Yucca Mountain Nuclear Waste Storage Facility

There are 66,000 tons of radioactive waste in storage in the United States ( The Salt Lake Tribune). What to do with so much hazardous material? This is a massive problem, with no easy answer. One possible solution that has been in the works since 1987 is a proposed containment facility at Yucca Mountain, Nevada.


It started with the Nuclear Waste Policy Act in 1982, giving the federal government responsibility for finding a place to store America’s waste. Yucca mountain was selected for in-depth study in 1987. ( Office of Civilian Radioactive Waste Management (OCRWM)) Since then, the government has spent billions of dollars on analyzing the site and planning for the most advanced waste containment methods possible. The site is at the center of a huge controversy.


Yucca Mountain is on federal land and scientists mostly agree that the geology of the area – the make-up of the terrain, depth of the water table, and other things – would keep the waste safe (US EPA Radiation FAQ). Other experts say, though, that there are dangerous fault lines and earthquake risk. Recent studies have also shown that water moves through the mountain faster than originally thought, raising questions about potential contamination of the groundwater. ( LA Times) This scientific conflict is one problem facing the plan. The government says the site is safe for the waste; others disagree. The US DOE seems firmly in favor of the plan, but the new president and his Secretary of Energy are against it. In President Obama’s budget proposal, he is asking for the minimum amount of funding for the Yucca Mountain Project to keep it just barely afloat. ( U.S. News & World Report)


There are other options for dealing with the waste, including short term storage facilities, a central storage facility in another location, or reprocessing the waste to make weapons-grade plutonium. I believe that the best option would be to create a Yucca Mountain-like repository in another location. The need for some high tech long-term waste storage is apparent, a facility served and protected by the best that our science has to offer. The waste would also be safer in a top-of-the-line facility rather than wherever the companies can find space for it, spread across the country.


Although Yucca Mountain seemed to be a feasible site when it was chosen in 1987, new geological and scientific discoveries have put that choice in question. The main problem, though, in my opinion, is the maelstrom of public conflict over the site. This sort of facility, no matter how well protected, would be vulnerable to the vagaries of time and geological change. It should not be forced onto a community that doesn’t want it. There have been effective waste storage facilities, successfully sited in amenable communities. ( U.S. News & World Report) There has been so much conflict over Yucca Mountain already, I don’t believe that the community will ever accept the facility.

And yet, there needs to be some kind of solution. We (as a country) are planning to build more than 30 new nuclear reactors. The problem is only going to get bigger.
I believe that it is time to cut our losses in Yucca Mountain, and turn our attention to a new solution that could be better sold to the public.