Sun Editorial:

Are they kidding?

Some Nevada Republicans appear willing to accept benefits for having nuke dump

Friday, Jan. 2, 2009 | 2:03 a.m.

Ever since Congress designated Yucca Mountain, 90 miles northwest of Las Vegas, as the only site in the nation worth studying for a potential high-level nuclear waste dump, elected Nevada officials have waged a spirited bipartisan battle against this outrageous policy.

Clear-thinking state Democratic and Republican politicians, along with a majority of Nevadans, recognize the obvious health and safety hazards of being host to deadly radioactive waste. They know the risks associated with transporting the waste through Las Vegas and near the Strip.

With President-elect Barack Obama opposed to a dump at Yucca Mountain and with Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid, a Nevada Democrat, spearheading the fight in Congress, the opportunity to kill the Energy Department’s proposal has never been better. The last thing Nevadans need is for that final push to be undercut by people who live in this state.

But some Nevada Republican leaders have abandoned common sense in recent weeks and are beginning to sound like shills for the nuclear power industry, which wants to dump its waste at Yucca.

After touring Yucca Mountain with other members of the Nevada Republican Party’s Central Committee last month, party Chairwoman Sue Lowden made a disturbing suggestion on her Internet blog Dec. 22.

She said that if Congress doesn’t repeal the law that designated Yucca as the sole potential dump site, then Gov. Jim Gibbons should appoint someone “to immediately begin negotiations with the Department of Energy in order to protect Nevada’s interests and assure that our citizens are adequately compensated for providing this service to the nation.”

Sorry, but there is no amount of compensation that can make up for the dangers Nevada would inherit with a dump.

Clark County Republican Party Chairman Bernie Zadrowski also weighed in last week on the party’s Web site with an inane endorsement of Lowden’s call for a debate on Yucca Mountain. “She has merely, and rightly, asked for a dialogue to be opened up so that we may understand any and all potential benefits, as well as detriments,” Zadrowski wrote. Here’s some dialogue: There are no benefits.

Lowden and Zadrowski are also guilty of poor timing. With the Energy Department’s application for a license now before the Nuclear Regulatory Commission, both California and that state’s Inyo County filed objections to the licensing request Dec. 20 and Dec. 22, respectively. California, through its justice department and energy commission, stated the Energy Department proposal “poses a threat to the people, natural resources and environment of California.”

California blamed the Energy Department for not adequately analyzing the effect of transporting nuclear waste through that state and for failing to say how waste from California reactors can be safely packaged.

Inyo County also lambasted the department for failing to analyze how the county’s ground-water supplies, including those in Death Valley, could be contaminated by the dump.

Although we are grateful California has joined Nevada in raising objections to the proposed dump, we are equally flabbergasted that a small group of Republican leaders who live in this state cannot see what is obvious to most of their fellow residents and their neighbors to the west. Fortunately, that group does not include Sen. John Ensign, R-Nev., who remains steadfastly opposed to the dump.

“I would caution against any Nevada group showing support or an openness to Yucca Mountain,” Ensign said. “The leaders of our state have historically and consistently worked together in a bipartisan manner to oppose this horrible policy for our state and country, and that resolve has brought us to the end of the road for Yucca Mountain. Now is not the time to change the doomed fate of this project, and anyone who believes there is a magical source of funding for our state if we accept the project is completely wrong.”

Unless Lowden and Zadrowski see the light of day, they could end up cementing the Republican Party’s minority status in Nevada.

Discussion: 16 comments so far…

By thebs

1/2/09 at 2:18 a.m.

Suggest removal

Lowden is the chairwoman of the Nevada State Republican Party, and Ensign has to plead with her to be reasonable?

No, there are no benefits to be had. There's no negotiating or requesting extra money in exchange for the dump. The window for that was over a decade ago, and we rightfully rejected even considering it.

But with the Nevada Republican Party suddenly reconsidering it's opposition to the dump, it will only serve to weaken our case. Nevada should be united, and Nevada Republicans should get on the phone and ask the leaders of their party why they suddenly aren't as opposed to Yucca as they once were.

If Nevada Republicans can't even work with the Democrats on fighting Yucca Mountain, then there's no hope for them.
By davelv

1/2/09 at 7:36 a.m.

