Reid’s victory on Yucca Mountain is nation’s loss
Last week, U.S. Sen. Harry Reid celebrated victory.
For more than two decades, Reid has fought location of a high-level nuclear-waste repository at the Yucca Mountain site in his native Nevada. Now, with fellow Democrat Barack Obama in the White House, he believes the battle is won, at least for now.
“It’s over with —- Yucca Mountain is gone,” Reid said, citing Obama’s 2010 budget, which strips funds for building the depository.
But Reid’s victory —- testament to his power as Senate majority leader —- represents a setback for the nation. It is a victory of narrow, not-in-my-backyard politics at the expense of issues that are truly global and epic in scale: climate change and the safe storage of nuclear waste.
Yucca Mountain is admittedly not the perfect solution to storage of spent nuclear fuel. Given the incredibly long half-life of high-level waste —- it will remain dangerous for an estimated 10,000 years, roughly twice the length of recorded human history so far —- absolute confidence in a storage solution is impossible. Ice ages, earthquakes, climate changes, meteorite strikes —- even leaving mankind out of it, the number of things that could go wrong at any particular site over 10 millennia is enormous.
However, if Yucca Mountain is not the perfect answer, it is by all available evidence our best answer.
We as a society have made the decision to use nuclear power. A lot of Americans aren’t happy with that decision, but it is a decision that is not likely to be reversed. So we better deal with the consequences —- including the spent-fuel waste created by nuclear power —- as responsibly as possible.
Furthermore, the problem would remain even if we were to shut down every nuclear plant in the country and never build another one. If that happened, we would still need to store some 50,000 metric tons of spent nuclear fuel as safely as possible for what passes for eternity.
But where?
The Obama administration says it is reopening that question, forming a blue-ribbon panel to explore alternative storage strategies. But there’s no scientific reason to believe that will produce a solution other than long-term storage in an isolated desert area such as Yucca Mountain.
At best, after several more years and billions of dollars, the panel will come back to suggest an isolated desert area, but one that doesn’t happen to be represented by the Senate majority leader.
That has a lot of people upset, and for good reason. Without a long-term spent-fuel storage site, it becomes harder to responsibly address climate change, Obama’s top environmental priorities.
Conservation is the cleanest possible source of additional energy, and it’s underutilized in this country. Solar power, wind power and biofuels can make important contributions as well. “Clean coal” —- coal-fired electricity-generating plants that recapture Earth-warming carbon instead of dumping it into the atmosphere —- is a theoretical possibility with untested technology and economics.
That leaves nuclear power. It is costly to build and technically complicated, but unlike coal and natural gas, it does not produce carbon dioxide or other greenhouse gases. Given the mathematics of energy use and growth, nuclear power inevitably will play a major role in addressing climate change.
But without a permanent storage facility, nuclear power becomes both more dangerous and more expensive.
Years ago, I worked as a journalist and editorial writer in Nevada. I know firsthand about the state’s intense opposition to serving as a nuclear waste depository and why it feels that way.
Back in the ’50s and ’60s, when nuclear bombs were exploded above-ground at the Nevada Test Site, the government assured local residents of their safety. The explosions became a tourist attraction, drawing people from around the country, and a mushroom cloud was even incorporated into the local county government seal.
But years later, strange cancers began to appear. Questions began to be asked, and for a long time —- for far too long —- federal officials tried to suppress evidence that nuclear radiation had played a role. Eventually, after a hard fight, more than 10,000 “downwinders” with cancer won compensation from Washington.
Steven Chu, a Nobel-prize winning physicist appointed by Obama to serve as secretary of energy, no doubt understands both the science and the politics of the situation. Obama himself has emphasized the primacy of science in guiding decision-making. But on this one, he’s making a regrettable exception.
Tell us what you think about the site
Customer Care »
Vacation stops, manage subscriptions and more
AJC Services
Sections
Other Editions
Guides
Visitor Agreement | Privacy Statement
© 2011 The Atlanta Journal-Constitution
107 comments Add your comment
I Report :-)/ You Whine :-(
May 11th, 2009
7:31 am
Yes, things like this are proof positive that liberals do not deal with reason or facts, they are guided purely by their feminine emotions.
