law is this now that I don't like or don't understand? Tell me, do you know what the relevant legislation is regarding the Yucca Mountain project? Do you know what NWPA stands for (the words that go with the letters)? Do you know what it says? Do you know the process that was established therein and how it works? How about the year it was passed, and who signed it into law?

Have you ever done a fuel shipment? I didn't think so. Don't feel bad, not many have. I have done them. I know the rules. I have worked with them and followed them.

Have you ever been involved with licensing a nuclear reactor? I have. I know the NRC inside and out. I have worked with DOE and I know how it works.

Have you ever been involved with the construction and licensing of a nuclear facility of any kind? I have. I know exactly what goes into such an undertaking, and what is required, both engineering and licensing (i.e., "following the law").

How about building and licensing a waste disposal facility? Yep, been there, done that. Know what is involved on the legal, technical, and public policy side of doing that? Sure do. Have you similar experience? I didn't think so...

Do you know what 10CFR19 is? Do you know what 10CFR20 is? Can you cite for me the topics addressed by 10CFR50? How about 10CFR55? Hell, do you even know what CFR stands for??? So much for utterly demolishing the drivel about having ones head in the scienfific books! I've still got plenty of 2x4s left. Which one of your nonsensical arguments and ridiculous personal challenges to you want me to take the next one to?

I'm not saying this to boast, but simply to say you're going after the wrong dude with this "follow the law" crap. Because, for one, I probably have more experience dealing with nuclear-related rules and regulations than you ever knew existed, and second, you probably can't even cite, based on your own knowledge and not something cut-and-apsted out of another website, what the relevant laws and rules are and what they say. So just stop with that kind of crap, because you're becoming more and more of a caricature. Many on Free Republic will be glad to teach you how to FReep and make a difference in getting laws changed.

Arrrrrrrrrnnnnnt! Wrong answer! Been there, done that. What, you want to start another challenge on how much a person FReeps? Geez, man, you're getting more and more ridiculous.

[Ditto]

Now why would REPUBLICANS, who supported the President on everything else do this?

Because a sufficient percentage of the people of the state of Nevada have a serious case of Nuclear phobia. They have been totally propagandized by the Luddite left.

[NevadaY]

My 2 cents -

As a Nevada native and resident I've always thought that there isn't any better place to put the stuff as long as they can get it to its destination safely.

Where Nevada went wrong was that they should have charged a large fee (with a big smile on the face) for taking care of it. Its all about hospitality. We already do that with gambling, but this would have been a far better way to get money.

We knew they were going to put it in Nevada all along because it makes sense. But now its just gonna be rammed down our throats with no returns but plenty of potential risk.

P.S. I really don't think keeping it is much of a risk, but it rounded out the phrase :-)

[68-69TonkinGulfYachtClub]

You don't like the process.
You are an expert at what needs to be changed.
You know exactly what needs to be changed.
You know how to FReep.
Start the process to change the system.
Become a leader and tell us what we can do to help.
You ARE correct, the system needs to be changed.
Point the way and many on FR will help you, including me.
"One of the penalties for refusing to participate in politics
is that you end up being governed by your inferiors." PLATO

[winodog]

I have said this on other threads. The site may be safe,(I doubt it because I dont believe anything the gov.org says)But I dont want the trash coming through Vegas or Pahrump where I have invested money in land.

I want a back door built so the waste created by the rest of the country comes nowhere near Vegas. Let it travel the highways by your house.And Nevada wants money and lots of it for the rest of the country making us your trash dump. We dont benefit from it and we dont want it. All the people saying we should take it dont have to worry about their homes and property being made a wasteland for the next million years.

And what really ticks us Nevadans off us all the fair weather freepers who advocate state rights till it interfers with their lifestyle. I say screw all of you. If the containers are so safe put the waste in one and keep it where the trash was made till you figure out a better way of dealing with the trash you made.

We already have a radioactive dump site in Beatty that is storing low level waste so we do our part and then some.

