[Permatopia] "Interim Storage" of nuke waste

[Christopher L]

Greetings, friends!
You may know me as a guy disgusted with the notion of signing petitions and writing my representatives.  However, one issue could cook human Life forever - and I don't mean climate change.  It's nuclear waste, which is a potent threat to human DNA (and that of horses and trees) for upwards of 10,000 years.
The Department of Energy has come up with a bone-headed scheme to get themselves off the hook of contractual obligations to provide "permanent storage" of high-level nuclear waste.   Yucca Mountain was supposed to be the end of power-company liability, but it was found inadequate and scuttled in 2013.  That's when DOE quickly came up with this "interim storage" plan - which implies a "permanent" storage plan which they do not have.
The "interim plan" would mandate two for-profit companies to store about 70,000metric tons of high-level nuclear waste (estimates seem to differ) on aninterim basis.  Yet these two sites (not yet selected) would almost certainly be the last repositories of the nation’s nuclear waste.  It's unlikely that sites can be found that are even as good as Yucca Mountain(flawed as it turned out to be).  And 70,000 metric tons ofhigh-level nuclear waste (plus the 2000 or so tons produced annually byexisting nuke plants) would be stored by private enterprise for 10,000 years.  Safely. Permanently.  Trust us. Besides the absurdity of a for-profit company being our onlyguarantee of “safe disposal” for 10,000 years, consider the transportationissues.   Trains derail, tractor trailersflip over, ships sink.  Remember the ExxonValdez?  Remember all those exploding trains comingout of the fracking belt?  Amtrakdisasters?  Imagine if high-level nuclearwaste were involved.  It’s a trulyhorrific idea, mooted exclusively to give the power companies and the DOE “closure”.  We should give 'em hell, instead. I refer you to the government’s own 2013 document, http://www.energy.gov/sites/prod/files/Strategy%20for%20the%20Management%20and%20Disposal%20of%20Used%20Nuclear%20Fuel%20and%20High%20Level%20Radioactive%20Waste.pdfDOE 2013: “Strategy for the Management and Disposal of Used Nuclear Fuel andHigh-Level Radioactive Waste” pp.2-3 “The NWPA established a broad policy framework for the permanentdisposal of used nuclear fuel and high-level radioactive waste derived fromnuclear power generation.   The NWPAauthorized the government to enter into contracts with reactor operators – thegenerators and current owners of used nuclear fuel –  providing that, in exchange for the paymentof fees, the government would assume responsibility for permanent disposal. Thefees were to ensure that the reactor owners and power generators pay the fullcost of the disposal of their used nuclear fuel and high-level radioactivewaste.    “The federal government did not meet its contractualobligation to begin accepting used nuclear fuel by 1998.    As a result of litigation by contract holders,the government was found in partial breach of contract, and is now liable fordamages to some utilities to cover the costs of on-site, at-reactor storage.   “Currently more than 68,000 metric tons heavy metal (MTHM) ofused nuclear fuel are stored at 72 commercial power plants around the countrywith approximately 2,000 MTHM added to that amount every year.    The sooner that legislation enables progresson implementing this Strategy, the lower the ultimate cost will be to the taxpayers.  “This document outlines a strategy that is intended tolimit, and then end, liability costs by making it possible for the governmentto begin performing on its contractual obligations.” Also see:http://www.energy.gov/ne/fuel-cycle-technologies/nuclear-fuels-storage-transportation-planning-project   The opening sentence of this DOE webpagereads:“The future of nuclear energy inthe United States depends on our ability to manage and disposition used nuclearfuel and high-level radioactive waste.” In other words, the DOE has tofulfill its contractual obligations to store highly radioactivewaste, as soon as possible, in order for nuclear power to have a future.  This means power companies have no further responsibility, making investment in nuclear power look pretty attractive.  This is an important assumption, and has an important implication.  Stopping the idiotic plan of “interim storage” will pretty muchmake nuclear power non-viable in the United States.  Let us hope so. It would be too aggressive for me to urge you to write your own letter tothe DOE, but I hope you do.   Emails haveto be received by January 27, 2017.  Butnow is a great time to send em.  You willfind the details at the end of my own letter, which I have attached.   Remember to have fun with theabsurdity, and not to take it too damned seriously.  It's only the fate of mankind.  They are the buffoons, and we are merelypointing this out.  We should have fundoing it. If you read my comments to the DOE and have suggestions or criticisms, please email me and say so.  I haven't sent it in yet.
Blessings!
c.
  



   
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mail.here-we-are.org/pipermail/permatopia_here-we-are.org/attachments/20161113/3c0d76f0/attachment-0002.html>
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: REQUEST FOR INFORMATION.docx
Type: application/vnd.openxmlformats-officedocument.wordprocessingml.document
Size: 429636 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://mail.here-we-are.org/pipermail/permatopia_here-we-are.org/attachments/20161113/3c0d76f0/attachment.docx>