The democrat party, our return to the 9th century.
Susan Myers
May 11th, 2009
7:36 am
The politicians (read: Harry Reid) would have you think they are experts on everything by the way they pontificate endlessly on those things about which they know only the buzz-words.
Bottom line: Yucca Mountain is safe. It is probably the most studied geological formation in the country. The risks are absolutely minimal. The real problem lies with perceptions fostered by ignorant (again, read: Harry Reid) politicians. Reid doesn’t have many claims-to-fame, so he has jumped on the anti-Yucca Mountain bandwagon to win some ill-deserved accolades.
Sooner or later, we must let the scientists and engineers have their say…not a big-mouthed buffoon like Reid.
DB, Gwinnettian
May 11th, 2009
7:37 am
At best, after several more years and billions of dollars, the panel will come back to suggest an isolated desert area, but one that doesn’t happen to be represented by the Senate majority leader.
Simpler solution: get a Senate majority leader other than “Give ‘em Head” Harry, and move forward with plans to build the facility.
kitty
May 11th, 2009
7:44 am
If Yucca Mountain was in a predominantly red state…like Georgia…its senators would be against it as well. That is their job. To protect their constituency. NIMBY crosses party lines. It is short sighted politics, but it isn’t partisan.
I Report :-)/ You Whine :-(
May 11th, 2009
7:57 am
Our future-
Last Wednesday, Marco Rubio, a 37-year-old, Cuban-American lawyer from Miami and a former speaker of the Florida House, declared he will be running for the U.S. Senate……..Rubio went on to lament Republicans who “just want to survive. Their message seems to be if you can’t beat them, join them. If we go in this direction Republicans become just another branch of the Democrats.” -AmSpec
Red Foreman
May 11th, 2009
7:58 am
Hey, I got an idea…let’s store it at Jay’s house…
RW-(the original)
May 11th, 2009
8:01 am
So basically what you’re saying is that after spending billions of dollars Obambi is going to discover that Bush was right again.
Ray
May 11th, 2009
8:03 am
Just goes to show that a politician will do anything to get re-elected. It isn’t about the danger of putting this stuff at Yucca Mountain….. If Reid doesn’t fight this thing and appears to favor it, his constituents will vote him out. Ah, perpetual politicians…… this country’s biggest threat.
DB, Gwinnettian
May 11th, 2009
8:12 am
Bush was right again.
I must have missed that part where Bush staked his political capital and used his party’s majority in both houses of Congress to make the facility a reality.
BTW, I did finally notice your inquiry about DADT over the weekend and replied to it downstairs, if you’re interested.
@@
May 11th, 2009
8:16 am
“It’s over with —- Yucca Mountain is gone,” Reid said, citing Obama’s 2010 budget, which strips funds for building the depository.
Obama’s political Cap & Trade with Harry? Noooooo…those kinda things can’t happen under an Obama administration.
absolute confidence in a storage solution is impossible. Ice ages, earthquakes, climate changes, meteorite strikes —- even leaving mankind out of it, the number of things that could go wrong at any particular site over 10 millennia is enormous.
Giant asteroids, super volcanoes….both of which could alter life as we know it if not end it altogether. For peace of mind, we’ll let the politicians convince us that it’s they who can control all things. It’ll come with a price tag though.
Redneck Convert
May 11th, 2009
8:20 am
Well, let’s put the waste in Atlanta. This Shirley Franklin is always whining about jobs and wanting to raise taxes. The Atlanta Nuclear Waste Repository sounds perfect for her and that whole bunch. The only problem might could be the people there might want to steal some of it. Anyhow, a good earthquake after it got built would get rid of most of the libruls in this state.
Joe Matarotz
May 11th, 2009
8:21 am
Easy there, Jay Bird. Criticizing Reid will get you into the same hot water that David Feherty is in. Far better to be like Wanda Sykes – make fun of every Republicant in sight, even if it stoops to viciousness or racism. You will have Obama’s blessing, just like Wanda had. No, no double standard there. And for the record, Reid is another self-serving scum who will do anything to be reelected.
