U.S. must act on nuke waste

Nuclear waste from the generation of electricity is stored at centralized sites in Great Britain, France, Sweden and other countries with nuclear power plants. But no comparable interim site for waste storage exists in the United States. Such a site needs to be set aside now if we’re to make use of carbon-free nuclear power in combating global warming. The best place for interim storage would be near the planned Yucca Mountain repository in Nevada.

Although an operational repository is not essential for construction of new nuclear plants, utility regulators – and investors – need confidence that a workable plan for long-term spent-fuel storage is in place.

How soon can this be done? This is no small question. There is some dispute about the severity of the nuclear waste problem, but in those parts of the country where it is a problem – mostly near large cities – the impact is so unsettling that state officials are demanding help from Washington.

Some 57,000 metric tons of spent fuel is stored at scores of nuclear power plant sites in different parts of the United States. Here in Maine, 550 metric tons is stored safely and securely at the site of the decommissioned Maine Yankee plant. Because spent fuel is a byproduct of electricity production, the amount keeps increasing at operating nuclear plants. But there is a limit to how much of the highly-radioactive material can be added at local sites.

Congress needs to address the nuclear waste problem and it should direct the Department of Energy to transport the spent fuel to an interim site in the Nevada desert. It also should provide full funding for licensing and construction of the Yucca Mountain repository, at the budget level requested by the Bush Administration – $494.5 million for the 2008 fiscal year.

Before dismissing this as fantasy, consider that the senior Republican on the Senate Energy Committee, Sen. Pete Domenici of New Mexico, is a strong advocate of shipping spent fuel to an interim site in Nevada. And the Senate Appropriations Committee voted to provide nearly the full budget request for the Yucca Mountain project.

Electricity consumers have a stake in seeing some progress on waste storage. Since 1982, users of nuclear-generated electricity nationally have contributed $29 billion to the Nuclear Waste Fund for construction of the Yucca Mountain facility. About $65 million has been paid by electricity users in Maine alone. Even these numbers understate the true cost of nuclear waste management, since consumers also pay for storing spent fuel at local nuclear plant sites.

Those who think we can continue to store spent fuel at nuclear plant sites indefinitely should think again. Sure, the spent fuel poses no immediate threat, but there is not much relief in sight from reprocessing spent fuel, not unless a way can be found to separate plutonium for recycling without contributing to nuclear weapons proliferation.

This leaves us with one overriding imperative: We must establish a centralized storage site for spent fuel and complete the construction of a permanent repository. This may be a difficult policy to pursue in view of the opposition from vocal anti-nuclear groups and some Nevada politicians, but that doesn’t make planning for it any less necessary.

Donald A. Grant is chair and professor emeritus of the mechanical engineering department at the University of Maine.