Suggest removal

Two points:
a) Las Vegas benefited probably the most of any city in the world from nuclear power, a nuclear Navy and the nuclear weapons with the resulting lower cost in oil for 20+ years and world stability through America's military might that led to easy money and fantastic growth. Now Las Vegas and Nevada don't want to help pay the price for the past by supporting Yucca storage (not a dump as always termed by opponents). Really makes Nevadans and its politicians look bad.
b) The Republicans are brilliant in their strategy to unseat Reid. Force a vote up or down under his regime, and if it loses then in 2010 the Republicans can point out his failure to delivery. This is highly likely given that 39 states have civilian and military nuclear waste.
By Future2012

1/2/09 at 7:57 a.m.

Suggest removal

Republican would be well served to be for something that would:

- Contribute to energy independence and prevent global warming

- Contribute to high paying Nevada jobs

- Democrats must be challenged on science based decisions. Not the trash science of Bob Loux and others

Permit adjudication of the YMP License Application docketed September 8, 2008 and allow science to make the case on the merits. Opponents, if they permit their positions on technical facts of the program, have should have nothing to fear from a quality review process.

The directors of 10 national laboratories including Steven Chu as head of the Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory in California prepared an eight-page position paper on nuclear power calling for the "licensing of the Yucca repository as a long-term measure."

Republicans should call for accountability and technical expertise on the part State Attorney General Catherine Cortez Masto on Lobbyist and confessed crook Bob Loux's 12-19-2008 release list of 219 contentions

- Allow for the construction of a railroad in middle Nevada that would spur growth - regardless of the ability to carry SNF.

- Start the process of putting in place safeguard infrastructure, personnel, and training to watch over and respond to transportation of hazardous material in Nevada, using Federal money.

This would allow us to manage such hazardous materials as chorine and propane tankers in downtown Las Vegas. Then we would be prepared in the future for the much less hazardous SNF transports.

- Nevada should collect a fee for waste storage, much like states collect revenue for oil recovery.

Yucca Mountain is in the national interest and as long as a science based decision shows the waste storage to be safe Nevada Republicans can and should support it.

Nobody should believe that Republican are soft or selling out because we are allowing a legal and technical process to play out.
By Future2012

1/2/09 at 8:07 a.m.

Suggest removal

The LV Sun says "a majority of Nevadans, recognize the obvious health and safety hazards of being host to deadly radioactive waste. They know the risks associated with transporting the waste through Las Vegas and near the Strip."

Is The LV Sun Fear mongering. Yes.

The LV Sun has known forever that the NSF rail casks are not being shipped through LV.

The point was made in the R-J on 1-17-2008, that Bill Clinton and Bill Richardson held 21 formal draft EIS hearings (9 in Nevada) in 1999 and 2000, to establish that danger from transportation of nuclear waste is less then such hazardous materials as chorine and propane.

This has been a long closed issue, but still raised by Nevada even though they will not do anything about chlorine tankers running by the Vegas Strip. Bill Richardson was engaged in preparing a positive the Site Recommendation right before he left office.

Transportation of spent nuclear fuel (SNF) is not a problem. If Nevada representatives would demand similar protection for Chlorine tankers as will be in place for SNF such as dedicate trains, exclusion zones, evacuation plans, GPS locators, armed guards (to protect from terrorist with TOW missiles), track and signal inspects, alerts to local officials of the location of hazardous materials, trained emergency responders then we could be less concerned about the potential Bhopal like deaths from a toxic laden tankers of 90,000 people.

The LV Sun refuses to save the valley from hazardous chorine and propane tankers in downtown Las Vegas.
By Future2012

1/2/09 at 8:27 a.m.

Suggest removal

Why is it that Nevada keeps getting technically unqualified people to run our agencies?

Is sportscaster Bruce Breslow even capable of comprehending the 8000 page LA and the hundreds of supporting technical document?

Nevada was embarrassed on 12-19-2008 with the unprofessional quality of the 200 plus questions submitted by Lobbyist Bob Loux and State Attorney General Catherine Cortez Masto.