Mort Merkel
May 11th, 2009
8:26 am
Texas.
DB, Gwinnettian
May 11th, 2009
8:28 am
Wanda Sykes – make fun of every Republicant in sight, even if it stoops to viciousness or racism.
Cite, please for her “racism.” I need a laugh.
Mrs. Godzilla
May 11th, 2009
8:28 am
I’m a no nukes kinda’ gal.
Nuclear waste should be stored under The US Capital and every US State Capital.
You vote for it….you glow for it.
ty webb
May 11th, 2009
8:31 am
Jay,
years ago you worked as a journalist? Who knew.
AmVet
May 11th, 2009
8:33 am
What is wrong with some of the regular right-wingers here who consistently fail to acknowledge that Bookman regularly indicts Democrats as well as Republicans (granted the percentages offend their sensibilities)?
I have several guesses regarding intellectual honesty or the lack thereof but what the heck it is a rhetorical question.
I have historically been hesitant to support such a measure, but the generally useless Harry Reid and many others are the perfect reason to implement term limits in Congress.
Twelve years and gone.
No more permanent oligarchies…
TnGelding
May 11th, 2009
8:34 am
Linville
May 11th, 2009
6:49 am
Let’s hope you’re right. But I’m afraid that the reason the Shiia want us to leave is so they can really go after the Sunni.
This is one of the reasons things have quietened down:
http://www.unhcr.org/cgi-bin/texis/vtx/iraq?page=intro
Patty
May 11th, 2009
8:36 am
Each state should dispose of their own nuclear waste. Only by having to make this decision will state officials think about whether nuclear power is the way of the future. If Stan Wise, Georgia Public Service Commissioner, had to dispose of nuclear waste close to his residence, he may change his mind about making Georgia citizens pay in advance for two new nuclear reactors we don’t want. Solar, wind, hydrogen, natural gas for vehicles, and other alternative energy sources are much better for Georgia and the environment. As long as we cannot dispose of the nuclear waste we have accumulated to date, we should not pursue additional sources of nuclear power. Every school, government building and shopping center in Georgia should have solar panels. Georgia government officials should be at the forefront in encouraging local businesses to pursue investment in safe alternative energy sources. Nuclear power is not safe if the waste remains dangerous for 10,000 years.
Patty
Cumming, GA
ByteMe
May 11th, 2009
8:38 am
Jay, when you researched this column, did you find out where France stores there nuclear waste? What was their solution to this problem?
Thanks!
Taxpayer
May 11th, 2009
8:38 am
…The public was told the releases were “insignificant.” But stack monitors were saturated and unusable, and the Nuclear Regulatory Commission later told Congress it did not know—and STILL does not know—how much radiation was released at Three Mile Island, or where it went.
Using unsubstantiated estimates of how much radiation was released, the government issued average doses allegedly received by people in the region, which it assured the public were safe. But the estimates were utterly meaningless, among other things ignoring the likelihood that high doses of concentrated fallout could come down heavily on specific areas.
Official estimates said a uniform dose to all persons in the region was equivalent to a single chest x-ray. But pregnant women are no longer x-rayed because it has long been known a single dose can do catastrophic damage to an embryo or fetus in utero.
The public was told there was no melting of fuel inside the core. But robotic cameras later showed a very substantial portion of the fuel did melt.
The public was told there was no danger of an explosion. But there was, as there had been at Michigan’s Fermi reactor in 1966. In 1986, Chernobyl Unit Four did explode.
The public was told there was no need to evacuate anyone from the area. But Pennsylvania Governor Richard Thornburgh then evacuated pregnant women and small children. Unfortunately, many were sent to nearby Hershey, which was showered with fallout.
In fact, the entire region should have been immediately evacuated. It is standard wisdom in the health physics community that—due in part to the extreme vulnerability of human embryos, fetuses and small children, as well as the weaknesses of old age—there is no safe dose of radiation, and none will ever be found…
Safe, low-cost, dependable nuclear power…”Trust me!” Riiiiiiight.
