Berkley’s 9 minutes of defiance on Yucca
House panel gathers for update on stalled plans for waste dump
Wednesday, July 16, 2008 | 2 a.m.
Sun Topic
Sun Archives
- Yucca Mountain price tag: $90 billion (9-15-2008)
- Carl Pope … Yucca Mountain. Ugh. (7-10-2008)
- Senate panel cuts Bush’s budget request for Yucca (7-8-2008)
Washington The lineup was as lopsided as they get here on the Hill.
One side included all the big-time supporters of Yucca Mountain — the nuclear energy lobby, the Energy Department, the National Association of Regulatory Utility Commissioners.
On the other side: Nevada Rep. Shelley Berkley, the lone opponent of the proposed nuclear waste dump to appear in the Tuesday morning hearing. She came to tell Nevada’s side of the story.
Over the next nine minutes and 25 seconds, the Democratic congresswoman from Las Vegas spit bullets at the project proposed for a site about 90 miles northwest of Las Vegas.
She hammered the project’s “bloated price tag.” (The costs are now estimated at $90 billion to build and operate the facility for 100 years — one-third higher than a previous estimate, thanks to inflation, expansion and redesign.)
She noted the “history of chronic delays.” The project is 20 years behind schedule.
She railed about the “long list of scientific and technological shortcomings that continue to plague Yucca Mountain,” and read e-mail about falsified scientific reports.
She drew chuckles as she spoke about the Energy Department’s sci-fi-sounding plan to send mechanical devices into the mountain 100 years from now to install drip shields, which would protect entombed waste canisters from water corrosion. She described it as something out of the movie “I, Robot.”
And she mocked those who advocate nuclear power as green energy (because it produces no global warming-causing emissions).
“Clean energy? Nuclear waste is radioactive,” the exasperated congresswoman said. “What is more dirty than that?”
The House subcommittee was assembled Tuesday to receive an update on the project, an aide said, not to hold a debate over whether Yucca Mountain should be built.
Still, when Berkley asked if she could join, the Democratic-led panel obliged.
Congress is increasingly frustrated with Yucca Mountain. Even though the Energy Department hit an important milestone last month by submitting its long-awaited license application to the Nuclear Regulatory Commission for review, lawmakers want more progress.
Repeatedly on Tuesday, lawmakers wanted to know about Plan B, and what alternatives for interim storage were available during the wait for Yucca Mountain.
Edward Sproat, whose office oversees the project in the Energy Department, said pursuing alternative sites around the country would require more political will than is feasible to be financially worthwhile.
In fact, a congressionally mandated report on the prospects for a second dump will show next month that the Energy Department thinks the best option is to simply expand capacity at Yucca Mountain, Sproat said later.
Before Berkley could finish her prepared remarks, the committee chairman, Democratic Rep. Rick Boucher of Virginia, lightly tapped his gavel. Time to wrap it up.
A few minutes later in the hall, she sighed. “I needed an hour.”
Discussion: 1 comment so far…
Post a comment
- Most Read
- Discussed
- Most E-mailed
- Joe Perry: Steven Tyler has quit Aerosmith
- Live Main Event blog: Cada and Moon set to square off heads-up
- Judge dismisses suits blaming Las Vegas Sands for stock drop
- Freddie Roach talks tough; Manny Pacquiao backs it up
- Commercial development in Las Vegas grinding to a halt, analyst says
- Strip sign-lighting ceremony set for Monday
- County considers suing over travel Web site room taxes
- Ensign moves out of home on C Street
- Cada and Moon emerge as Main Event’s final two
- Metro identifies officers, sergeants in 2 fatal struggles
Blogs
The Kats Report
Buchanan was one of the city's truly flamboyant characters
Sports: Upon Further Review
Fight snapshot: Reviewing "24/7 Pacquiao/Cotto," episode 3
The Kats Report
Life in the Limelight: Wayne Newton (2 Comments)
Politics: Ralston's Flash
An entire campaign in one mail piece for Harry Reid (3 Comments)
Miech Again
On the road to Long Beach, UNLV hoops style (13 Comments)
The Kats Report
Vocal strain prompts Wayne Brady to call off 'Making It Up' until 2010 (1 Comment)
The Greene Room
New Mexico soccer player goes MMA on BYU (16 Comments)
Calendar »
- 8 Sun
- 9 Mon
- 10 Tue
- 11 Wed
- 12 Thu
-
76 Trombones + 4 concert at Artemus Ham Hall
Artemus Ham Hall at UNLV | 2 p.m. to 4 p.m.
-
The Smothers Brothers at The Orleans Showroom
The Orleans Showroom
-
Abbacadabra at The Las Vegas Hilton
Las Vegas Hilton
-
Roy Clark at The South Point Showroom
South Point Showroom
-
Zowie Bowie's Vintage Vegas Show at Monte Carlo
Lance Burton Theater
The Sun
Locally owned and independent for more than 50 years.
Technorati









There is a much better way than storage for 200,000 yrs. The gov should develop liquid fluoride thorium reactors (LFTR) and burn up the waste. For a fraction of the cost of Yucca we could have had LFTR already.
Thorium based (rather than uranium based) nuclear power was demonstrate in the 50's and 60's but was abandoned because it was much harder to produce weapons grade material (compared to uranium). The military considerations favored the uranium fuel cycle.
thorium LFTR compared to uranium reactors:
have 100x more known fuel reserves (enough to power the USA for 1000s of yrs)
burn fuel 100x more efficiently without reprocessing
1000x less mining waste
~100x less radio active waste volume and waste needs storage for 10-300yrs not 10000yrs
no weapons grade material
are inherently safer (low pressure, can't explode)
more efficient (high temp)
should cost less (low pressure)
can be air cooled (don't need water)
can BURN UP URANIUM WASTE! no Yucca!
Sound to good to be true?
for more info see
www.energyfromthorium.com/
www.energyfromthorium.com/ppt/thoriumVsU...
charlesH (BS Physics)
Orem, Utah