Skip to main content (Press Enter).
Log In to GSA
Skip auxiliary navigation (Press Enter).
GSA Website
GSA's Connected Community
Contact Us
Skip main navigation (Press Enter).
Toggle navigation
Search Options
Home
About Us
About G&S
Officers
Bylaws
News & Resources
Newsletter
Highlights
E-an Zen Fund for Geoscience Outreach Grant
Best Paper Award
GSA Geoscience Job Board
Our Community
Our Community
Help
FAQs
How to Log In
How to Use the Site
Join
Geology and Society Division
View Only
Community Home
Discussion
559
Library
113
Blogs
41
Events
0
Members
289
Comment on draft nuclear waste management legislation
By
Kasey White
posted
05-09-2013 15:32
0
Recommend
Comment
on
a
discussion draft of comprehensive nuclear waste management legislation released by
Senators Dianne Feinstein, D-Calif., and Lamar Alexander, R-Tenn. – the leaders of the Senate Appropriations Subcommittee on Energy and Water Development – and Energy and Natural Resources Committee Chairman Ron Wyden, D-Ore., and Ranking Member Lisa Murkowski, R-Alaska. The
Nuclear Waste Administration Act of 2013
would implement the recommendations of the Blue Ribbon Commission on America’s Nuclear Future to establish a nuclear waste administration and create a consent-based process for siting nuclear waste facilities.
1 comment
25 views
Related Content
Critical Minerals Bill Introduced by Senator Murkowski
Karen Paczkowski
Added 04-09-2015
Blog Entry
DOE Science Funding Bill Passes House and is Approved by Senate Appropriations Committee
Karen Paczkowski
Added 07-06-2015
Blog Entry
Senate Energy Committee Passes Bipartisan Energy Bill
Karen Paczkowski
Added 08-11-2015
Blog Entry
Critical Minerals Bill Examined by Senate Energy Committee
Karen Paczkowski
Added 05-15-2015
Blog Entry
House and Senate Appropriations Committees Pass Bill to Fund USGS
Karen Paczkowski
Added 07-01-2015
Blog Entry
Permalink
Comments
Dennis O'Leary
09-21-2013 22:48
"Comprehensive nuclear waste management legislation": the concept has a grotesque, hallucinatory quality - at least to me, who spent 17 years studying Yucca Mountain. The Blue Ribbon Commission was essentially a kind of political puppet show, established to give the impression of serious progress on an issue that became a victim of political expediency. I am using very polite words here. The BRC reiterated all the bromides of any big political face-saving maneuver: the new process will be transparent, based on the best science, environmentally responsible, etc. Here is the situation: almost 30 years and about $15 billion were spent getting Yucca Mountain to the point of a license application. Reid, Obama, and Chu prevented NRC from reviewing the application. Instead, the BRC calls for 1) search for a radwaste site that will require community consent. I guarantee we won't find a site in the US as isolated and secure as Yucca Mountain. Local communities don't even want to see radwaste transported let alone emplaced anywhere nearby. 2) Interim storage? We are talking about upwards of $30 billion to accommodate the 100,000 and more metric tons of spent fuel. Will interim storage also require community consent? 3) A new agency designed solely to find a permanent waste repository - only for commercial waste, not military. When you consider everything that was done concerning the Yucca Mountain project, the likely need now for two permanent repositories, the liklihood that there will be no new nuclear power plants licensed until at least the interim storage issue is settled and two new permanent sites are ready to be characterized and undergo risk assessment,and another attempt at a license application, convincing local communities to feel good about nuclear waste in their counties, I think we are looking at at least $400 billion and no repository construction till 2050. That's optimistic.
Terms of Use
Code of Conduct
Privacy Policy
© The Geological Society of America, Inc.
Powered by Higher Logic
×
Community Tags
Add a tag
x
User Tags may not contain the following characters: @ # $ & :