Erik Chang Essay 3 A Mountain of Problems The United States has over 100 operational nuclear power plants

generating 2,000 metric tons of nuclear waste per year. Nuclear power accounts for approximately 19 percent of the United States' electricity production. (United States Environmental Protection Agency) The Yucca Mountain Waste Repositorys funding was terminated on April 14, 2011 under the Obama Administration. However, the need for a permanent nuclear waste facility still exists. On March 11, 2011 Japan was struck by a 9.0 magnitude earthquake that damaged the Fukushima I Nuclear Power Plant. These spent rods are still highly radioactive: the radioactivity is so great the rods must be stored in water so they do not combust the radioactivity in the used rods can cause them to become so hot they begin to catch fire. (Murphy) The Fukushima plant contained an approximate 600,000 spent fuel rods in its holding pools. So although the Yucca Mountain Waste Repository controversy has faded into the past, the recent disaster at the Fukushima plant and pull of funding the question where to store high level radioactive waste has not disappeared. In 1960 the United States began using a new form of energy, Nuclear power. Since the emergence of commercial nuclear power the big dilemma was where to store the nuclear waste. In 1957, a report by the National Academy of Sciences, The Disposal of Radioactive Waste on Land, recommended the geologic disposal of radioactive wastes. (Papay) Ever since the report was made recommending geological disposal, various nations from around the world have begun to research and test for possible nuclear waste repositories. Recently, Sweden and Canada have licensed applications in 2011 for new nuclear waste repositories while Korea and Finland both have waste repositories under construction. Many countries are also discussing the possibility of

building their own nuclear waste repositories in the near future. The 1957 report from the National Academy of Sciences sparked a 40 year search for a location where an underground nuclear repository could be constructed in the United States. Beginning in 1978 the Yucca Mountains have been studied by the Department of Energy as a site for a nuclear waste repository. In 1982 the Republican president Ronald Regan signed the Nuclear Waste Policy Act. The Nuclear Waste Policy act served as guidelines to establish procedures to evaluate and select sites for geologic repositories and for the interaction of state and federal governments. It also provides a timetable of key milestones the federal agencies must meet in carrying out the program. (Summary of the Nuclear Waste Policy Act | Laws and Regulations | US EPA) and to assign the United States Department of Energy (DOE) the task of determining the best method and location to dispose of nuclear waste. The Yucca Mountains was selected to be studied along with nine other sites in 1984. A year later the site list was narrowed down to three and the Yucca Mountains were finally selected as the final site in 1987. Ever since the United Sates Congress picked the Yucca Mountains as a proposed nuclear waste dumping site in 1987 without the permission of the state of Nevada protests broke out. (Garber) Hundreds of communities rallied to fight for and against the dumping site. The Yucca Mountains have been studied extensively by the Department of Energy however they have been accused of possible falsification of quality assurance documents on water infiltration research. (U.S. Senate Committee on Environment and Public Works) The accusation of possible falsification of data undermines the argument that the Yucca Mountains are able to server as a sufficient high level nuclear waste repository. Set to open in 1998, the Yucca Mountain Waste Repository had many legal issues involving the transport of nuclear waste to the site and questions about funding. Because of this

and the absence of any way to process nuclear waste, the spent fuel rod pools began to accumulate and having to rely on dry cask storage. Dry cask storage allows spent fuel that has already been cooled in the spent fuel pool for at least one year to be surrounded by inert gas inside a container called a cask. The casks are typically steel cylinders that are either welded or bolted closed. The steel cylinder provides a leak-tight containment of the spent fuel. (United States Nuclear Regulatory Commission) The storage containers containing a total of 70,000 metric tons of high level radioactive waste are sealed and are currently stored at 121 different power plants sited around the United States. (United States Nuclear Regulatory Commission) These spent fuel rods, which are extremely radioactive, must be disposed of with great care because they take thousands of years to decompose and become non-radioactive. Recently, Canada and Sweden have licensed applications in 2011 for new nuclear waste repositories. Korea, Finland, Germany both have nuclear waste repositories under construction. Currently, only Sweden, which has one, and Finland, which has two, are the only two countries to have operational geological nuclear waste facilities. (iks) However, these geological repositories were not built to hold high level nuclear waste like the Yucca Mountain Waste Repository was intended to. The currently operational nuclear waste repositories were designed to store low and intermediate level waste. Low level waste is generated from hospitals, laboratories and industry, as well as the nuclear fuel cycle... which contain small amounts of mostly short-lived radioactivity. It is not dangerous to handle, but must be disposed of more carefully than normal garbage. (World Nuclear Association) Low level waste generally does not require special treatment or shielding whereas intermediate may contain higher amounts of radioactivity and may require special shielding. (World Nuclear Association) High level nuclear waste requires special treatment and handling. While only 3% of the volume of all radioactive

