Time to Stop Yucca Mountain
Nevada Has Been Nuked Enough!
By Jim Bridgman
March/April 2002
Volume 39, Number 2
The federal government is nearing the final phase in the long battle
over where to dump tens of thousands of tons of highly radioactive nuclear
waste. In February, Secretary of Energy Spencer Abraham recommended
to President Bush that Yucca Mountain, Nevada be the "disposal site"
for this waste and the President made his recommendation to Congress.
Within 60 days, Nevada is expected to veto the recommendation, thereby
starting the clock for a congressional vote. Under the Nuclear Waste
Policy Act (NWPA), Congress has 90 days to defeat the Nevada veto with
a simple majority vote. With such a restricted timeframe, opponents
of Yucca Mountain need to do their utmost to educate fellow activists
and in turn educate members of Congress on this vital issue.
One of the primary organizations working on this issue is the Alliance
for Nuclear Accountability (ANA), which represents 34 organizations
united in their opposition to placing high-level radioactive waste in
Yucca Mountain. Over a decade ago, ANA adopted a position stating that
it "opposes disposal of nuclear waste at the Waste Isolation Pilot Plant
(WIPP) or Yucca Mountain because those sites were not selected by an
objective, scientific process. WIPP and Yucca have environmental and
safety problems which disqualify them as nuclear waste repositories."
In 1982, Congress specified that the selection of a repository should
be based primarily on geological characteristics that would ensure that
the nuclear waste would be safely isolated for thousands of years. Unable
to meet this standard, the DOE announced last December that it was changing
the rules to rely on the technology of human-made containers to keep
the waste safe, since geology cannot be relied on to contain the waste.
Under the changed rules, which downgrade the importance of the geological
barriers, the nuclear waste repository could just as easily be placed
in the basement of DOE headquarters in Washington as in the desert 90
miles northwest of Las Vegas.
The General Accounting Office reports that there are 293 outstanding
problems with the site that must be addressed before it can be licensed.
Most of these problems center around the mountain's geology and the
proposed containers that will supposedly keep the waste safe for at
least ten thousand years (a period much shorter than the hundreds of
thousands of years that the waste will remain dangerous). An earthquake
or volcano in the region is a distinct possibility, given the numerous
geological faults under Yucca Mountain. There are also concerns about
the rock itself, which is porous but also very brittle and would crack
easily in the event of an earthquake.
As a presidential candidate, George W. Bush made a campaign promise
stating, "I believe sound science, and not politics, must prevail in
the designation of any high-level nuclear waste repository." Now it
is clear that rather than follow the course of sound science, the DOE
has chosen to side with the nuclear industry and rush through a political
solution to a very hazardous problem.
Energy Secretary Spencer Abraham has more recently argued on behalf
of Yucca Mountain using the tragedies of September 11, claiming that
the country would be much safer if this waste was stored in one place
rather than many sites. However, the Bush Administration is encouraging
the re-licensing of nuclear power reactors, ensuring that dozens of
nuclear power plants will continue to generate high-level waste. This
waste will probably have to be stored onsite, given the limits of storage
capacity in Yucca Mountain.
Another major flaw in the Secretary's argument is that the transportation
of nuclear waste to Yucca Mountain would create thousands of potential
targets for terrorists. Waste from 44 states would be transported in
over 50,000 nuclear waste shipments made over the nation's highways
and railways, some in or near the Washington, DC area. By the DOE's
own analysis, 150-400 accidents are expected over the 20-30 year of
shipments, with potentially deadly results.
The recent crash of a chemical truck in the Baltimore Tunnel provides
an example of how things can go wrong. The DOE has not tested the containers
to handle the types of temperatures that can be reached in a chemical
fire. Nor have they designed the casks to withstand the use of explosives
by terrorists. These scenarios could mean the death of hundreds, perhaps
even thousands, the evacuation of large populations and the creation
of large "dead-zones" that would remain uninhabitable for thousands
of years.
Storing waste at Yucca Mountain could risk not only public safety,
but public health as well. Between 1951 and 1992, a total of 928 nuclear
bombs were exploded at the Nevada Test Site, causing a myriad of health
problems. A National Cancer Institute study in 1997 estimated that radioactive
iodine in the fallout from the atmospheric tests performed at the Nevada
Test Site in the 1950s will likely cause 10,000 to 75,000 additional
thyroid cancers in the United States. Now, as the Department of Energy
recommends that a minimum of 63,000 metric tons of highly dangerous
radioactive waste be disposed of in Yucca Mountain, the question must
be asked: Hasn't Nevada been nuked enough?
The Western Shoshone still live downwind and downstream from Yucca
Mountain and claim title to it under the 1863 Treaty of Ruby Valley.
The U.S. government claims the land was bought by the United States,
but the Western Shoshone never sold their land: the U.S. government
only "bought" the land by accepting the money on behalf of the Western
Shoshone under "federal trusteeship." By planning to site Yucca Mountain
on Shoshone grounds, the US government is not only committing environmental
racism, it is doing so on land that it does not rightfully own.
If these facts outrage you, the Alliance for Nuclear Accountability
invites you to join us in our annual DC Days, April 14-17 as we seek
to meet with key Senators to educate them on the many problems surrounding
Yucca Mountain. As part of DC Days, ANA is working with NIRS, Public
Citizen and others to organize a rally on the Capitol Steps for Tuesday,
April 16. Please come out to show our united opposition to disposing
of high-level waste in Yucca Mountain, Nevada. In the meantime, you
may learn more about the issue and write a letter to your Senators (if
you live outside DC) using the action packet on ANA's website posted
at
www. ananuclear.org/yuccapacket.html.
Jim Bridgman is the Program Director at the Alliance for Nuclear
Accountability
