So routine now, one can hardly keep track;
After 30 years, five presidents and $13 billion dollars, the Obama administration is pulling the plug on Yucca Mountain, the federal government’s proposed storage facility for America’s nuclear waste.
For a candidate who said he wanted to get politics out of science, critics find the president’s decision hypocritical and shortsighted, at a time when nuclear energy is making a comeback.
[…]
Many in Congress are also angry with Obama’s decision to close Yucca Mountain. “Many a utility facility across the country is going to have to close down if we don’t get a handle on it because waste is piling up in those communities with reactors,” said Rep. Jerry Lewis, (R-Calif). Lawmakers like Lewis and Sen. John McCain say with no long term repository for America’s nuclear waste, the re-licensing of existing plants and construction of new ones is in jeopardy, just as the nation reconsiders nuclear energy as a clean and dependable source of electricity.
In the meantime, the nation’s utilities have asked the federal government to suspend the nuclear waste disposal tax — now running about $750 million a year — and may want a refund for the money already spent on the now failed yucca facility. So far, officials representing the department of energy have said no.
You know, I’ve long thought that nuclear waste storage was a perfect fit for Saskatchewan. Not only could we generate billions in revenue, it’d prompt the science-averse NDP vote to relocate amongst their brethern in BC.
Ship it to Africa. That’s where all “recycled” computer screens, TV’s and energy-efficient light bulbs already go. Bit of nuclear waste on the side won’t be noticed.
With double digit unemployment, I would think the people of Nevada would welcome 5000 jobs……or maybe Obama is only talking to Senator Reid….who WILL lose his seat in 2010!!
The mole is destroying the country from within.
What should be done to those, who voted him into the office?
We already have too many NDPers in the Left Coast.
Send them to the White House where they will feel like they are on the far right of the political spectrum.
That would be nuclear torture for them.
So, the Democrats won’t let new refineries be built, won’t allow offshore drilling for oil, won’t allow exploration for oil in the rest of the U.S. because it’s “environmentally sensitive”, won’t even think about nuclear, and will ONLY allow expensive and unreliable ‘renewable’ forms of energy, except hydro because it destroys rivers and habitat unnaturally. Do you think they are actually trying to starve the U.S. of energy? Yep.
Umm, nuclear waste is bad, bad, mmm-kay?
Besides, it’s too close to South Park.
I’m torn on this topic.
That over 10 billion has been spent and not a single
ounce of waste has been stored is a scandal and the best proof of why government should never get into the operation of any enterprise makes me cheerful.
That it also means significantly higher power costs in the US and thus hardship for millions of people saddens and discourages me.
Had Obama done it for the first point above would be one thing, but clearly he has done it for a completely different – and idiotic one. The long term cost of this will be several times that which has already been spent.
Ignorant asses.
The sad part is that I know people who were actually naive enough to believe the “get politics out of science” line.
Of course, what I knew, and what was obvious to everyone who wasn’t a partisan, was that all that meant was “get politics in science on the approved side“.
As long as there’s politics, and state-funded science and state money being spent as the result of “science”, politics will be in science.
(For that matter, too many people forget that science can’t tell us what to do; it can only tell us what to do to achieve a clearly defined goal, and tell us what (some of) the costs are.
It can’t tell us what we should want to do, or what we should value over what, or how much.
It can tell us how much nuclear power will cost, and what wastes it will produce, and how much it will cost to dispose of those wastes to a standard X. It can’t tell us what X should be set to, thus leaving it open to politics to demand No Possible Risk…)
What?!? Send more NDPers to BC?!?
We are already drowning in Anorexia Envirosa living dead. I see them every day. We don’t need anymore!!!
Seriously, deep in the Canadian shield is the place to put this stuff. At one time quite a bit of nuclear waste storage testing was happening just outside Lac du Bonnet in Manitoba. Would be a boon to the region.
Better yet, put it back in the ground in Northern Sask where it is mined in the first place. Save on back hauling, as they already have a fleet of uranium ore trucks they could use.
Three-eyed fish are a much larger threat to humanity than the pending climate catastrophe; this is why we shouldn’t use nuclear power to combat global warming. It doesn’t stop at the fish, the nuclear slippery slope inevitably leads to three-eyed children.