waste, it holds 95% of the radioactivity.(World Nuclear Association) In order to store this high level waste, the storage facility must be capable for lasting a couple thousand years because much of the high level radioactive waste have half-lives of longer than one million years. Plutonium-239, which is in irradiated fuel, has a half-life of 24,400 years. It is dangerous for a quarter million years, or 12,000 human generations. As it decays, uranium-235 is generated; half-life: 710,000 years. (NIRS) The storage conditions, which are widely debated, were established by the United States Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) in June 2001. From 2002 to 2004 the Department Of Ecology worked on a license for the Nuclear Regulatory Commission. During that time Nevada brought many lawsuits to the D.C. court of appeals. In 2004 the Court of Appeals did not listen to the Nevada lawsuits but throws out the 10,000 year EPA regulation standard for the Yucca Mountain site. Seeing as the half-life of the high level nuclear waste that will be stored in the facility is 24,000 years, and does not become safe after a few millions years, this is very unsafe and unethical. From 2004-2007 the DOE researched possible shipment routes to the Yucca mountains finally finishing their application in 2008. In July 2009 the project was cancelled to wait for technology to improve for a better solution than a dumping site. The House of Representatives voted 388 to 30 on amendments to HHR3183 (Roll call vote 591, via Clerk.House.gov). Finally, in 2011 the funding for researching the Yucca Mountain site cut terminating all standing operations involving the site. However, the site controversy may be revived in the near future and is widely debated by the current potential candidates for the 2012 presidential election. There is still heavy opposition to the Yucca Mountain Waste repository. There are more than 50 national and 700 environmental and public interest groups opposed to the Yucca Mountain Waste Repository. Among those groups is The State of Nevada which vetoed the site

recommendation of the Yucca Mountains spring 2002. Unfortunately, on July 23, 2002 President George W. Bush signed House Joint Resolution 87. The Joint resolution approved the site at Yucca Mountain, Nevada, for the development of a repository for the disposal of high-level radioactive waste and spent nuclear fuel, pursuant to the Nuclear Waste Policy Act of 1982. (Pub. L. No. 107-200) Nevada is often stereotyped by prostitution, gambling, and illegal aliens. The political issues that arise are simply that of locals that are unable to vote to veto this project while others see it as a way to control Nevadas natural resources. The science behind the Yucca Mountain decision has been widely debated. In order for the Yucca Mountain Waste Repository to be approved, it must pass the EPAs regulations that they have set are the following: an individual protection standard, a human intrusion standard, and a groundwater protection standard. Currently, Nevada ranks fourth in the nation for seismic activity (United States Geological Survey), which makes the EPAs claim that the Yucca Mountain site is safe for the repository already, look outrageous. U.S. Geological Survey obtained last week by the Review-Journal show that the Bow Ridge fault passes directly beneath the footprint of a pad where spent fuel canisters would age or cool down before they are entombed in a maze of tunnels inside the mountain, 100 miles northwest of Las Vegas. (Rogers) The fact that the repository could potentially be located above a fault line is terrifying thought to the public and could potentially violate their individual protection standard and the groundwater protection standard. But the potential impact of terrorism on the current possessors of spent fuel and the vulnerabilities of transportation systems and the repository design were not fully explored (Papay). Despite the large amount of evidence in support of the Waste Repository, there is also substantial evidence against the waste repository. The questionable evidence in support of the repository is trumped by the evidence against it. From experience we humans have

