Yucca Mountain

User avatar
Kirk Sorensen
Posts: 4064
Joined: Nov 30, 2006 3:30 pm
Location: Alabama
Contact:

Re: Yucca Mountain

Post by Kirk Sorensen » May 10, 2018 11:22 am

Nuclear Waste Policy Amendments Act

This just passed the US House of Representatives 340 to 72.

http://thehill.com/policy/energy-enviro ... te-project

User avatar
Kirk Sorensen
Posts: 4064
Joined: Nov 30, 2006 3:30 pm
Location: Alabama
Contact:

Re: Yucca Mountain

Post by Kirk Sorensen » May 13, 2018 5:11 pm

Yucca Mountain’s Lone Ranger Finally Corrals House Attention
Visiting Nevada’s Yucca Mountain in 2011 was like walking through a ghost town, Rep. John Shimkus recalled in an interview this week. It was the year after the Obama administration surrendered to fervent local opposition and halted work by the Department of Energy to prepare the site to store the nation’s commercial nuclear waste, even though Congress designated it for that purpose in the 1987 Nuclear Waste Policy Act. By the time Shimkus arrived, empty desks and cubicles sat abandoned where hundreds of people had worked on those preparations, which included submitting an application to the Nuclear Regulatory Commission. “They just locked the doors and told everyone to take their personal items and leave,” he said. “When you went back, there [were] still coffee cups on the desk.”
I've never been any great fan of Yucca Mountain but the way that the Obama Administration dealt with it was downright criminal. But like most things they did they encountered no resistance from the pliant media. Billions and billions of dollars utterly wasted.
A military veteran and former high school U.S. government history teacher, he says his Yucca defense is also driven by his advocacy for law and order. He was furious, he said, when he perceived that the Obama administration ignored the law — the 1987 Nuclear Waste Policy Act in which Congress determined that Yucca Mountain should be the nation’s nuclear waste repository. “To have insider politics, presidential politics break the law, that’s what really got me fired up … just the total disregard for the law by the executive branch,” Shimkus said in the interview.

jagdish
Posts: 2290
Joined: Apr 19, 2008 1:06 am

Re: Yucca Mountain

Post by jagdish » May 17, 2018 2:14 pm

There is enough fissile material lying in once used nuclear fuel in the world to serve as nucleus for recycling of U238 and introduction of a thorium cycle. What we see is the biggest holder intent on making a problem out of an asset and UK and Japan fizzling out after separating the fissile.
It will be left to old nuclear Russia and China to carry on the work. Non-nuclear are brow beaten by nuclear haves in developing a sensible nuclear policy.



User avatar
Kirk Sorensen
Posts: 4064
Joined: Nov 30, 2006 3:30 pm
Location: Alabama
Contact:

Re: Yucca Mountain

Post by Kirk Sorensen » Sep 13, 2018 1:39 pm

Yucca Mountain Halted Again as GOP Aims to Retain Senate
Heller’s legislative win was not universally celebrated by GOP lawmakers. A top Yucca advocate pointed to Heller’s race as the reason for stripping out the funding. “As we’ve allowed for a decade now, a single senator’s short-term political calculations again triumphed over long-term, bipartisan policy priorities,” Illinois Rep. John Shimkus said in a statement. The blame and disappointment for that outcome, Shimkus said, fall on House GOP leadership for failing “to stand strong on the House position, as well as the president’s position, on funding in the appropriations process.”

User avatar
Tim Meyer
Posts: 359
Joined: Dec 22, 2015 8:40 pm
Location: Florida

Re: Yucca Mountain

Post by Tim Meyer » Sep 15, 2018 4:51 pm

The inaction comes with a consequence. More than 80,000 metric tons and counting of high-level nuclear waste is stored at nuclear reactor sites in more than 35 states. The longer the waste sits, the more the government will be forced to pay to compensate nuclear power producers for its inaction. Estimates place the government’s liability from nuclear waste at $34 billion and growing.

“I ask these communities not to give up hope,” Shimkus said. “Next Congress, with a new speaker and a new Appropriations chairman, we will have another opportunity to do our job and put policy ahead of politics.”
I don't understand the ignorance. I thought the technical designation is "spent nuclear fuel" according to the original US Naval design ill-suited for terrestrial fission energy. It's not "waste". If NPPs had co-located MCSFR facilities, for example, their onsite SNF would fuel the MCSFR. SNF remains fuel. The mentality of the people in power is puzzling. Talk about an asset in negative terms is an invocation: the bad attitude converts something valuable into waste.