OWE the humanity! I shudder to think of the massive burden on Obamacare if the government must provide eye exams for these little bastards.
Time to add “mmm-kay?” to the spam filter.
The right approach may be to cut power to the White House and the Capitol. Pelosi without a mike..in the dark. I’d vote for it.
The US consumes more than 100 quadrillion BTUs of primary energy per year. That energy has to come from somewhere.
The technologically feasible choices are as follows:
– Coal: currently 57% of US electrical generation; domestic, cheap, efficient, polluting (yes, even ‘clean coal’)
– Oil: comes from unstable regimes like Venezuela, Saudi Arabia and Canada; better than coal, but cannot be domestically exploited due to the environmental lobby
– Gas: good but expensive; using it to generate electricity is like running your lawnmower on Glenlivet
– Hydroelectric: Outstanding but limited by (a) available water, and (b) environmental opposition
– “Green power”: not technologically feasible. Despite hundreds of billions in investments over 30 years, wind/solar/biomass accounts for about 1% of US primary power production
– Nuclear: virtually unlimited fuel; superbly dense; lowest polluting power source known – BUT adamantly opposed by the Luddite Left.
So my question is: where does the 100 quads come from? Because the alternative is, quite frankly, a new Dark Age.
The Athabascan basin is perfect for nuclear waste disposal.
1. It’s remote.
2. It’s in the Canadian Shield, one of the toughest and most stable geological formations on the face of the earth.
3. Many geological formations are already radioactive from naturally occuring uranium.
4. They can use an old uranium mine.
“critics find the president’s decision hypocritical and shortsighted”
Gee. It’s almost like during the campaign he was lying or something.
You don’t want to use the old uranium mine, because it may be re-opened in the future. Better to dig a dedicated hole for it.
Who says Detroit is useless anymore?
Might be a nice little earner for the Michigan Mafia.
It is incredibly sad. The United States has been
a truly great country, and reasonably decent given
its great power.
And now it’s committing suicide. Or, more accurately,
about 35% of Americans are killing
the other 65% before drinking the cyanide-laced
Koolade themselves. Jonestown writ large.
Gore must be smiling . . more taxpayer funding to get poured into “sustainable” firms he has invested in.
> You know, I’ve long thought that nuclear waste
> storage was a perfect fit for Saskatchewan.
There’s plenty of room between Lorne Calvert’s ears. Would also be safe: Nothing has ever been known to penetrate his skull so I can’t see anything escaping, either.
how hot is that stuff anyway?
I still dont get why with all the ancient rock formations all over the world why it cant be encased in recycled glass or something and left 1/2 mile inside a mountain.
leave it up to the politishuns with their ‘anything to get re-elected’ mentality to screw it all up.
what better place than this in Obamas home continent.
http://antwrp.gsfc.nasa.gov/apod/ap050220.html
grok your “won’t do” list is absolutely correct but was missing one item-democrats have designated CO2 as a pollutant! As others have pointed out, they do not have the schooling to realize that each of us generate CO2 (essential for all plant growth) with each breath.
Are they trying to starve the US of energy? -undeniably, but I believe the goal is much scarier, they want to destroy the US economically for generations and have made remarkable progress in one year.
Their leader is wont to compare himself to Lincoln, that’s a big joke, but perhaps he should be careful not to end his days as Lincoln did. I can foresee that some factions will not allow this wanton destruction of a great nation.
Canada should build dozens of nuclear reactors along with waste recycling and storage facilities and become a huge exporter to the US.
Provide them with kWh’s when the wind isn’t blowing, take the waste they already have at a huge profit, recycle it and power the plants that replace the one’s they aren’t building.
But sadly Canadians are to interested in subsidizing their own power bill through their own taxes and economic drag to do anything as resourceful.
I thought the Republicans were the party of NO!!
Obama cannot make the tough decisions and the ones he does make he gets completely bass ackwards , his decisions seem to be as random as results from a Magic 8 Ball…I wonder…
Should I send More troops to Afghanistan? (shake) “Concentrate and ask again” (shake,shake) “Better not tell you now”
Should I close Yucca Mountain and have 100 nuclear waste sites instead of one and waste millions of taxpayer dollars spent to date? (shake)”Yes – definitely”
I love you Magic 8 Ball!
