U.S. official says Yucca nuclear dump not an option

VIENNA Tue Jun 21, 2011 1:25am EDT

VIENNA (Reuters) - A controversial Nevada site is not an option for storing toxic waste from nuclear power plants, a senior U.S. official said, dismissing Republican efforts to revive the Bush-era plan.

"We do not see Yucca Mountain as a solution here," U.S. Deputy Energy Secretary Daniel Poneman said on the sidelines of a major international meeting to strengthen global nuclear safety after Japan's Fukushima atomic crisis.

"It is time to turn the page and try to find a better set of solutions," he told Reuters in an interview on Monday.

The world has struggled with what to do about nuclear waste for decades, but Japan's nuclear disaster three months ago brought fresh attention to the dilemma as much of the waste is now stored in pools next to reactors.

The plan to house atomic waste at Yucca was approved by then-President George W. Bush in 2002 but opposed by people in Nevada who feared it could pollute water and hurt tourism.

Last year, the Obama administration asked the Nuclear Regulatory Commission to pull an application to license the dump, and named a panel of experts to look for other options.

But this month, Republican lawmakers said the regulator had found the site suitable for storing nuclear waste, despite administration claims the location was unsafe.

Poneman said: "I think any policy -- the success of which can only be measured over many decades -- can only succeed with strong bipartisan support and strong support from the communities affected."

"It was equally clear that Yucca mountain was not going to have that kind of support," he added.

NUCLEAR SUPPORT

The head of the U.N. International Atomic Energy Agency opened the week-long nuclear safety meeting by calling for countries to do risk assessments of their reactors within 18 months, to make sure they could withstand extreme natural events of the kind that crippled Fukushima.

Yukiya Amano also proposed strengthened international safety checks, or peer reviews, on reactors worldwide organized by the U.N. body. The plan may meet resistance from those that want to keep safety an issue strictly for national authorities.

Poneman said the United States, which has 104 nuclear reactors of the world total of some 440 and is carrying out post-Fukushima safety checks, was a "strong supporter" of peer reviews and it would study Amano's proposals closely.

"We have called in the IAEA many times to provide additional oversight," he said.

"I think the question that is going to be presented is whether the mandate of the IAEA is going to run to that additional level," Poneman said, when asked whether such reviews by the agency could become mandatory.

The United States still sees nuclear energy as having a "very important role to play in a low carbon future," he said, referring to U.S. government loan guarantees of more than $8 billion to support the construction of nuclear reactors.

"It is not a decision for governments to make but rather for utilities to make when those reactors will be economically viable to build. But it is certainly something that we are still supporting," Poneman said.

(Editing by Clarence Fernandez)

We welcome comments that advance the story through relevant opinion, anecdotes, links and data. If you see a comment that you believe is irrelevant or inappropriate, you can flag it to our editors by using the report abuse links. Views expressed in the comments do not represent those of Reuters. For more information on our comment policy, see http://blogs.reuters.com/fulldisclosure/2010/09/27/toward-a-more-thoughtful-conversation-on-stories/
Comments (4)
morbas wrote:
Few options really,
a) Use magnetic launchers to put the radioactive waist on the Sun (and any terrorists as well).
b) Find a path to the center of the Earth for atomic waste. This would maintain/invigorate our Gaia Sphere carbon cycle essential to life on Earth.
Far fetched Atomic power solutions.

Jun 21, 2011 6:40am EDT  --  Report as abuse
JamVee wrote:
I like Morbas option a) above

Jun 21, 2011 10:33am EDT  --  Report as abuse
davelv wrote:
Poneman said: “I think any policy — the success of which can only be measured over many decades — can only succeed with strong bipartisan support and strong support from the communities affected.”

Exactly what Yucca Mountain has. It was created and confirmed with strong bipartisan Congressional support. And the local affected communities do want the repository. The neighboring 5 counties as well as the host county which is bigger than 9 states all want the repository. It is Las Vegans over 100 miles away and the state level politiicans in Nevada and California who don’t want a repository.

Let’s be honest. Yucca Mountain was closed down as payola to Reid’s relection and to Obama’s election.

Jun 22, 2011 8:20pm EDT  --  Report as abuse
This discussion is now closed. We welcome comments on our articles for a limited period after their publication.