In U.S., nuclear waste has nowhere to go
By Michael Hawthorne / Chicago Tribune
Tuesday, March 17, 2009 - Added 1h ago
CHICAGO - In a pool of water just a football field away from Lake Michigan, about 1,000 tons of highly radioactive fuel from the scuttled Zion Nuclear Power Station are waiting for someplace else to spend a few thousand years.
The wait has gotten longer. A lot longer.
President Barack Obama’s proposed budget all but kills the Yucca Mountain project, the controversial site where the U.S. nuclear industry’s spent fuel rods were supposed to end up in permanent storage deep below the Nevada desert. There are no other plans in the works, meaning the waste for now will remain next to Zion and 103 other reactors scattered across the country.
Obama has said there are too many questions about whether storing waste at Yucca Mountain is safe, and his decision fulfills a campaign promise. But it also renews nagging questions about what the nation should do with the radioactive waste steadily accumulating in 35 states.
With seven nuclear plants, Illinois relies more heavily on nuclear power and has a larger stockpile of spent fuel than any other state. In addition to Lake Michigan, plants storing waste are sited along the Illinois, Rock and Mississippi rivers.
Customers of ComEd and other nuclear utilities have shelled out $10 billion to develop the Yucca Mountain site, in spare-change-sized charges tacked on to electric bills. Most of that money will have been wasted, and experts forecast that billions more will be spent on damage suits from utilities that counted on the federal government to come up with a permanent burial ground.
During his confirmation hearings, Energy Secretary Steven Chu said the waste can remain at plant sites safely while another plan is worked out. Reversing course from previous administrations satisfies critics in Nevada, including Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid, but triggers another round of political maneuvering and regional bickering in Congress.
"We are drifting toward a permanent policy of keeping extremely toxic waste next to the Great Lakes, and that cannot stand," said U.S. Rep. Mark Kirk, R-Ill., who echoed industry officials in calling for an independent panel of scientists and engineers to find a solution. Obama also is calling for more study.
By Michael Hawthorne / Chicago Tribune
Tuesday, March 17, 2009 - Added 1h ago
CHICAGO - In a pool of water just a football field away from Lake Michigan, about 1,000 tons of highly radioactive fuel from the scuttled Zion Nuclear Power Station are waiting for someplace else to spend a few thousand years.
The wait has gotten longer. A lot longer.
President Barack Obama’s proposed budget all but kills the Yucca Mountain project, the controversial site where the U.S. nuclear industry’s spent fuel rods were supposed to end up in permanent storage deep below the Nevada desert. There are no other plans in the works, meaning the waste for now will remain next to Zion and 103 other reactors scattered across the country.
Obama has said there are too many questions about whether storing waste at Yucca Mountain is safe, and his decision fulfills a campaign promise. But it also renews nagging questions about what the nation should do with the radioactive waste steadily accumulating in 35 states.
With seven nuclear plants, Illinois relies more heavily on nuclear power and has a larger stockpile of spent fuel than any other state. In addition to Lake Michigan, plants storing waste are sited along the Illinois, Rock and Mississippi rivers.
Customers of ComEd and other nuclear utilities have shelled out $10 billion to develop the Yucca Mountain site, in spare-change-sized charges tacked on to electric bills. Most of that money will have been wasted, and experts forecast that billions more will be spent on damage suits from utilities that counted on the federal government to come up with a permanent burial ground.
During his confirmation hearings, Energy Secretary Steven Chu said the waste can remain at plant sites safely while another plan is worked out. Reversing course from previous administrations satisfies critics in Nevada, including Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid, but triggers another round of political maneuvering and regional bickering in Congress.
"We are drifting toward a permanent policy of keeping extremely toxic waste next to the Great Lakes, and that cannot stand," said U.S. Rep. Mark Kirk, R-Ill., who echoed industry officials in calling for an independent panel of scientists and engineers to find a solution. Obama also is calling for more study.
Comments