Yucca Mountain & Nuclear Waste
Back to Issues Page
Introduction
What's the latest on Yucca?
Technical Issues
Alternatives
Nevada Test Site
Yucca Mountain, Nevada
Introduction
Since the beginning of the nuclear age, the nuclear establishment has tried to find a solution to the problem of long-lived high-level nuclear waste. The waste is the deadly byproduct of nuclear weapons development and nuclear power plants. High-level waste is highly toxic and radioactive and will remain so for many hundreds of thousands of years. Early on, there were ideas to dump it on a remote desert island, sink it to the bottom of the ocean, or even ship the waste into Sun. These ideas were quickly dismissed as too costly and highly dangerous. Since at least the late 1950s, there has been a consensus within the scientific community that the best option or, really, the "least-worst" option is to build a geologically based repository to isolate the waste for as long as possible. It wasn't until 1982 when the Nuclear Waste Policy Act was passed that the United States decided to make this the official policy of the United States.
Unfortunately, the Yucca Mountain site was not chosen for scientific reasons. The history of project reveals that Nevada was chosen because it was, at the time, a weak political state and could offer little resistance to the plan. Furthermore, almost every time clear and concrete evidence emerged that the Yucca Site was unsuitable for a geologic repository, the Federal Government simply changed the rules to make it work. NCL is opposed to the project in every way and believes it should be scrapped. We will work at the state level to maintain the state's opposition and continue to inform our legislators that Yucca Mountain is not the answer to the nuclear waste problem and is, in fact, is a serious threat to our environment, public health, and economy.
See also:
Yucca Mountain Timeline- Visit Public Citizen's thorough timeline of the history of the Yucca Mountain Project.
Click here to see a map of nuclear reactors in U.S.
State of Nevada - 2006 State of Nevada Yucca Mountain Public Opinion Survey - Summary Report (PDF)
What's the latest on Yucca?
On October 13, 2006 the Department of Energy announced alterations to their transportation plan bringing nuclear waste to Yucca Mountain and also a plan to almost completely redesign surface facilities at the Yucca site itself.
Mina Corridor
The first part of the plan involves building a rail corridor through western Nevada and such cities as Reno, Mina, Hawthorne, Fallon, and others. It has been dubbed the "Mina Corridor."
Project Redesign
The second portion of this review involves redesigning certain surface facilities at the Yucca site itself to create "aging" pads and essentially allow "interim" storage at Yucca Mountain while the facility is built.
What does this mean?
Regarding the Mina Corridor:
- NCL is opposed to any route to Yucca Mountain. There is a significant amount of evidence that demonstrates that the site is highly unsuitable for a nuclear waste repository.
- The Mina Corridor would affect many more people and would overall pose a greater risk to public health and the environment than the previously considered Caliente route.
- NCL called for DOE to fully consider the No Action Alternative. The Mina corridor is dangerous and is filled with a high degree of uncertainty and must be removed from consideration.
- NCL contends that it is premature, irresponsible, and wrong to pursue a transportation plan to a site that has not yet received a license to operate, has not been proven to meet radiation health standards, and would pose a significant public health risk to Nevadans as well as the millions of Americans along the transportation routes.
- The manner in which the Department of Energy (DOE) went about seeking public comment was grossly insufficient and sent a clear signal to the public that they are more interested in pushing an unsafe project forward than truly engaging the public in the process.
Regarding the Project Redesign:
- Any move to design or redesign a facility that is scientifically uncertain and has no license to operate is premature and irresponsible.
- This proposal is potentially illegal under the Nuclear Waste Policy Act that forbids any "interim" storage in Nevada.
- DOE must fully consider the No Action Alternative and immediately end all plans to build a nuclear waste repository at Yucca Mountain.
To read NCL's full comments on the two proposals, click below.