I Report :-)/ You Whine :-(
May 11th, 2009
8:45 am
What is wrong with some of the regular right-wingers here who consistently fail to acknowledge that Bookman regularly indicts Democrats as well as Republicans (granted the percentages offend their sensibilities)?
AmVet- Just because you are blinded from seeing the pointless, after the fact opportunism all so that bookman burnish his pro energy credentials, doesn’t mean we are-
If nuclear power plants aren’t being built, it’s not because they are hugely expensive and a big risk for investors, it’s the fault of environmentalists.-Bookman, 6/22/08
http://www.ajc.com/blogs/content/shared-blogs/ajc/bookman/entries/2008/06/22/
Believe me, bookman sees the loss of Yucca as a victory too.
DB, Gwinnettian
May 11th, 2009
8:46 am
Bytme, maybe some of it goes to… russia?
I’m sure they can be trusted not to do anything irresponsible with it.
Mrs. Godzilla
May 11th, 2009
8:58 am
…..and some of it gets illegally dumped of the coast of somalia….
sd
May 11th, 2009
9:03 am
Bookman, you were right to paint this as Yucca Mountain versus the Rest of the Country. Thankfully, we live in a country that has a constitution that protects the minority against the majority. You wouldn’t want this stuff stored in Stone Mountain. The people of Yucca Mountain didn’t creat this waste, they shouldn’t be responsible for it.
Here was National Geographic’s take on this 7 years ago.
http://news.nationalgeographic.com/news/2002/07/0711_020711_yuccaspikes.html
AmVet
May 11th, 2009
9:09 am
“We”, Andy?
You don’t have a gerbil in your pocket do you?
Given that the hijacked and hemorrhaging GOP has been humiliated in two straight elections and is very, very busy destroying what little is left of itself (at least in the eyes of everyone save the 21% club) perhaps JB can be more gracious. Who knows?
BTW, it would seem that you didn’t even read what you linked. The considerations noted are valid.
Funny that you of ALL the people here would talk about blindness…
Bosch
May 11th, 2009
9:09 am
Space – that’s where it needs to be stored – or shipped. Can’t we send it to Neptune?
TnGelding
May 11th, 2009
9:11 am
I think Reid is celebrating a little early. Let’s wait and see what actually happens. I don’t think we need to worry about 10,000 years. Mankind will have taken a giant step backward way before then.
And then there’s the problem of transporting it to the site. Many communities don’t even want it passing through town. For that REASON I WOULD RECOMMEND REGIONAL SITES.
What about temporarily (that’s all we really need to worry about) using abandoned uranium or coal mines, or just leave it where it is?
One possible solution:
http://www.argee.net/DefenseWatch/Nuclear%20Waste%20and%20Breeder%20Reactors.htm
Red Foreskin
May 11th, 2009
9:18 am
Red Foreman,
You’re really funny. You should get job writing comedy jokes. Real funny……
Cherokee
May 11th, 2009
9:25 am
Patty – great idea – (just wanted to acknowledge it before it gets lost in the usual foul right wing drivel that gets posted on Jay’s blog)
TnGelding
May 11th, 2009
9:31 am
Jay is certainly right about conservation. Our waste of energy should be a national disgrace. And why are we even selling energy inefficient devices? They could be recalled and retrofitted or recycled, or possibly sold in energy rich countries.
Another interesting development:
http://www.utexas.edu/news/2009/01/27/nuclear_hybrid/
Shawny
May 11th, 2009
9:31 am
I wouldn’t say Bookman regularly indicts democrats, but rather, occasionally indicts them. You are correct in this post, NIMBY holds us back, and it is always a politically motivated behavior, just like TK opposing a wind farm station off the coast of Mass.
Nuc-u-lar power is safe. Perhaps we could shoot quantities of the spent fuel into deep space.