learned that it important to calculate all possible risks before they happen and order to ensure that disasters do not occur. For example, the BP oil spill in 2010 was a catastrophic event although expert engineers approved the drilling process. Nuclear waste, if handled improperly, could potentially have catastrophic results. Although the Yucca Mountains are inadequate to host a nuclear waste facility, the need to have a permanent disposal site for high level nuclear waste remains. With 19% of its energy coming from nuclear power, the rapidly growing United States cannot afford to go completely off of nuclear power. Placing a nuclear waste facility in the state of Nevada, who is greatly opposed to the waste repository, is unwise. While the Yucca Mountains may appear to be the best location for a high level nuclear waste facility, it is certain that the calculated risk of having the repository is far greater than the threat we face of being unable to find a location to dump nuclear waste for extended periods of time. Current storage facilities are sufficient enough to store nuclear waste until the next new decades. In the meantime, the United States has three options; discover an efficient alternative source of energy, drop the Yucca Mountains as a potential site for a Nuclear Waste Repository and begin the search for new potential sites, wait until technology/methods has evolved to process nuclear waste. With new technologies and instruments that have been made available since the 1980s the search will be better conducted and better facilitated, and then the United States will have the nuclear waste facility that they need.

Works Cited iks, Timo, and Pekka Anttila. "Repositories for Low- and Intermediate-level Waste in Finland." Reviews in Engineering Geology 19 (2008): 67-71. Reviews In Engineering Geology. Web. 8 Feb. 2012. <http://reg.gsapubs.org/content/19/67.abstract>. Asma, Stephen T. "Green Guilt - The Chronicle Review - The Chronicle of Higher Education." Home - The Chronicle of Higher Education. 10 Jan. 2010. Web. 18 Oct. 2011. <http://chronicle.com/article/Green-Guilt/63447/>. Dimock, Michael. "Money Walks." Pew Research Center. 12 Apr. 2007. Web. 18 Oct. 2011. <http://pewresearch.org/pubs/451/money-walks>. Disposition of High-level Waste and Spent Nuclear Fuel: the Continuing Societal and Technical Challenges. Washington, D.C.: National Academy, 2001. Print. Ewing, Rodney C., and Allison Macfarlane. "Yucca Mountain." Sciencemag.org. Web. 18 Oct. 2011. <http://www.sciencemag.org/content/296/5568/659.full.pdf>. "FINAL VOTE RESULTS FOR ROLL CALL 591." Office of the Clerk U.S House of Representatives. 17 July 2009. Web. 18 Oct. 2011. <http://clerk.house.gov/evs/2009/roll591.xml>. Garber, Kent. "Lessons from the Yucca Mountain Nuclear Waste Storage Debate." US News & World Report | News & Rankings | Best Colleges, Best Hospitals, and More. 16 Mar. 2009. Web. 18 Oct. 2011. <http://www.usnews.com/news/energy/articles/2009/03/16/lessons-from-the-yuccamountain-nuclear-waste-storage-debate>.

Herszenhorn, David M. "Yucca Mountain Plan for Nuclear Waste Dies - NYTimes.com." Politics and Government - 2012 Presidential Watch - The Caucus Blog - NYTimes.com. 31 Mar. 2009. Web. 18 Oct. 2011. <http://thecaucus.blogs.nytimes.com/2009/03/31/yucca-mountain-plan-for-nuclearwaste-dies/>. "HIGH-LEVEL RADIOACTIVE WASTE - NIRS." Nuclear Information and Resource Service NIRS. June 1997. Web. 08 Feb. 2012. <http://www.nirs.org/factsheets/hlwfcst.htm>. Murphy, Kirk J. "Nuke Engineer: Fuel Rod Fire at Fukushima Reactor "would Be like Chernobyl on Steroids" | MyFDL." My FDL | Home. 14 Mar. 2011. Web. 18 Oct. 2011. <http://my.firedoglake.com/kirkmurphy/2011/03/14/nuke-engineer-fuel-rod-fire-atstricken-reactor-would-be-like-chernobyl-on-steroids/>. "Nevada Visitor Statistics." Nevada Commission on Tourism. Web. 18 Oct. 2011. <http://travelnevada.biz/statistics.aspx>. "NRC: Dry Cask Storage." NRC: Home Page. Web. 18 Oct. 2011. <http://www.nrc.gov/waste/spent-fuel-storage/dry-cask-storage.html>. "NRC: Glossary -- Fuel Rod." NRC: Home Page. Web. 18 Oct. 2011. <http://www.nrc.gov/reading-rm/basic-ref/glossary/fuel-rod.html>. "NRC: Spent Fuel Pools." NRC: Home Page. Web. 18 Oct. 2011. <http://www.nrc.gov/waste/spent-fuel-storage/pools.html>. "Nuclear Energy | Clean Energy | US EPA." US Environmental Protection Agency. Web. 18 Oct. 2011. <http://www.epa.gov/cleanenergy/energy-and-you/affect/nuclear.html>.

