[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Independent Yucca Review Raises Questions







Mark Graffis wrote:



> Environment News Service

>

> Independent Review Questions Approval of Yucca Mountain

>

> By Cat Lazaroff

>

> WASHINGTON, DC, January 25, 2002 (ENS) - Scientific uncertainties make it

> impossible to ensure that a proposed nuclear waste dump in Nevada would

> remain safe for the thousands of years necessary to protect the environment,

> suggests a review by the Nuclear Waste Technical Review Board.

>

> While the board (NWTRB) has found "no individual technical or scientific

> factor has been identified that would automatically eliminate Yucca Mountain

> from consideration as the site of a permanent repository" for the nation's

> nuclear waste, the review found a variety of problems with the studies that

> aim to ensure the safety of the site.

>

> The NWTRB study questions the adequacy of the computer models used to

> project how the site's natural features, including geological and hydrologic

> formations, will protect the stored wastes. The report also raises concerns

> about how well casks designed to contain the wastes for the 10,000 years

> required by lawmakers will hold up to the potential tests of time, natural

> and manmade disasters.

>

> "Gaps in data and basic understanding cause important uncertainties in the

> concepts and assumptions on which the DOE's performance estimates are now

> based," NWTRB concludes. "Because of these uncertainties, the Board has

> limited confidence in current performance estimates generated by the DOE's

> performance assessment model."

>

> "The Board's view is that the technical basis for the DOE's repository

> performance estimates is weak to moderate at this time," the NWTRB

> concluded.

>

> However, "the Board makes no judgment on the question of whether the Yucca

> Mountain site should be recommended or approved for repository development,"

> the report says.

>

> The Department of Energy (DOE) says the NWTRB report provides "valuable

> independent confirmation of a critical conclusion" reached by the DOE after

> 24 years and $4 billion of research: that Yucca Mountain would make a

> suitable repository. Earlier this month, Energy Secretary Spencer Abraham

> announced that the agency intends to recommend to President George W. Bush

> that the Yucca Mountain site is scientifically sound and suitable to hold

> radioactive waste.

>

> Yucca Mountain is the only site now under consideration as a permanent

> repository for high level radioactive wastes, including spent fuel from the

> nation's 103 nuclear power plants. Nevada itself has no nuclear reactors.

>

> The NWTRB says that "eliminating all uncertainty associated with estimates

> of repository performance would never be possible at any repository site."

> Therefore, government officials and policymakers will have to determine "how

> much scientific uncertainty is acceptable," the board wrote.

>

> The Board recommended that the DOE "continue a vigorous, well integrated

> scientific investigation to increase its fundamental understanding of the

> potential behavior of the repository system."

>

> Under Secretary of Energy Robert Card said Thursday that the DOE is

> committed to reducing uncertainties about the safety of the Yucca Mountain

> site by using estimates of its performance projecting thousands of years in

> the future.

>

> "The [Energy] Secretary is committed to ensuring the safety of citizens of

> Nevada and of the nation, a timely recommendation on a repository, and an

> ongoing course of research that would last so long as the repository is in

> its operating and monitoring period," Card said, noting that research could

> continue "as much as 100-300 years after its opening."

>

> Card pointed out that the NWTRB did not disagree with the DOE that a

> repository at Yucca Mountain "would be safe throughout its operating and

> monitoring period, hundreds of years into the future." Card said there is no

> legitimate scientific organization that disagrees on this issue.

>

> If President Bush decides to recommend the site, the state of Nevada will

> have the opportunity to disapprove the recommendation. If Nevada disagrees

> with Bush's recommendation, Congress will be responsible for designating a

> repository site for development.

>

> "The Board's review of the 24 years of scientific study at Yucca Mountain is

> important, as is the decision on whether or not to address the country's

> nuclear waste problem at this time," Card said, "given the impacts to

> national security, environmental protection, and continued clean up of

> nuclear waste."

>

> Spent nuclear fuel and high level radioactive waste is now scattered across

> 131 sites in 39 states, Card noted.

>

> Many Nevada officials oppose the planned repository. On January 24, the city

> of Las Vegas and Clark County, Nevada filed court documents charging that

> DOE approval of the Yucca Mountain site will cause "immediate and

> irreparable harm" to Las Vegas.

>

> "Today's legal action represents our continued commitment to working with

> the governor and other elected officials as we pursue every option to keep

> Nevada from becoming the nation's nuclear waste dump," wrote Clark County

> Commission chair Dario Herrera in a written statement.

>

> The petition, filed in a federal appeals court, asks the court to delay the

> DOE's official recommendation that the site be approved. By law, Energy

> Secretary Richardson must wait until February 10 to recommend the site - 30

> days after he gave official notice to Nevada Governor Kenny Guinn of his

> intentions.

>

> The state of Nevada filed a lawsuit on December 17, 2001 to halt the Yucca

> Mountain Project The state alleges that Energy Department's ground rules for

> judging whether the site is suitable for nuclear waste storage are contrary

> to what Congress intended.

>

> If President Bush does approve a nuclear dump at Yucca Mountain, Governor

> Guinn plans to continue his opposition.

>

> "I can veto a decision by the President of the United States, and then

> within 90 days it has to go to both houses of Congress, the Senate and the

> House, and they have to overrule with at least a simple majority veto,"

> Guinn said earlier this month.

>

> More information about the Yucca Mountain Project is online at

> http://www.ymp.gov

>

> ------------------------ Yahoo! Groups Sponsor ---------------------~-->

> Get your FREE credit report with a FREE CreditCheck

> Monitoring Service trial

> http://us.click.yahoo.com/ACHqaB/bQ8CAA/ySSFAA/xbTolB/TM

> ---------------------------------------------------------------------~->

>

>

>

> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/



--

Coalition for Peace and Justice and the UNPLUG Salem Campaign; 321 Barr Ave.,

Linwood, NJ 08221; 609-601-8537 or 609-601-8583 (8583: fax, answer machine);

ncohen12@home.com  UNPLUG SALEM WEBSITE:  http://www.unplugsalem.org/  COALITION

FOR PEACE AND JUSTICE WEBSITE:  http:/www.coalitionforpeaceandjustice.org   The

Coalition for Peace and Justice is a chapter of Peace Action.

"First they ignore you; Then they laugh at you; Then they fight you; Then you

win. (Gandhi) "Why walk when you can fly?"  (Mary Chapin Carpenter)









************************************************************************

You are currently subscribed to the Radsafe mailing list. To unsubscribe,

send an e-mail to Majordomo@list.vanderbilt.edu  Put the text "unsubscribe

radsafe" (no quote marks) in the body of the e-mail, with no subject line. You can view the Radsafe archives at http://www.vanderbilt.edu/radsafe/