Facebook
Fark
Digg
Reddit
Stumble
Atop Yucca Mountain, 90 miles northwest of Las Vegas, signs warn of possible radiation near a test well.
Sunday, March 18, 2012 | 2:01 a.m.
Sun archives
The Nye County Commission recently sent a letter to Energy Secretary Steven Chu all but begging to make Yucca Mountain a high-level nuclear waste dump. The letter is part of a desperate push by dump supporters and the nuclear energy industry to revive the plans for Yucca Mountain, which has been all but dead since President Barack Obama’s order to shutter the project.
The president’s decision hasn’t stopped the nuclear energy industry and its supporters, who have tried to force the issue over Nevada’s objections for years. Consider the “Screw Nevada” bill in 1987, which bypassed a full scientific selection process to designate Yucca Mountain as the nation’s sole nuclear waste dump.
Now, they are trumping up Nevada’s “support” via Nye County, which has long been in the minority for its stance on the dump. And last week, a group called Nevadans 4 Carbon Free Energy announced a poll purportedly showing that Nevadans don’t want Yucca Mountain closed. The group and others have been pushing to keep Yucca Mountain open as a research park for research and development of nuclear waste reprocessing.
As we have noted, there are problems with the ill-conceived and exorbitantly expensive plans for Yucca Mountain, but here are a few things to consider about the current arguments being made:
-
Nye County supports it
A farm on Homestead Road displays Pahrump's rural heritage. The majority of Nye County's population lives in Pahrump.
The president’s blue-ribbon panel on nuclear waste recently recommended the government find places that want nuclear waste instead of forcing it on a state, thus prompting Nye County’s solicitation.
However, Gov. Brian Sandoval last week wrote to the Energy Department reaffirming Nevada’s opposition, noting that “Nye County cannot and does not speak for the state of Nevada.”
Indeed. According to the Census Bureau, Nye County has less than 2 percent of the state’s population, and its consent doesn’t mirror the state’s views.
Consider that since the “Screw Nevada” bill passed, every governor and U.S. senator, positions that require statewide votes, has actively opposed Yucca Mountain.
-
‘People are for it’
So what about this new poll that purportedly shows support for Yucca Mountain? People who responded to the poll were told that Yucca Mountain “is no longer being actively developed to store the waste.” Odd that there’s no mention of the nuclear energy industry’s continued push, isn’t it? Then, people asked if they were in favor of keeping Yucca Mountain open “for the study and potential reprocessing of nuclear waste into usable energy because of the jobs and money such a would bring into the state or close Yucca Mountain altogether to help protect Nevada’s environment.”
Seriously? That’s like asking, “Are you in favor of jobs or against them?”
Instead, ask if people want nuclear waste hauled across the nation and tucked into Yucca Mountain, which isn’t really a mountain but a volcanic ridge, and see what they say. In polls over the years, Nevadans have shown their opposition to making the state a nuclear waste dump time and again.
-
Nevada Energy Park
The nuclear energy industry supporters say the nation shouldn’t let all the money spent on Yucca Mountain go to waste, thus the effort to create an “energy park” for research and development of nuclear waste reprocessing.
However, reprocessing is already being studied in laboratories elsewhere, and there is no reason to think that scientists would move their labs to a site 100 miles from Las Vegas where the draw would be ... a huge hole in the ground.
The energy park is nothing more than a backdoor attempt to keep Yucca Mountain open. If there’s research and the potential to reprocess it, that would mean there would need to be nuclear waste on site. Thus, Yucca Mountain becomes a de facto nuclear waste dump.
Sneaky, isn’t it?
-
‘We could negotiate for benefits’
Some of the dump’s supporters say that Nevada should negotiate with the federal government for benefits in return for taking the waste dump. But who’s going to write the check? The members of Congress pushing this?
In 2002, Rep. John Shimkus, R-Ill., one of the biggest dump supporters in Congress, called on Nevada to “fulfill (its) nuclear legacy and continue to aid this nation and our citizens” by taking the waste.
On the floor of the House, Rep. Jeff Duncan, R-S.C., recently said his state should have the “right” to “be rid of this waste.”