Did the elections last night mean the voters are against my agenda? (shake) “As I see it, yes” uhmm I was not concentrating (shake,shake) “Without a doubt” (shake,shake,shake) “My sources say no”
I love you Magic 8 Ball!
Toxic waste facilities tend to be money losers, and I suppose nuclear waste facilities have similar problems. The Swan Hills facility, in Alberta, has not panned out. I think the main problem is transportation to the facility. It’s a perfect site, with a layer of clay that would hold any waste for thousands of years. Getting there seems to be the real problem,
didn’t stop the US NAVY from dumping de-comissioned ship/sub reactors in the middle of Washington State, out in the open!
coulda swore i saw that, from a blog like this.
photos from google earth, with captions noting which ship/sub reactor ……….
So what to do with a left over 10 billion dollar hole in the ground?
World’s biggest mushroom farm, maybe?
You know, I’ve long thought that nuclear waste storage was a perfect fit for Saskatchewan. Not only could we generate billions in revenue, it’d prompt the science-averse NDP vote to relocate amongst their brethren in BC.
That just might work. I wonder Kate how these Luddites will feel when their computers crash for good. No Power no play. As the TV’s shut down, don’t they think people will notice?
http://youth.greenparty.ca/en
thought you might get a kick outta this,
the Greens are wilted
clik on the top link on google may have to click twice but it works
but don’t call me late for diner
guess u already know the Greens are wilted, i been away for a while, actually one night was in the slammer, before anyone mentions so
Google ‘Oklo fossil reactors’ to see how mother nature took care of the waste from the naturally occuring reactors in Gabon Africa 2 billion years ago.
“But if we fail the whole world will sink into a new dark age made more sinister … by the lights of perverted science.” Winston Churchill. In the Spectator, Charles Moore wonders if he foresaw the replacement of incandescent light bulbs by CFL’s.
Would bee’s wax be politically incorrect? Would it be seen as the enslavement of insects?
It’s only “waste” until someone finds a use for it. (Petroleum was a waste product until someone invented the internal combustion engine.) The whole point behind the “reduce, re-use and re-cycle” mantra is that there is still some value to be found in the things we throw away.
The same principle applies to nuclear “waste”. What comes out of today’s nuclear plants may not be usable right now, but science and technology continue to advance (in spite of the obstacles being raised to prevent it), and some day some bright boy at MIT (or more likely some university in India) will find a use for some of those actinides and isotopes, and when that happens they will stop being “waste” – they will instead become a staggeringly valuable asset.
That’s why Kate is right to use the term “storage” rather than “disposal”. We do NOT want to put that stuff anywhere that we can’t retrieve it. And if we in Canada can be paid to take possession of something that we could eventually sell back to the original owners, that sounds like a win-win-win situation to me.
Lorne Calvert! Was there such a person? I thought he was in a nightmare I had. Next thing you’re gonna tell is we send him a cheque every month as well as one to J.C. the other nightmare.
Plutonium will be used to power robotic spacecraft, making a long term storage facility for it useless…
I think that Government Marijuana operation deep in the abandoned mine below Flin Flon would be great. (http://www.reuters.com/article/healthNews/idUSTRE56L6Z320090722
It might actually add some zing to the government pot production; and perhaps if suitably irradiated they would never have to start up Chalk River again either!
The Cap & Trade gangsters don’t want to compete with any type of technology, starting with Nuclear.. As Barbara Boxer has said “the market doesn’t want nuclear”
The EU plan is to drain the USA of all wealth, and to do that they must control all innovation. Once Cap & trade passes; oil (drill baby drill ), & coal sources will be encouraged as that will increases total CO2 costs. The Envios
will fight that, and we will be caught in a phoney conflict that the Cap & trade market will manipluate at will. We will be screwed
Only an imbecile lizard (obama) would suggest we need to store Nuclear waste for thousands of years. Future nuclear science MUST develop uses for that energy.. France is not missing a beat…no competition..
How do you think Gore & Soros are going to make thier Green Machine print Money?
Let’s see: the democrats are promising nuclear power to RINOs to support their crap and tax legislation … as long as the solution to nuclear waste is available!! Hmmm …?
BTW There is no such thing as nuclear waste. One recycles!