Conceptual view of Nuclear Power Plant-- Esquire
Yucca Mountain Haunts the Obama Administration. By Katherine Ling, Greenwire, “While President Obama’s fiscal 2011 budget proposal is expected to sound a death knell for the planned Yucca Mountain nuclear waste repository, the administration has so far failed to launch the blue-ribbon commission it promised almost a year ago to decide on a waste-disposal alternative. Hanging in the balance is 60,000 metric tons of commercial and defense nuclear waste. I find it quite disconcerting that a commission with a proper broad charter to look at this problem hasn’t been created, said Arjun Makhijani, president of Institute for Energy and Environmental Research [IEER], a nonprofit opposed to nuclear power. ‘I think the bigger danger is that inaction will simply lead us back to Yucca Mountain,’ Makhijani said, adding, ‘Leaving the problem to fester is not good.’
“Obama dramatically cut funding for the Nevada repository in his fiscal 2010 budget request and announced his intention to form a commission to chart an alternative waste-management solution. Energy Secretary Steven Chu quickly followed up, telling Congress last March that the commission would be formed ‘ideally’ within a month and would craft recommendations by the end of 2009. Last week, Chu responded to questions about the commission by saying the Energy Department is ‘working as hard and fast as we can on that.’ The lawmaker who has led opposition to the Yucca project, Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid (D-Nev.), is confident that the administration’s delay won’t translate into a revival of the Nevada project… But despite agreements between Reid and the administration, Yucca Mountain remains — by law — the disposal site for U.S. nuclear waste. The DOE repository license has not been withdrawn, nor has the department moved to do so, according to an industry source. Meanwhile, Reid is facing a tough re-election battle this year. Moreover, some say that disagreement over whether the blue-ribbon panel should consider Yucca Mountain as a potential waste management solution is one reason the administration has taken so long to get the commission going. Qualified candidates, several sources say, do not agree Yucca should be taken off the table.”
I thought Yucca Mountain was off the table, but apparently it’s still being considered. Some people are still arguing for its use as a nuclear waste repository. (They are mostly Republicans who are against Obama’s energy policy in general). According to others, on-site nuclear waste storage is just fine for now until a better national site is found. (Some people whose land is used for this would disagree). Stewart Brand feels that the threat from nuclear waste pales in comparison to the threat from the continued use of coal. (e360 interview) and he has said that we can figure out where to put the nuclear waste later on, in another interview heard in the Climate Files podcast.
More nuclear news compiled by the Climate Crisis Coalition:
Browner Emphasizes Obama Support for Nuclear Power. By Jeff Mason, Reuters, January 11, 2010.
“The Obama administration wants to help the nuclear industry build a power plant for the first time in years to help diversify U.S. energy supplies and fight climate change, the White House said on Monday. Carol Browner, President Barack Obama’s top energy and climate adviser at the White House said… ‘We have not built a nuclear plant in this country in a long time but we want to work with the industry to make that happen in the not too distant future… We have been working with the nuclear industry to understand exactly what it is they need… The president believes that nuclear needs to be a part of our energy future… If you believe as we do that climate change is a serious problem… then you need to be open to what are all of the ways in which we can produce energy in a clean manner.’”
Many environmentalists are against nuclear power, and many Republicans are for it, but to use it should not be a decision based on politics or old information. The nuclear industry has changed a great deal since the 1970s when the old breeder reactors were built. The goal of new energy is to provide a lot of power with little to no carbon or other GHG emissions, and nuclear power could provide that. Safety is also a big issue, and no form of power is without safety issues. See more about this issue in the Climate Files podcast.
Recent Comments