“Nevada must either rebate the billions of dollars already spent on Yucca Mountain or stand out of the way and allow the facility to open for business,” Duncan said.
That doesn’t sound like someone who wants to cut a check but someone who would agree with Shimkus that Nevada should do its duty and quiet down.
-
The bottom line
There has been discussion that there are jobs to be had with Yucca Mountain. There will be jobs during construction, but after that, how many people does it take to baby-sit nuclear waste? And if this is such a good deal for Nevada, wouldn’t the other states — especially those with waste in them — be lining up for these jobs?
They’re not, and they don’t want to make a deal, either. They want Nevada to take the waste. Period.
Nevada’s leaders shouldn’t be fooled by any of these disingenuous and manipulative attempts to rally support for Yucca Mountain. The fact remains that Yucca Mountain is bad policy and Nevadans don’t want it. It’s past time for the nation to move on.
The key points from the Blue Ribbon Committee report that Obama and Reid sponsored
- No evidence that Yucca Mountain is unsafe and the NRC should complete their licensing safe evaluation report
- Transportation of nuclear waste is totally safe and will be sent to a interim storage point out in the open
- a new organization should be formed to that the project is taken away from a political president and DOE
- the ratepayers money for the project that Reid and Obama stole must be restored
- that we must come up with payola to the states that want to house the repository.
Note that Romney has already proposed the offer of money to a State like New Mexico which wants the repository.
Liberal Fear Mongers say of Yucca "It will greatly diminish the number of tourists who come to Las Vegas ...As soon as some neon blue people are seen out on the Blvd. it will effectively kill Sin City forever" Further they say "No sense in keeping all your deathly glow in the dark eggs in my back yard."
Just so we are clear Liberal Fear Mongers claim dry solid nuclear waste can not be shipped but note "the finest place to ship it to is to a dump Arizona."
Just so we are clear Liberal Fear Mongers say they refuse to allow Yucca because they claim it is unsafe yet they refuse to allow the NRC to release their safety evaluation report which shows it's safe.
Just so we are clear Liberal Fear Mongers think store nuclear waste at hundreds of highly populated sites near rivers and lakes is safe, but storing at the remote Yucca is not.
Based on the finding and the Fed Court case Yucca may well be back
In an editorial 12-4-2011 the Las Vegas Sun said "I am taking this time to interject a harsh reality".... Yucca "Is not dead and it will come back to haunt us"...."Those who profess to be fair and open on the subject of nuclear waste and Nevada's role as stooge in that process, insist that the Nuclear Regulatory Commission be allowed to determine whether Yucca Mountain is suitable. Those with half a brain know that the NRC is just a political animal ready to go to the highest bidder."..."
The highest bidder was Senator Harry Reid and Rep Markey who installed as NRC Chairman Gregory Jaczko to shutdown the nuclear power industry and Yucca Mountain.
Re Future. The "future" of Yucca Mountain is secured. It is, and will remain closed. While casting all the "blame" on "liberals" for the dumps demise, you neglect to mention the state's GOP stalwarts Kenny Guinn, Dean Heller, Jon Porter, Brian Sandoval, etc., who all opposed, or are opposed, to this being rammed down Nevada's throat. The only quisling shill for the dump is Bob List who is on the Nuke industry's payroll. Two more dupes who seem to want to keep this boondoggle alive are Mark Amodei (research facility fan), and Joe Heck who really hasn't stated his position, so he is a defacto supporter of it. Nevadans across the board are opposed to the dump. Maybe you could spell out YOUR reasons for supporting it and not someone else's talking points. By the way, transportation of ANYTHING is never "totally safe".
At every nuclear power plant in this country, they store their own generated low lever rad waste in a spent fuel pool. These pools are running out of storage room and at some sites are 40-50 feet below the surface of the ground. If a terrorists commanded an airplane into one, there is a disaster waiting to happen in every residential area where there are facilities.
At Fukishima, they lost water in their pool and the spent fuel started boiling. It still has energy after a refuel and doesn't cool until a few years after it pulled from the reactor.
This has always been my argument. What do you do with it? Nobody at this paper has any solutions to a national problem except that they don't want it here. OK, then propose something. It can't stay where it's at.
