An
Overwrought America 2007 Nuclear Issues In Our Times Essay Contest Winner
Congress amended the Nuclear Waste Policy Act in 1987 and directed the U.S. Department of Energy to study only one site for the possible storage site for nuclear waste: Yucca Mountain, NV. Due to having less power than Alaska and Texas (other two proposed sites) in the federal government, Nevada was chosen for the storage site. On July 9, 2002, the U.S. Senate made the final legislative decision approving the development of a repository at Yucca Mountain. The current procedure is awaiting the approval of a license from the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission no later than June 30, 2008.
There is no sufficient data that can support the claim that the Yucca Mountain repository could maintain for ten thousand years. An engineering failure or the ignorance of an engineer could result in failure to contain the radioactivity, and in a worse case scenario, a Chernobyl like incident, in which the flaws in the RMBK reactor design and the unawareness of operators led to the worst accident in nuclear power history. In regard to the proposed repository in Nevada, the incorrect spacing of containers or a fault in the structure of the system could rival Chernobyl in being the worst nuclear power accident in history. This malfunction could ensue in the spread of deadly radioactive contamination across the western United States.
Today, there are one hundred and twenty six sites that store nuclear excess across the United States. If passed, the proposal would move most of the excess solely to Yucca Mountain, NV. The Department of Energy’s plan is to ship byproduct on a regular basis for approximately thirty years with up to one hundred thousand shipments in total. Thus, citizens living along major transportation routes could expect on average, two to three shipments per day passing through their communities over a period of thirty years.[1] This is very perilous. Although this project affects Nevadans the most, others are predictably worried. The shipment of such nuclear waste will pass through residential areas via trucks, trains, and/or barges. Some states, including Missouri, believe that in light of the terrorist attacks of September 11, 2001, there is a possibility of assaults on this cargo.[2] If there was to be a terrorist attack, whether it is from inside or outside the United States, this nuclear crisis would lead to America’s next medical epidemic. In addition, another drawback to the transportation of the byproduct is that other states across the country will have a huge financial burden due to the expenditure on security needed for the transportation.
On Memorial Day of 2002, in Potterville, MI, a train was derailed and a propane spill proceeded. In the ensuing fire, the temperatures reached 3,400 degrees Fahrenheit and led to the burning of propane for days. Nuclear waste containers are only able to withstand a 1,475 degree Fahrenheit fire for only 30 minutes.[3] If a train was to derail and a consequent fire proceeded while carrying nuclear waste to Yucca Mountain, it would cause lethal contaminants to be released into the air; this would evidently overwhelm Americans nationwide.
Furthermore, by the time the shipping of the byproduct is initiated, there will already be more excess nuclear byproduct across America than the approximated seventy thousand metric ton capacity of the Yucca Mountain repository. By the year 2035, there will be a projected 119,000 metric tons of waste in the US alone.[4] By that time, the United States will have an identical problem to that of today. Furthermore, when and if the Nevada repository is filled, other states will have to worry about future legislation regarding the storage of new waste. The national government will have precedent to override the states’ objections to such new storage sites.
Considering the fact that Yucca Mountain is only fourteen miles from Amargosa Desert and only one hundred miles northwest of Las Vegas, many Southwestern states fears that contamination may spread into the water supply surrounding the geographical location of the site. In the atomic bombings of Hiroshima and Nagasaki, over one hundred and forty thousand died from radiation poisoning and hundreds died exclusively due to minuscule radiation exposure. Moreover, everything in both cities was destroyed and left no sanitary water.[5] Even today, the Japanese are experiencing repercussions from the Hiroshima & Nagasaki atomic bombs.
Another difficulty which both Nevadans and non-Nevadans will have to face is the fact that the proposed site of the storage is in an area of seismic activity. Seismic activity around Yucca could open the nuclear waste repository into the air causing nuclear contamination throughout the southwest; winds would carry the deadly substances to not only Nevadans but to residents of Arizona and Utah. This has happened in our history; in 1953, at the Nevada Test site, atomic bomb testing caused off-site fallout produced by the bomb. Winds carried this fallout one hundred and thirty five miles to Saint Georgetown, Utah. A 1962 United States Atomic Energy Commission report found that children of Saint Georgetown were exposed to the deadly thyroid of radioiodine. A 1997 National Cancer Institute report found that the fallout caused as much as seventy thousand cases of thyroid cancer alone across the lower states.[6] This is just one of the many problems not only affecting Nevadans but affecting all other continental states of the US.
This proposed site is not suitable for such a repository; it endangers both Nevadans and non-Nevadans alike. The problems with the transportation of waste, repository site itself, seismic activity, wind patterns, and other future problems with Yucca Mountain are all devastating facts that lead to one conclusion. We must rethink the harmful things we do in society that endanger not only one group of people, but all people; this nuclear crisis reveals an overwrought America.
Works Cited
“Yucca Mountain Standards” Environmental Protection Agency 13 December, 2006<http://www.epa.gov/radiation/yucca>
Civilian Radioactive Waste Management 13 December, 2006
Sierran. Hengerson, Roy. “Yucca Mountain Nuclear Waste Dump: Bad for Missouri as Well as Nevada” July August 2002 18 December, 2006 <http://missouri.sierraclub.org/SierranOnline/JulyAugust2002/06YuccaMountainstorybyHengerson_nuc.htm>
“Environmental Encylopedia” 13 December, 2006 <http://findarticles.com/p/articles/mi_km4449>
“Radioactive Waste Project” Nuclear Information and Resource Service. 29 June, 2002 18 December, 2006 <http://www.nirs.org/alerts/06-29-2002/1>
Environmental Protection Agency.com 13 December, 2006 <http://www.epa.gov/radiation/yu cca/index.html>
Jeffery St. Clair.” Downwinders Be Damned.” CounterPunch. 18 December, 2006 <http://www.counterpunch.org/stclair03302005.html>
U.S. Department of Energy.gov 1000 Independence Avenue SW, Washington, DC 20585 (202) 586-6151, Fax: (202) 586-0956,<http://www.doe.gov>
Rosenberg, Jennifer “Hiroshima & Nagasaki” About:20th Century History 18 December, 2006 <http://history1900s.about.com/od/worldwarii/a/hiroshima.htm>
Yucca Mountain Project.gov, PO Box 364629, North Las Vegas, NV 89036-8629 (800) 225-6972, Fax: (702) 295-5222, 18 December, 2006 <http://www.ymp.gov>
Gerrard, Michael B. “Fairness in Toxic and Nuclear Waste Siting”. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press, 1994.
Rahm, Dianne, “Toxic Waste and Environmental Policy in the Twenty-first Century United States.” Jefferson, NC: McFarland & Co., 2002.
“The Explosion of the Reactor” Chernobyl.Info Retrieved on 19 January 2007 <http://www.chernobyl.info/index.php?userhash=19247596&navID=10&lID=2>