Stories
Slash Boxes
Comments

SoylentNews is people

posted by azrael on Saturday August 30 2014, @03:15PM   Printer-friendly
from the defer-problems-to-the-future dept.

The New York Times is reporting that the US Nuclear Regulatory Commission has decided that nuclear waste from power plants can be stored on site, above ground, in containers that can be maintained and guarded forever.

In her statement, the Chairwoman recognized that this unanimous decision makes it less likely that any permanent storage facility will ever be approved by Congress:

“If you make the assumption that there will be some kind of institution that will exist, like the Nuclear Regulatory Commission, that will assure material stays safe for hundreds or thousands of years, there’s not much impetus for Congress to want to deal with this issue. Personally, I think that we can’t say with any certainty what the future will look like. We’re pretty damned poor at predicting the future.”

The decision allows the resumption of Nuclear Licensing for new reactors, and expansion of existing plants by allowing indefinite use of above ground storage that can be monitored repaired and maintained essentially forever.

In June 2012, a court ruled that the commission had not done its homework in studying whether the waste could be stored on an interim basis while awaiting the creation of underground storage facilities. As a result, the commission froze much of its licensing activity two years ago.

The new storage plan is exactly the same as the old storage plan, but drops any pretense of there being a central underground storage facility, while at the same time mumbling some vague plans for 2048.

 
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.
Display Options Threshold/Breakthrough Mark All as Read Mark All as Unread
The Fine Print: The following comments are owned by whoever posted them. We are not responsible for them in any way.
  • (Score: 5, Interesting) by mrchew1982 on Saturday August 30 2014, @06:22PM

    by mrchew1982 (3565) on Saturday August 30 2014, @06:22PM (#87614)

    Yucca mountain is about as good as it gets. A college professor told me that they have advanced pretty far on the project and are just waiting for a very senior statesman to retire so that approval for it can be pushed through the legislature.

    The other project that you are talking about for the long term storage of radioactive compounds is being built at Oak Ridge Nuclear Labs. It is horrendously over budget and has shown no glimmer of success.

    Starting Score:    1  point
    Moderation   +3  
       Interesting=2, Informative=1, Total=3
    Extra 'Interesting' Modifier   0  
    Karma-Bonus Modifier   +1  

    Total Score:   5  
  • (Score: 2) by kaszz on Saturday August 30 2014, @10:38PM

    by kaszz (4211) on Saturday August 30 2014, @10:38PM (#87669) Journal

    What kind of rock does the Yucca mountain site have? and Oak Ridge?
    Granite is kind of state of the art.. But if you geology doesn't feature it. It doesn't..