What do you think will happen to the cost of power if they start shutting down plants because there is no place to store waste?
We're closing coal plants by the droves and cannot replace a 600 megawatt unit with a solar plant or wind farm that produces 50 megawatts when the sun shines.
I've worked with this stuff for years and handled safely it can be transported safely....But not in Nevada, right.
Then propose something in stead of just being a NIMBY.
I've talked to politicians in this state and many on both sides support Yucca Mountain, but know it is political suicide to admit it. I think there are more closet supporters of this project then people will admit to because you can never have a rational dialog about something involving emotional people.
Re BCDave. The South Caroline representative's statement that his state has the "right" to be "rid of this waste" is breathtaking in it's arrogance. Part of reaping the benefits of nuclear power in any state that uses it, is the RESPONSIBILITY to contain the waste generated at the plant. Ron Paul said it best: "No state has the right to force any other state to take nuclear waste" (paraphrased). "What do you do with it?"...why is it Nevada's problem to answer that question? The "Screw Nevada" legislation was Congress's answer to that question. A true NIMBY response. Nye county wants the stuff, but as Brian Sandoval said, Nye county doesn't speak for the state of Nevada. Neither do the representatives of Illinois or South Carolina. There are plenty of viable locations to store nuclear waste besides Nevada. It's time for Congress to start looking for one.
Enjoyed the editorial.
One thing that is for certain is that our elected politicians here in Nevada need to understand to their very souls that any stance regarding opening Yucca Mountain Project (YMP) will be an immediate harbinger of their political suicide.
Right now, Amodei and Heck are in the gunsights next election for their stance regarding YMP happening. They will understand that their position is unpopular and politically will be like touching the electrified third rail on the train tracks.
Call me wrong all you want, but the Nye County Commissioner is now in this boat too. You can't tell me that everyone over there wants this to happen.
We hold their feet to the fire.
This editorial is correct with the fact that Nevada does not want YMP.
We don't take kindly with politicans from other States trying to tell us what to do also.
And worst of all, we detest politicians here in Nevada doing the bidding of politicians from other States who only want to get rid of their nuclear trash and dump it here.
This article would have been more believable if it had been written in crayon.
Biased yellow journalism has hit a new low. Not one point "illustrated" in the so called article is based on reality.
When people insinuate the population numbers of Nye county are a small percent of NV they aren't taking into account the real numbers of the entire state that want Yucca.
It is appalling that the Sun would continue to stoop to this level of junk science and hyperbole.
What happened to the paper that won Pulitzer prizes for investigative journalism? Clearly the editorial process hasn't risen to that level.
Frank admits "Ola - Yucca is a dead issue for now."
In an editorial 12-4-2011 the Las Vegas Sun said "I am taking this time to interject a harsh reality".... Yucca "Is not dead and it will come back..."
The Obama/Reid blue ribbon committee says a repository is safe and transportation is safe.
Harry Reid says "I can not change the NWPA law"
The Federal courts will rule in favor of the NWPA law
Nye county wants it
This is a 100 year project - Reid and Obama will be out of office
-----------
Obama said. "Shake it off. Stop complainin'. Stop grumblin'. Stop cryin'. And Biden says "It a big F'in' Deal"
BCDave: "If a terrorists commanded an airplane into one, there is a disaster waiting to happen in every residential area where there are facilities."
Please explain how a nuclear reactor is 'safe' by removing the spent fuel? The reactor remains and the unspent fuel remains. Would it not be easier for a terrorist to breach a shipment on our highways then in a highly secured nuclear reactor site? Wouldn't that be a disaster waiting to happen?
"We're closing coal plants by the droves and cannot replace a 600 megawatt unit with a solar plant or wind farm"
Guess you haven't heard of natural gas. Now cheaper than nuclear power, in abundance, cleaner than coal, no long term waste, etc.
"I've worked with this stuff for years and handled safely it can be transported safely"
Sounds like you're making an argument to leave this 'safe' material where it sits. Science has said deep bore holes onsite is a safer solution than transporting to an unstable volcanic ridge. Science did not choose Yucca Mountain...scientists were tasked with making Yucca work...there are cheaper and safer alternatives (granite entombment, salt mines).