Midori
May 11th, 2009
9:33 am
Hey Joe Matarotx: Boss Limbaugh BUILT his career by being a divisive, bigoted, demagogue, those offended by Wanda Sykes jokes need to get a life.
http://blog.windycitywatch.com/2009/05/boss-limbaugh-built-his-career-by-being.html
Taxpayer
May 11th, 2009
9:40 am
Well,
I think Jay could be (although, I don’t really know) against the further proliferation of nuclear power plants AND be in favor of some form of nuclear waste storage that would consolidate the current on-site storage used by the nuclear power plants. It’s just another fine mess we’ve gotten ourselves into and we still don’t have a good solution. One thing is certain though, we simply cannot afford to tax the big businesses that create these problems and use those proceeds to help fund long-term solutions because that would take away some of their profits and their ability to hire good high-priced CEOs, etc. But, that’s another story. Now that we have some people in government that believe in science maybe we’ll make some positive headway. After all, faith sure hasn’t solved anything.
FYI,
There are 80 nuclear power plants operating east of the Mississippi; nine are located in New York and Pennsylvania. If for any reason one of these 9 reactor sites were to experience a loss of water in their holding tanks for the hot spent fuel rods, it could send a radioactive cloud sweeping over New York City and other populated areas downwind, leaving New York state, including Manhattan Island, uninhabitable. The resulting economic devastation running into the trillions of dollars could very possibly lead to the collapse of the US economy. The only way to reduce this threat of exposure is to reduce the on-site storage of radioactive waste.
Dave R
May 11th, 2009
9:40 am
Big difference, Midori.
Wanda Sykes joked that she hopes Rush Limbaugh’s kidneys fail.
Not exactly humorous.
Your morning jolt: Sonny Perdue says Georgia can't afford supplyside economics | Political Insider
May 11th, 2009
9:44 am
[...] Jay Bookman declares Harry Reid’s victory on Yucca Mountain to be the nation’s loss. [...]
Dave R
May 11th, 2009
9:45 am
Taxpayer.
Loved to article you posted regarding TMI. Just a few holes in it that you could drive a truck through, which is better than your usual posts.
Loved the comment comparing TMI to Chernobyl and the possibility of an explosion. Minor problem – two completely different TYPES of reactors, and two different operations.
Don’t let facts get in the way of a good rant.
Citizens of Uranus
May 11th, 2009
9:48 am
Wanda Sykes joked that she hopes Rush Limbaugh’s kidneys fail.
Not exactly humorous.
Perhaps not, but “racist?” That was Joe’s assertion @ 8.21, and I’m still waiting for evidence.
Taxpayer
May 11th, 2009
9:48 am
Shipping the 77,000 tons of radioactive material from 131 sites, located in 39 states, across 45 states to Yucca Mountain is how the Department of Energy plans to reduce that risk. This includes 44,000 tons of spent fuel rods from 31 states and 33,000 tons of high-level radioactive waste, most from bomb and warhead-making facilities located in 8 other states. This material would be shipped by truck and rail across 45 states and through some densely populated areas, like Chicago and St. Louis. Much of it would be shipped in steel casks, while the more highly radioactive material would be shipped in lead lined casks. Each rail cask would weigh approximately 145 tons and hold an amount of Cesium 137 that would be the equivalent of 260 times that released by the Hiroshima atomic bomb. The Nuclear Energy Institute has reported that these waste canister cylinders have 15-inch thick, triple layered walls of steel and lead. They have undergone tests to withstand punctures, 120 mph collisions and exposure to a 21,475-degree fire for ½ hour.
And, the first order for these special containers will go to the low-cost bidder — some little outfit in China, or was it India. But, I digress.
Taxpayer
May 11th, 2009
9:51 am
DaveR,
Stuff it. You obviously do not know what you are even talking about so don’t even try to claim that your 5th grade education qualifies you to do more than shine my, well, shoes.
Midori
May 11th, 2009
9:54 am
Dave R,
I hope they fail, too.
Much like Rush hopes the country fails.
Flashback: Top 10 Racist Rush Limbaugh Quotes:
1. I mean, let’s face it, we didn’t have slavery in this country for over 100 years because it was a bad thing. Quite the opposite: slavery built the South. I’m not saying we should bring it back; I’m just saying it had its merits. For one thing, the streets were safer after dark.