Nevada Republican Party's Central Committee Chairwoman Sue Lowden rightfully pointed out that if "Congress doesn't repeal the NWPA law that designated Yucca as the sole potential dump site, then Gov. Jim Gibbons should appoint someone to immediately" take action.

Certainly sportscaster Bruce Breslow is technically incapable of representing the State of Nevada.

Obama has enough friends and "state" lobbyist in the nuclear industry to know that if the Feds quit on Yucca without changing the NWPA, that the NEI (through the courts) will get their money ($20 billion plus) back and the NEI can complete the job themselves. DOE has lost every court case on this issue.

The LA process continues to establish the suitability of the Yucca Mountain site, and is based on the science of the five supporting national labs and the USGS.

Are Bruce Breslow, Catherine Cortez Masto , Reid and Obama really smarter than Steven Chu, the ten national labs, the USGS, and the NRC to make a decision to stop the project.
By jfnance32

1/2/09 at 8:51 a.m.

Suggest removal

Obama has said that he will "end the notion of Yucca."

So in 4 years, there will be no longer Yucca.
By Gordon

1/2/09 at 9:18 a.m.

Suggest removal

A study on ONE site to determine suitability is a scientific fraud. How can you say Yucca is the MOST suitable site with NO comparison studies (controls)? It has been reported that Texas, Louisiana, Mississippi, and Utah had locations MORE suitable then Yucca, but the political power in these states prevented any studies being done.

There is no argument for safety when the reason for moving the waste is that it is too dangerous to leave it where it's at.

When Nevada has basically one natural disaster threat, earthquakes, and that is the biggest risk to long term storage, Yucca storage makes no sense.

With 40 million people living in a 500 mile radius, it seems there are more suitable places for storage in this country. The majority of nuclear plants are in the east parts of the country. Why pick a location as far away as possible from the sources.

The constant negative publicity that will be generated from transportation issues will hurt our tourism economy. When local news outlets start protesting shipments through their communities, the story will always include "90 miles from Las Vegas". If Nevada were to be compensated the stories will all include that bit of info and I guarantee we will lose tourists.
By jfnance32

1/2/09 at 9:43 a.m.

Suggest removal

"but the political power in these states prevented any studies being done."

The so-called "Screw Nevada" bill made it so.

Just a FYI, the Democrats had full control of the House and a majority in the Senate when it passed the "Screw Nevada" bill.

Just this year, a Democratic control House Committee voted to fully fund Yucca.

I guess Obama and Reid are going to have fight their own party on this one.
By davelv

1/2/09 at 11:45 a.m.

Suggest removal

Actually, Reid rightfully expects that he will have another Omnibus Spending bill for the remainder of FY09 and thereby can further cut Yucca funding. Until the budget process starts working again and each department's funding is passed separately, Reid can drop the budget to a death level. But you know, once Reid is gone the payback against Nevada will be quick and massive. Think Yucca Mountain without the NRC but as a pure DOE project. Additionally, it is possible that Nellis could close and the base be moved to Utah instead. Politics is a chess game with long term implications.
By Future2012

1/2/09 at 12:30 p.m.

Suggest removal

"A study on ONE site to determine suitability is a scientific fraud"

This statement made no sense.

We have only ONE earth - does that mean global warming studies are a scientific fraud. Okay maybe your right.

"When Nevada has basically one natural disaster threat, earthquakes, and that is the biggest risk to long term storage, Yucca storage makes no sense."

So your answer is to leave the waste above ground at hundreds of locations all over the U.S. Dumb and Dumber.

Read the LA the place is designed to be safe with earthquakes.
By Gordon

1/2/09 at 1:25 p.m.

Suggest removal

"We have only ONE earth - does that mean global warming studies are a scientific fraud." That's a lame response. Yes there is ONE earth, but there is much more than one possible storage location. To not study other locations to determine the BEST solution, is scientific fraud. Then try to use science to justify safety, without exploring other SAFER solutions, is scientific fraud.

"So your answer is to leave the waste above ground at hundreds of locations all over the U.S. Dumb and Dumber." Being that is your own conclusion, not mine, talk about dumb.