Lynn, Closing a plant takes about one minute of bad decision making. Opening ANY new plant takes about ten years.
Our President is not capable of doing anything outside of a re-election cycle. Your thoughts and plans are wasted without implementation from our "leaders" in Washington.
@ressince73, the wastes in South Carolina and in Washington are from reactors that produced plutonium and tritium which were used to protect the UNITED STATES and win the cold war. Every state owns this waste, including NEVADA. In fact, Las Vegas more than any city in the world has benefited the most from America's nuclear deterrent which has allowed tourism to prosper and kept energy prices low/stable for decades. It appears Nevadans and Greenspun want all of the benefits from this vast amount of nuclear waste and don't want to help dispose of it. Yucca Mountain is 100 miles away in a dry desert 800 feet underground, 1000 feet above the water table next door to where 1000 atomic bombs were exploded. It is also the LAW. If you don't like the law, change it through Congressional action. Don't use political payola between Reid and Obama, and expect it to be a permanent change.
There is only one reason not to activate Yucca and it isn't scientific.
Obamacare was based on finding $500 billion per year in fraudulent charges. They have only found $2 billion. Even the guy who thought there was this much fraud says Obamacare is now unaffordable. Additionally by excluding thousands of different uinons, the funding base is just not there now. It has to be voided. So too will Obama's unConstitutional and illegal cancellation of the nation's nuclear repository at Yucca Mountain. It is not just Obamacare, Yucca Mountain or Obama's ten trillion dollars deficits, but pretty much everything he has done in office must be fixed by the next administration.
New Mexico is begging for the opportunity to take the high level radioactive waste, and they are also currently equipped to do so. Let them have it!
For Jim Reid's, "When it is a project like "Obamacare" they won't even discuss it and their leaders tell us it must pass before we can even see what is in it," he has a valid point.
Last night while having our Saint Patrick's Day meal, my son and I discussed the proposed ObamaCare, and had no clue about where it is in legislation and WHO it will really serve. That should not be. The People have the right to know what is going on in all the governance that affects us, and we should have a voice in it.
With "ObamaCare," it might be said:
"True enough. There certainly is truth in what you are implying. What you have written happens to be true. But isn't it also true that truth is relative and that what may appear to be true, in its nearest approach to truth, is a form of non-truth meant to conceal the true nature of truth?" Harry Hughes on Relativism
With that thought, Blessings and Peace,
Star
Author, your reasons against are quite feeble. And you're wrong about the energy park. It would be huge. Attract the best nuclear minds to one location. It could advance technology much more quickly.
Who writes an opinion piece and doesn't put their name to it? And more importantly why?
Too bad our governor chooses to speak for the loud minority. Dont just read the stats, go see it for yourself. Dont be afraid. Go see it. It has my vote but we'll probably never be asked what we think.
Lol
Still Lol
Until the law charges it is the law
When the courts say follow the law like the EPA then you have to do it
Yucca will return
Baker, CA is about the same distance from Las Vegas as Yucca is. No one in Vegas would be complaining if this was being built in Baker.
@LynnJohnson, while natural gas is cleaner than coal, it still puts out tremendous amounts of carbon dioxide which nuclear power does not. Either you are for stopping global warming through remewables like wind, solar and yes nuclear; or you are really antinuclear by supporting natural gas as well as proglobal warming. Natural gas is also cheaper than nuclear power, but is the world's climate worth burning natural gas for the next 100 years before it runs out just because it is cheaper?
davelv: "while natural gas is cleaner than coal, it still puts out tremendous amounts of carbon dioxide which nuclear power does not."
But nuclear power comes with a 100,000 year waste problem. High level nuclear waste is not exactly good for the environment. Nuclear power is not cheap when including the cost of storing the waste.
I'm actually for an all of the above strategy to our energy needs. Focusing on renewables, but realizing the need for traditional sources while the renewable infrastructure is built out.
Cutting pollution to zero is an expensive fantasy, but that doesn't mean we shouldn't find ways to reduce emissions where we can until renewables are the sole source of our energy sometime in the future.