[68-69TonkinGulfYachtClub]

This is the same petition form that Jeff Head used on the Klamath FallsPetition.
Start it up, you know what needs to be changed and who it should go to.
Once it is ready ping me I personally guarantee you I will promote it on Free Republic
like so may other threads and petitions I do daily.
There is a reason why so many FReepers ask me to help promote their particular threads and petitions.
In fact you should contact the Radio FR people and do a show on the changes that need to be done.
Bob J can get you started.
When you do your show (you can do it at home for free) I'm the Radio FR PR guy, so everyone will know.
Let's join forces and make some changes in the system.

Free Petition Submission Form

[mrsmith]

A freeper's Yucca Mountain site: yuccamountainexpose.org

[68-69TonkinGulfYachtClub]

Thanks!
This is the kind of thing that chimera can use in a petition and on Radio FR.
Time for a change in the system and he knows what laws need changing.

[chimera]

Look, in an effort to see your side of this and to at least partially wipe the slate (since this pissing contest has carried across two threads now), let me say I appreciate your giving me that link and for the offer of assistance. You went out of your way to offer that and I am appreciative.

Let me say this about that. I question whether or not petition action is necessary or productive at this point. Now, before you get angry at me and think that I am copping out or don't want to help or lead or whatever, let me explain why.

The process established by the NWPA is by no means bad. It got corrupted by politics, sure, like many things do, and the process has been stretched out and delayed as a result, probably more than was necessary to resolve any technical issues. But what is needed now is for people to think more with their brains and less with their glands. And there must be people, especially those knowledgeable in the field, willing to speak up, to put the truth out there, correct misunderstandings, and refute falsehoods. That is what I have been trying to do.

The principle driver on the public opinion side in the Yucca Mountain issue is one thing and one thing only, and that is: NIMBY. And, because of the nature of NIMBY, where it comes from and how it works in the individual and public mind, all the petitions in the world, no matter how well prepared and promoted, no matter how elegantly worded or mellifluously argued, will make a dent against it.

What will is people who have the moral courage and intellectual honesty to confront the issues, and also to confront the naysayers and the NIMBYs with the truth. Truth that is objectively real and whose implications are logically reasoned and truthfully expounded upon in whatever forum presents itself. Those of such moral courage may not carry the vote at the end of the day, but they will not go quietly into the night and allow the liars and Luddites and various other assorted miscreants to go unopposed, as they so often do on this and related issues.

I have been critical, perhaps harshly so, of the State of Nevada website because I believe it contains incorrect, false, and deliberately inflammatory information. But Nevada is a sovereign state and such uses of public funds is a matter for the citizens of that state to settle. I, as a non-resident, would not presume address that issue on their behalf. The citizens must hold their representatives accountable for the expenditure of state funds.

The Yucca Mountain program is of national importance. It has national security implications. It has scientific and technical merit. It has relevant economic implications. For those reasons, and as those issues affect me as a citizen, I choose to comment upon them, as an issue of national policy.

You have freely offered your opinions on the subject, as is your right to do as a FReeper in good standing, and have raised some relevant points. I have tried to offer another viewpoint on those, based on my knowledge and experience, perhaps those have been contrary to yours.

In deference to FReeper kidd (I think), who admonished me (politely so) about writing emotional responses, I will again apologize to you for that and try to do better on that score. But I think all who have followed this discussion from thread to thread can see the basis for that frustration.

I will confess that I take a dim view of NIMBYism. It is generally an emotion-based response and, when it raises its hoary head, seems to drive out all rational thinking, logic, and reason. People just don't want to listen to the truth. And that is a real source of frustration and concern to those of us who honor the truth.

So, at this point, why don't we ask the question that was asked at the end of the previous thread. If people are so opposed to the Yucca Mountain Program because they think it is unsafe from a radiological viewpoint, can anyone provide a credible analysis as to why that is, based on real, concrete scientific data and analysis, not something based on speculation, fanciful imagination, fear, emotion, and NIMBY?

P.S. - You'll have to have the last word on this for tonight. Its been a long day and I need to hit the hay. 'Night to all...