Mina Corridor Comments (Word)
Project Redesign Comments (Word)
To read the State of Nevada's Comments:
State of Nevada Comments on DOE's Notice of Intent to Prepare a Supplement to the Final Environmental Impact Statement for a Geologic Repository for the Disposal of Spent Nuclear Fuel and High-Level Radioactive Waste at Yucca Mountain, Nye County, NV (71FR198, October 13, 2006, 60490-60494) (pdf)
State of Nevada's Comments on DOE's Amended Notice of Intent To Expand the Scope of the Environmental Impact Statement for the Alignment, Construction,and Operation of a Rail Line to a Geologic Repository at Yucca Mountain, Nye County, NV (Federal Register Notice of 10-13-06) (pdf)
To read comments submitted by 26 state & national public interest groups:
Mina Corridor Comments (PDF)
Project Redesign Comments (PDF)
Technical Issues
Annual Review. Earth Planet Science Journal-
MIT Technology Review -
- Is the Yucca Nuke Dump All Wet? - By Allison Macfarlane
- Uncertainty Underground - A recent book by experts from wide variety of scientific fields discussing different aspects of the Yucca Mountain Project and the serious uncertainties revolving around the push to store high-level nuclear waste in Nevada.
Institute for Energy & Environmental Research -
State of Nevada -
Public Citizen -
Alternatives to Yucca
Download a primer on a viable alternative to Yucca Mountain. This plan calls for the safe and secure storage of High-Level nuclear waste onsite at reactor sites and not at the scientifically unsafe Yucca Mountain. This statement was endorsed by over 100 state and national organizations including the Nevada Conservation League.
Download Here (PDF)
"If not Yucca Mountain, then what?" - An alternative plan for managing highly radioactive waste in the United States, - By Institute for Energy & Environmental Research and the Alliance for Nuclear Accountability
Nevada Test Site
NTS Waste Management Program
While Yucca Mountain is being considered for a high-level nuclear waste repository, the Nevada Test Site (NTS) currently hosts the largest low-level radioactive waste (LLRW) dump site in the country. NTS serves as a dumping ground for waste from former and present nuclear weapons sites around the country. Although there are other LLRW facilities across the country, the waste that is disposed of at NTS only comes from U.S. Department of Energy and U.S. Department of Defense generators.
Radioactive Waste Management Sites at the NTS
Approximately 1,200 annual shipments of low-level waste travel to NTS, many of the shipments through the Las Vegas metropolitan area. The shipments usually come from the east coast or midwest from former nuclear weapons sites in Ohio and Kentucky, for example. While accidents are rare and the overall health risk is low, there is much secrecy as to the specific routes and times of the shipments. Once it arrives at NTS, LLRW is disposed of in pits, unlined trenches, and in craters at two specific radioactive waste management sites at NTS:
Area 5 is a 732-acre radioactive waste management complex, of which 160 acres are currently in use for radioactive waste storage and disposal. Low-level waste is shipped to Area 5 at the NTS in drums and boxes that are placed in shallow, excavated “cells” (essentially holes in the ground), which range from 12 to 48 feet deep. The boxes and drums are stacked and arranged in a grid system to facilitate tracking, and as cells are filled, waste handlers cover them with an 8-foot layer of soil.
Area 3 receives bulk packages of low-level waste that are disposed of in designated craters. These craters were formed in the 1960’s by underground nuclear testing. Currently, there are only two active disposal cells remaining. Once these cells are filled, it is anticipated that the Area 3 disposal facility will undergo the closure process.
What is Low-Level Waste?
Low-level radioactive waste (LLRW) is defined more by what it is not rather than what it is. LLRW is, therefore, material that is not classified as high-level waste (irradiated reactor fuel), transuranic waste, or by-product material such as uranium mill tailings. Typical LLRW includes materials such as rags, papers, filters, equipment, discarded protective clothing and construction debris that contain small amounts of radioactive material. LLRW is generally classified in three levels of toxicity: "Class A" wastes are composed mainly of low activity trash, although some components may be biologically dangerous in minute quantities and some may even remain hazardous for many thousands of years; "Classes B and C" are higher in radioactive concentrations and tend to contain isotopes that have very long hazardous lives. Some LLRW may even be declared "Greater Than Class C" (GTCC) in radioactive concentration and toxicity. There are two points here. One, the nuclear waste establishment does not classify waste according to the degree of hazard, only by the production source. Second, low-level waste is NOT low hazard. It is still very dangerous and much of it must be handled remotely with facility workers wearing heavy radiological protection.
Links/Literature
Fentiman, Audeen W. and James H. Saling. Radioactive Waste Management. New York: Taylor & Francis, 2002. Second ed.
Makhijani, Arjun and Saleska, Scott. High-Level Dollars, Low-Level Sense. Institute for Energy and Environmental Research. Available at http://www.ieer.org/pubs/highlvl1.html