So, Yes I'd support natural gas over coal, because it's moving in the right direction, reducing harmful emissions. I support nuclear power until we can wean ourselves from it, but I do not support an ill-conceived plan at Yucca Mountain, there are better alternatives. The key word there is WEAN, as in a slow, progressive, goal of clean energy.
Several points:
A. The opening photo of a well, marked because there is radiation underground, is extremely misleading. Geologic exploration uses sealed radiation sources to measure such things as structure and moisture underground. The State of Nevada's geologists, and university geology programs use such 'sealed sources.' When you are done with the tests, you pull the sealed source back up and put in a shielded container and put it in your pickup and move on to the next well. You also take all the warning signs with you to the next well to be tested. The way this photo is used is egregious Yellow Journalism.
1. Nye County wants this economic lifeline. They have sent representatives to Carlsbad, New Mexico, several times, where a nuclear waste repository is operating for 13 years now, and they have seen how a project of this sort can stabilize a local economy for multiple generations. Urban Nevadans don't give a hoot about the economic plight of rural Nevadans. Many probably don't even know there is such a thing as a rural Nevadan.
2. The People are For It piece: actually, I hate to admit, makes a point about the nature of the question. Responses were positive, but for an alternative use of the property.
3. I also agree that the full-blown Energy Park idea is not a sustainable one, not without a repository nearby. Expanding UNLV's current program in nuclear science and engineering would make more sense, perhaps with a new research facility that can use radioactive materials in Nye County, perhaps at Yucca, although there is no real benefit to being underground for such work with the massive infrastucture required to keep such a place operating and powered and ventilated.
4. The 'benefits' discussion: others have already addressed the state of South Carolina point of view about the defense waste they store for the nation. But the example of New Mexico, which for 20 years had its highway and other infrastructures improved at federal expense, in direct compensation for taking the nation's first geologic repository is instructive. It has to be negotiated for. If you don't ask, you don't get. If you say you don't see a negotiating table, it is because you have said you will not negotiate!
5. The photo of Yucca in its beautiful state of isolation never fails to impress people from out of state that this site is a great choice! But my comment on this section is the statement that no state wants it. Wrong. New Mexico's governor sent a letter to Secretary Chu asking the Department of Energy to show through science that other wastes can be safely disposed in its salt beds, and then to come talk terms (negotiate!) with the state. I have heard rumors three other states have sent somewhat similar letters, but cannot confirm it: I am not an investigative reporter. But I would like to be one, and would be, if the Sun makes me a great offer.
"And if this is such a good deal for Nevada, wouldn't the other states -- especially those with waste in them -- be lining up for these jobs?"
---------------------------
There it is...
Re davelv. What a laughable post. Plants in Washington and South Carolina produce electricity for consumers in those states. It is a stretch to say they were built to "win the Cold War". Times have changed since the '50's when nobody really had a clue about the damages caused by Nuclear testing at the Nevada test site. Even if your assumption about the plants in Washington, South Carolina and many more states was true, how can that be a rationalization for dumping the waste in Nevada? Let the states that produce Nuclear power deal with their own waste issues. My initial post stated that and there is no argument that stands the smell test to contradict it.
The headline for the article promises 5 reasons to kill Yucca Mountain.
I didn't see them. I read general discussion, questions and criticism of proponents but no reasons not to. The format of the piece is lousy, no one cares about arrowed tabs and pictures we have all seen before. Try a logical argument laid out point by counterpoint.
As for calling Yucca Mountain a volcanic ridge... really? I wonder if the author has been to the Pacific Rim? Using that logic, I would ask him to name a mountain that isn't a volcanic ridge, the implication being instability. If depositing waste on the moon was economically viable I guess the author would object on the grounds that the moon might fall out of orbit and crash into the earth.
Gary, I don't wish to jump davelv's rebuttal but you must not have a firm grasp on reality.
The Nevada Test Site helped win the Cold War as well and ..... shocker ...... it is right next to Yucca Mtn.
Do you think they only blew up confetti at the NTS?
Bring on Yucca.
btw, I loved the distance to Baker comment..... I heard the Libs roll over
Studies show education levels are higher in areas around nuclear facilities. Research and development from the nuclear industry increases education levels.
Yucca is safe and Nevada is missing out.
We apparently aren't smart enough to even see this.