2. You know who deserves a posthumous Medal of Honor? James Earl Ray . We miss you, James. Godspeed.
3. Have you ever noticed how all composite pictures of wanted criminals resemble Jesse Jackson?
4. Right. So you go into Darfur and you go into South Africa, you get rid of the white government there. You put sanctions on them. You stand behind Nelson Mandela — who was bankrolled by communists for a time, had the support of certain communist leaders. You go to Ethiopia. You do the same thing.
5. Look, let me put it to you this way: the NFL all too often looks like a game between the Bloods and the Crips without any weapons. There, I said it.
http://newsone.blackplanet.com/obama/top-10-racist-limbaugh-quotes/
Expected
May 11th, 2009
9:57 am
Reid (as with most of the current administration) continues being foolhardy, shortsighted, and self-serving !!! This and domestic and international PC will be the end of the US…
Taxpayer
May 11th, 2009
9:58 am
It is estimated that 99,700 trips by truck will be required from 72 of the nuclear power plants alone, with an additional 16,240 coming from the Hanford facility, and another 2,460 from Idaho National Engineering. Thousands of more trips would be required for the 57 additional sites. Some 50 million people live within ½ mile of these projected routes. Critics have pointed out that the trucks or trains could become targets of terrorists or that an accident could occur, leaving one of the casks leaking its cargo into the air, rivers, or lakes. Energy Secretary Spencer Abraham says there is little risk to the public, and that the U.S. has already transported 2,700 loads of spent nuclear waste over 1.6 million miles since the 1960’s, “without one accident resulting from the harmful release of radiation.” This information is disputed by representatives of the state of Nevada who contend that there have been 11 accidents where detectable amounts of radioactive materials were released. .
Well, that no good Perdue needs to get those funds released to the DOT so they can start building I-3. After all, there are a whole lot of truck loads of nuclear waste that needs to be transported and we need better (i.e., less populated) routes than ones passing through Atlanta, for example.
Dave R
May 11th, 2009
9:59 am
Great Midori. You libs all cry about how “mean” Republicans are, but even they never go so far as to wish someone would die.
Great double standard you have there.
Dave R
May 11th, 2009
10:02 am
Taxpayer, obviously one of your “three degrees” never came from Columbia University. Maybe those online degree mills you “attended” don’t cover actual research like the big boys do.
Columbia University study vs. lib-based “interpretations”.
I think I’ll go with Columbia University on this one.
Mrs. Godzilla
May 11th, 2009
10:03 am
In defense of Wanda Sykes…..
She didn’t say she wanted Limbaugh to fail, just his kidneys!
His health insurance would provide dialysis and his $$$ would by him
a couple of used kidneys.
If Mr. Limbaugh and his supporters cannot take it,
I suggest they stop dishing it out. Think about how many and how often some of our resident conservatives have told us….they never ever listen to Rush.
Making a big deal out of a comedienne’s comments about one of the most reviled characters on the political landscape is not a bright idea for the rad right. There’s way too much video of Limbaugh and his own spiteful words.
On topic, would there be room at Yucca Mtn for Rush?
I Report :-)/ You Whine :-(
May 11th, 2009
10:03 am
Does it never dawn on our resident dimwit liberals that this stuff is being stored somwhere, right this minute, and that we are hard pressed to find people that glow in the dark?
Why do you democrats hate thought so much?
Susan Myers
May 11th, 2009
10:04 am
Rush Limbaugh – The one who proclaimed that Ted Kennedy would die from brain cancer soon and who also made fun of Michael J. Fox and his Parkinsons disease…among other things.
Wanda Sykes was awesome.
The beauty of humor comes from the truths that it tells.
Go Wanda Sykes!
DB, Gwinnettian
May 11th, 2009
10:05 am
You libs all cry about how “mean” Republicans are, but even they never go so far as to wish someone would die.
No, they go right ahead and make it happen without bothering to publicly wish for it first.
jon
May 11th, 2009
10:08 am
Just dump the stuff into deep ocean trenches. It will slowly release into the seawater and be harmlessly diluted.