What to do with Nuclear Waste? By Enmou Gao and Sam Liu

What is Nuclear Waste? Material containing the unusable radioactive byproducts of the scientific, military, and industrial applications of nuclear energy Since it is unusable and radioactive (dangerous), it must be processed and stored

How to Deal With Nuclear Wastes Nuclear waste requires sophisticated treatment and management in order to successfully isolate it from interacting with the biosphere Includes an initial treatment followed by a long- term management strategy involving storage or disposal of radioactive wastes

Initial Treatment Vitrification – stabilization of the waste into a form which will not react nor degrade Ion exchange – treatment with ions to concentrate the radioactivity into a small volume Synroc - synthetic rock that immobilize wastes Synroc 

Long Term Management Storage – high-level radioactive waste is stored temporarily in spent fuel pools and in dry cask storage facilities to allow the shorter-lived isotopes to decay before further handling Space disposal - use of high power lasers to launch "indestructible" containers into space Laser propulsion 

Remix & Return – blend high-level waste with uranium mine and mill tailings down to the level of the original radioactivity of the uranium ore, then replace it in empty uranium mines International repository –Australia or Russia as possible locations for high level waste deposits

Best Method? Geological disposal – encapsulation of wastes in engineered casks which are then placed and sealed within excavated rooms 500 to 1000 meters below ground surface Despite a long-standing agreement among experts that geological disposal can be safe and environmentally sound, a large part of the general public remains skeptical

Yucca Mountain After congressional deliberation, the Energy Department was ordered only to consider Nevada’s Yucca Mountain as a disposal site. Nevada objected strongly to this proposal, as relatively little is known about safe nuclear waste disposal Proposed Yucca Mountain schematic

Opposition to Waste Disposal Widespread opposition from NIMBY (Not in my backyard) and BANANA (Build absolutely nothing anywhere near anything) against depositing wastes Nevada and South Carolina rebelled against federal attempts to deposit wastes in their states The public does not trust that nuclear storage/deposit is safe or environmentally sound

Nevada’s Side of the Issue The federal government has spent more than $4 billion figuring out whether nuclear waste can be stored safely at Nevada’s Yucca Mountain There are fears that nuclear waste may seep into the water supply of Nevada, endangering the population Also, some Native-American groups are being forced off their land because they cannot “prove” that Yucca Mountain is of spiritual importance to them

Nevada has tried to block the Yucca Mountain proposal through a veto, but it was overridden in Congress and the override was signed by Bush in Since Nevada only has three electoral votes and therefore very little power political, it can only “cry” over the issue

Nevada and Interest Groups The state of Nevada has since teamed up with interest groups such as the Nuclear Information and Resource Service, and won a major victory in 2004 at the US Court of Appeals. –It cited that the EPA regulations were insufficient, and that their public health protection extending 10,000 years after burial were inadequate. This in effect halted progress on the site

South Carolina’s Stance South Carolina fears that it may be next on the nuclear waste “blacklist,” as it is already housing large quantities of the waste To protest, former Governor Jim Hodges has already staged a mock roadblock to demonstrate how he would have acted if trucks attempted to bring in spent plutonium –Compare this to George Wallace’s stand in front of a schoolhouse to prevent integration. Prime examples of dual federalism South Carolina has 8 electoral votes, so it actually has more political clout than Nevada, however compared to a total of 538 electoral votes, both states can be easily outvoted.

Jim Hodges Former South Carolina governor that has expressed his distaste of government. He knows that budget and politics has much more influence than promises, and takes Washington promises that South Carolina will not become a storage facility with a grain of salt.

With the implied powers clause in the Constitution, the federal government can say that it is ensuring the protection of the citizens of the United States by shielding them from radioactive waste. Also, because in some cases nuclear energy that is generated in one state is used for another, the commerce clause may also apply. Leading to a… DUAL-FEDERALISM STANDOFF! Further Complications

State or National Government? The national government could (should?) take control, but the states would be able to protest, each having power in their respective spheres None of the states want waste within their borders

What to Do?? The national government should be responsible for the waste, because the states that generate it may do not necessarily use all of the energy made Yucca Mountain, though a good place for now, may not be viable in the future. The goal is a long term storage facility (tens of thousands of years), and Yucca Mountain may be affected by earthquakes or volcanic activity.

END of the world?