@ressince,
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hanford_Sit...
and
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Savannah_Ri...
Nevada owns about 50 waste packages of defense waste produced from these two sites. Where should Nevada put it?
SUN.....Great editorial again.
YUCCA WILL NEVER BE SAFE, PERIOD.
Only a moron would bury dangerous nuclear waste
in an ACTIVE EARTHQUAKE AREA, ALSO A VOLCANIC
RIDGE.
ALL of Nevada is an active earthquake area.
NO MAN can ever say this is safe.
YUCCA IS DEAD, PERIOD!!!
The Yucca Mountain rat-hole needs to be
IMPLODED!!!
End of story.
he Yucca Mountain rat-hole needs to be
IMPLODED!!!
End of story. This is from a union worker who wants to kill union jobs at Yucca.
In the wake of the fukushima disaster, the fate of the world should be decided by the combined brain trust of the great metropolis of Tonopah and world renown academic center of Pahrump !
Gary, both Washington and South Carolian had many US government reactors making plutonium for bombs, for the Cold War effort. That they later added a few commercial reactors is not why they are suing the federal government for not taking their waste. It is the massive amount of fuel and high-level waste from the Cold War effort that is behind their lawsuit. That is waste created for the sake of the entire nation, not for making local power.
I think Pahrumps Academic center is in the basement of the house of ill repute.
I don't buy some of these commenters and their cases that we should accept the entire nation's surplus of nuclear garbage here in Nevada.
One commenter makes a generalization that the populace that lives around nuclear energy industry tends to be a lot smarter.
That may be, but what exactly is the knowledge level of people who live next to a garbage dump?
Not really saying much, is it?
We continue the fight. We hold EVERY politician's feet to the fire who wants Yucca Mountain Project (YMP) to happen.
They need to continually be reminded they are not going to remain elected if they stand for YMP to happen.
Just as a reminder for voters out there, Mr. Romney, when he campaigned in South Carolina, was asked by Governor Haley there what he was going to do about YMP. Mr. Romney emphatically told the Governor of South Carolina that when he becomes President, he will get it opened and dump all of South Carolina's nuclear trash in Nevada.
If (and it actually looks like it will happen) Mr. Romney is picked as the Tea/Republican Party candidate to run for President, people REALLY, REALLY need to remember that when they go to the voting booths in November 2012.
In my book, that makes Mr. Romney unelectable, and he has definitely went down on record and stated his position that he totally agrees with the "Screw Nevada" initiative and put the most harmful substance known to mankind here...even if we don't want it.
Collin again is lying when he stated "Just as a reminder for voters out there, Mr. Romney, when he campaigned in South Carolina, was asked by Governor Haley there what he was going to do about YMP. Mr. Romney emphatically told the Governor of South Carolina that when he becomes President, he will get it opened and dump all of South Carolina's nuclear trash in Nevada."
Rommy never ever stated that. Never.
What Ronmey offered is that he would pay New Mexico to take the waste because they said they want it because it is safe and they want jobs. This is in keeping with the Reid/Obama Blue Ribbon Committee.
Get your facts correct
So In my book, that makes Mr. Romney our next President.
acejoker......
They can study Yucca until the cows come home and
it still will never happen.
YUCCA WILL NEVER BE SAFE, PERIOD.
Public safety comes first, period.
Yucca Mountain sits on fault lines in an active
earthquake zone.
AND water runs under Yucca Mountain that flows
all the way to California.
YES, that rat-hole WILL STAY DEAD!
Future.....
Willard Romney will not beat our great
President Obama.
FOUR MORE YEARS FOR PRESIDENT OBAMA!
There is no reason for not using Yucca Mountain to store nuclear waste. One, its built, two, its on federal land, three, its needed, four, it nothing new to Nevada considering Nevada was the test site for nuclear research and testing, and last, Nye county and the state could use the money. The US must take care of its own nuclear waste, and Nevada could do its part by storing that waste at Yucca Mountain. There are more danger in this country than from nuclear waste.
express445.....
The reasons for NOT using Yucca are many.
SAFETY is the number one reason.
We will NEVER USE an earthquake zone to bury
nuclear waste, period.
IT'S NOT GOING TO HAPPEN.