Yucca can be used for something else.
"Those who say it can’t be done are usually interrupted by others doing it."

—James Arthur Baldwin, American novelist, essayist, playwright, poet, and social critic


User avatar
Kirk Sorensen
Posts: 4064
Joined: Nov 30, 2006 3:30 pm
Location: Alabama
Contact:

Re: Yucca Mountain

Post by Kirk Sorensen » Nov 07, 2018 10:23 am

Katie Tubb column: Congress dithers, Americans pay: What a (nuclear) waste
Like many Americans, you might not have an opinion on nuclear waste policy. But when you consider what it’s costing taxpayers, that could change. How much? About $7 billion to date (yes, billion with a “b” — 12 zeroes) and years of wasted time, with the near certainty of another $27 billion to $50 billion on the line, all courtesy of the forced generosity of, well, people like you and your neighbors. Some history is helpful. In the 1970s and ’80s, Congress began the work of determining what to do with radioactive waste and spent nuclear fuel — not just from commercial nuclear power reactors, but from defense activities such as powering the Navy’s nuclear submarines and cleaning up Cold War and World War II nuclear weapons sites. Congress directed the Department of Energy to collect and store waste starting no later than 1998. It chose some federal land at Yucca Mountain in Nevada to be the destination, so long as it was deemed safe by the Nuclear Regulatory Commission. With that vision, the department entered into contracts with commercial nuclear power companies, whose customers in 35 states paid the DOE roughly $750 million a year to fulfill this service.

jagdish
Posts: 2290
Joined: Apr 19, 2008 1:06 am

Re: Yucca Mountain

Post by jagdish » Nov 08, 2018 12:55 am

As merely storing of used fuel costs so much, it is better to recycle it. Till such time as better storage is available, it could be stored on decommissioned ships. A decommissioned carrier with its nuclear power could be used as floating recycling facility. Transuranics, mainly RG plutonium could be used as fissile with thorium. Recovered uranium could be stored as billets. Ways can be found in peace as in war.


User avatar
Kirk Sorensen
Posts: 4064
Joined: Nov 30, 2006 3:30 pm
Location: Alabama
Contact:

Re: Yucca Mountain

Post by Kirk Sorensen » Jan 11, 2019 3:05 pm

Groundhog Day in new Congress: Yucca push coming
Illinois Republican John Shimkus, the House’s chief proponent of building a nuclear waste repository at Yucca Mountain, will continue to look for an opportunity to advance the project, but he believes the locus of the fight is now in the GOP-controlled Senate.

jagdish
Posts: 2290
Joined: Apr 19, 2008 1:06 am

Re: Yucca Mountain

Post by jagdish » Jan 11, 2019 8:15 pm

Will logic get ahead of emotion?

User avatar
Kirk Sorensen
Posts: 4064
Joined: Nov 30, 2006 3:30 pm
Location: Alabama
Contact:

Re: Yucca Mountain

Post by Kirk Sorensen » Jan 29, 2019 6:22 pm

The high cost of nuclear waste politics
Many Americans know that President Obama and former Nevada Sen. Harry Reid illegally shutdown the Yucca Mountain nuclear-waste repository in 2010. At the time, the shutdown left 65,000 metric tons of high-level radioactive commercial spent fuel stranded in temporary storage at nuclear energy plants across 39 states, including the Columbia Generating Station in Washington State. The nationwide stockpile grew to 80,960 metric tons by last count in December 2017. What most American taxpayers don’t know is that they are assessed $800 million annually in Department of Justice payments to nuclear energy utilities because of the federal government’s breach of contract to pick up and dispose of the spent nuclear fuel. The DOJ uses taxpayer funds to pay the utility companies that sue the government for damages every year for not picking up the spent fuel. If that’s not enough, taxpayers also don’t realize they’ve been saddled with nearly $500 billion in financial liability for managing 57 million gallons of nuclear waste at the Hanford Site from its past production of plutonium for nuclear weapons during World War II and the Cold War era. This waste is stored in aging, leaking underground tanks that present a growing safety risk to the Columbia River and residents living nearby.

jagdish
Posts: 2290
Joined: Apr 19, 2008 1:06 am

Re: Yucca Mountain

Post by jagdish » Jan 30, 2019 10:24 pm

Why can’t people take obvious and easy steps. The liquid waste could have been dried and solids and radioactive water stored separately.
Used fuel could be separately stored into metal components brickets and bulk ceramic bricks by remote handling and stored in compact lots till ready for recycling.

Post Reply