Principles for Safeguarding Nuclear Waste at Reactors
The following principles are based on the urgent need to protect the public from the threats posed by the current vulnerable storage of commercial irradiated fuel. The United States does not currently have a national policy for the permanent storage of high-level nuclear waste. The Obama administration has determined that the Yucca Mountain site, which has been mired in bad science and mismanagement, is not an option for geologic storage of nuclear waste. Unfortunately, reprocessing proponents have used this opportunity to promote reprocessing as the solution for managing our nuclear waste. Contrary to their claims, however, reprocessing is extremely expensive, highly polluting, and a proliferation threat, and will actually complicate the management of irradiated fuel. Nor will reprocessing obviate the need for, or "save space" in, a geologic repository"
Having spent many years researching and reporting on problems and solutions relating to the nuclear industry, and corresponding with numerous other anti-nuclear activists, I believe the best short-term solution for managing the nuclear materials that already exist comes in the way of HOSS, or hardened on-site storage. Why this was never utilized in the first place is a whole other rabbit hole.
Hardened on-site storage involves storing radioactive waste as safely as possible as close to the site of generation as possible, thereby reducing the number of sites contaminated. Transporting waste to off-site storage should only be done if the reactor site is unsuitable for a HOSS facility and transporting it increases its safety and security, for example, if radioactive material is dry-stored above ground in a flood-risk area. HOSS facilities are not a permanent waste solution, however, and the waste must be both retrievable (ie. not buried deep underground) and able to be monitored for early detection of radiation leaks and/or overheating.
In the long term, further research on natural geological conditions that retard the movement of radionuclides must also be undertaken, to increase the effectiveness of long-term storage and reduce the risk of leaks from stored radioactive waste materials.
I should point out, however, that my support for improving the storage mechanisms of radioactive waste is due to concerns over public safety and in no way indicates my support for the continuation of nuclear power or the production of more nuclear waste. But realistically, HOSS is more favorable than the current industry standard, which is simply burying radioactive waste and hoping for the best, often with disastrous consequences -- like at the failed WIPP experiment. Burying it reminds me of what a criminal would do to cover his tracks, or a guilt stricken adolescent perhaps.
The overarching truth of the nuclear industry is that, each time an unexpected disaster occurs, the industry learns something new and devastating at our expense, making nuclear experimentation the single most dangerous scientific experiment in human history. Then, following each new failure, we hear a resounding chorus of 'we didn't think that could happen' from short-sighted nuclear advocates. In fact, that is exactly what was said about the WIPP disaster currently unfolding in New Mexico. Following the initial radiation leak in 2014, which reached the city of Carlsbad, Russell Hardy, director of the Carlsbad Environmental Monitoring and Research Center stated "We don't know what happened inside that might have caused a release. We don't know why it happened and we don't know whether it could happen again."
And therein lies the problem. By claiming to be victims of the unexpected, nuclear advocates are attempting to placate themselves, and us, and prolonging their denial about the extreme dangers they are undertaking. But by their own words they reveal their faulty reasoning: they genuinely don't know enough to operate nuclear systems with the assurance of safety, proving that humanity should not be going forward with more nuclear experiments but decommissioning them altogether. Realistically the nuclear industry does not and cannotadequately foresee and mitigate all the variable risk factors inherent in nuclear operations -- as history has shown -- nor does it have the integrity to admit the full extent of the problem. It is therefore illogical that nuclear advocates rationalize its continuation.
Nuclear experimentation is truly a Pandora's Box, lighting fires that burn forever. Mired by a history of cancer, coverups and contamination, and full of hidden surprises that cannot be contained, we're only now beginning to count the cost. The only thing we know for sure is that the million year radioactive waste cycle needs to be acknowledged and addressed today so that we don't blindly pass on this problem to future generations tomorrow.
The Little Green Book of Revolution
Ethan Indigo Smith's The Little Green Book of Revolution is an inspirational book based on ideas of peaceful revolution, historical activism and caring for the Earth like Native Americans.
A pro-individual and anti-institutional look at the history of peaceful proactive revolution, it explores the environmental destruction inherent to our present energy distribution systems and offers ideas to counter the oligarchical institutions of the failing 'New World Order'.
The Little Green Book of Revolution is available here on Amazon.
(Note: You can view every article as one long page if you sign up as an Advocate Member, or higher).
1
1
1