"Nuclear Waste Management : Education: World Nuclear Association : World-nuclear.org." World Nuclear Association | Nuclear Power - a Sustainable Energy Resource. Feb. 2011. Web. 08 Feb. 2012. <http://www.world-nuclear.org/education/wast.htm>. "OVER 50 NATIONAL & 700 STATE/LOCAL ENVIRONMENTAL & PUBLIC INTEREST ORGANIZATIONS OPPOSED TO THE YUCCA MOUNTAIN NUCLEAR WASTE DUMP." Nuclear Information and Resource Service. Web. 18 Oct. 2011. <http://www.nirs.org/radwaste/yucca/yuccaopponentslist.htm>. Papay, Lawrence T. "The Science and Politics of Radioactive Waste Disposal." The Bridge: Linking Engineering and Society 33.3 (2003): 3-4. Print. "Public Law 107 - 200 - Joint Resolution Approving the Site at Yucca Mountain, Nevada, for the Development of a Repository for the Disposal of High-level Radioactive Waste and Spent Nuclear Fuel, Pursuant to the Nuclear Waste Policy Act of 1982." U.S. Government Printing Office Home Page. Web. 18 Oct. 2011. <http://www.gpo.gov/fdsys/pkg/PLAW-107publ200/content-detail.html>. Rogers, Keith. "Yucca Fault Line Might Spring Surprise - News - ReviewJournal.com." Las Vegas News, Business, Entertainment Information - ReviewJournal.com. Web. 08 Feb. 2012. <http://www.lvrj.com/news/9954856.html>. "Summary of the Nuclear Waste Policy Act | Laws and Regulations | US EPA." US Environmental Protection Agency. Web. 18 Oct. 2011. <http://www.epa.gov/regulations/laws/nwpa.html>. Tetreault, Steve. "Eureka County, Nevada -- Yucca Mountain Timeline." Eureka County, Nevada -- Yucca Mountain.org. Web. 18 Oct. 2011. <http://www.yuccamountain.org/time.htm>.

"Top Earthquake States." U.S. Geological Survey Earthquake Hazards Program. Web. 08 Feb. 2012. <http://earthquake.usgs.gov/earthquakes/states/top_states.php>. United States. Senate. U.S. Senate Committee on Environment and Public Works. Yucca Mountain: The Most Studied Real Estate On The Planet. By James M. Inhofe. 2006. Mar. 2006. Web. 7 Feb. 2012. <http://epw.senate.gov/repwhitepapers/YuccaMountainEPWReport.pdf>. Wald, Matthew L. "Yucca Mountain." Times Topics - The New York Times. 30 June 2010. Web. 18 Oct. 2011. <http://topics.nytimes.com/top/news/national/usstatesterritoriesandpossessions/nevada/yu cca-mountain/index.html>. Waymire, Stuart D. "Yucca Mountain: The Battle For National Energy Policy." Yucca Mountain: The Battle For National Energy Policy. Web. 18 Oct. 2011. <http://www.yuccamountainexpose.com/>. Zimmerman, Michael E. "Introduction To Deep Ecology." Interview by Alan AtKisson. In Context: A Quarterly of Humane Sustanable Culture. Summer 1989. Web. 18 Oct. 2011. <http://www.context.org/ICLIB/IC22/Zimmrman.htm>.