Being the waste is currently stored were the reactors are located, wouldn't that make the waste just as safe as the reactor itself. If a disaster large enough to cause problems to the waste occurred, wouldn't it also be large enough to cause problems with the reactor? How does the danger of disaster lessen by moving the waste? Below ground storage onsite within the ultra-safe transportation casks seems the logical choice to me.

"Read the LA the place is designed to be safe with earthquakes." California's infrastructure is 'designed' to be safe in earthquakes too, but there are always problems when they occur.
By Houstonjac

1/2/09 at 2:18 p.m.

Suggest removal

The rest of US society thinks of Nevada as a vast wasteland of desert. For years that vast desert wasteland was used for underground nuclear tests saving the remainder of US society from exposure to the disturbances and fallout from these tests. Now that the government has failed, along with nuclear science in industry, to solve the long term nuclear waste disposal problem, the general thinking is again "let's heap this radioactive junk in the vast desert wasteland of Nevada."

I am opposed to this plan. I have been reading comments in these spaces for some time. I realize that some are for the repository and some are against it.

Yucca Mountain will not be a great thing for Nevada in my opinion. It will be a monster.
But this is merely my opinion. I cannot predict the future. I am a believer in allocating the social costs( exposure to and protection from transport and storage)of nuclear power in accordance with the social benefits of nuclear power( power utilization centers). That means that the primary utilization center states for nuclear power would be charged with finding solutions to the disposal of nuclear generated waste on their own soil.

If the social costs of nuclear power significantly outweigh the social benefits in any given state,then alternative sources of power would have to be used. This is not France where alternative energy sources are highly limited, and the French government has brainwashed the population into believing that the present nuclear waste storage solution is only "temporary".
By Future2012

1/2/09 at 3:16 p.m.

Suggest removal

You must have missed it but they down selected many other locations before Congress pass the NWPA designation.

The Reactors are housed inside a massive containment building designed to withstand earthquakes, 747 impacts, etc. The spent nuclear fuel is stored on concrete pad in the back lot of these facilities.

So no it is not as safe Yucca for a million years - at these 100s of locations including San Onfreo in CA
By Future2012

1/2/09 at 3:24 p.m.

Suggest removal

"For years that vast desert wasteland was used for underground nuclear tests saving the remainder of US society from exposure to the disturbances and fallout from these tests."

Now we are going to place the repository in the middle of NTS this vast highly containmented radioactive wasteland.

That actually makes sense - why containment a second location.

Use Yucca Mountain on the highly containmented radioactive wasteland called the Nevada Test Site. That is in Nevada - Right.
By getalife

1/2/09 at 6:05 p.m.

Suggest removal

I hate to be the voice of reason on such a complex issue, but does anybody posting about Yucca mountain have a clue where it is. It is right next to where nuclear bombs have been detonated.

Also have you seen the footage of a Semi-truck carrying a cask of spent fuel? The semi is demolished and the cask is in no way compromised.

I know, I know let's just knee jerk this whole deal.

Obama will not stop Yucca mtn, Harry Reids buddies and attorney friends make too much money in the battle.
By Metman

1/2/09 at 9:43 p.m.

Suggest removal

Once again the propaganda machine spews its misinformation on the pages of the Las Vegas Sun.

Who proposed shipping these materials anywhere near the "strip"? Who? When? Where? It never happened. And you know it.

Another boogy man scare tactic by people who know better but simply make things up to fortify an indefensible position.

And by the way, any sensible politician ESPECIALLY in this state, SHOULD be trying to find benefit in securing the OPPORTUNITY of becoming home of this repository.

In a state that is almost bankrupt, laying off teachers and with no other revenue stream than the hospitality industry, Harry Reid managed to chase millions of potential dollars away in the form of professional and scientific jobs associated with this project.

Nevada had the opportunity to be the center of a thriving scientific community fully funded by the country's nuclear industry. Instead this backwater politican will concentrate on making Arizona land deals where federally funded bridges will magically appear over the Colorado River, securing his under the table investments.

Reid has got to go.

The Sun must print the facts for a change.

« Previous Ten Next Ten »

Live chat: Tuesday, noon PST; Chat with Krista Creelman; Problem Gambling Center executive director Krista Creelman will answer questions about gambling addiction from Las Vegas Sun readers from noon to 1 p.m. Tuesday, Nov. ... Submit question