[cdn-nucl-l] Yucca Mountain debate needs dose of reality

["Adam McLean" <adam.mclean@utoronto.ca>]

Posted in the TriCity Herald on July 21, 2004 and at:
http://www.tri-cityherald.com/tch/opinions/story/5325291p-5263295c.html

Adam

---------------------

Yucca Mountain debate needs dose of reality 
This story was published Wednesday, July 21st, 2004

What's missing from the latest debate over Yucca Mountain is reality. 

Opponents of the plan to build a nuclear waste repository in Nevada are
demanding an all-or-nothing answer. 

That is, they either will accept a perfect plan or no plan. 

That might be an appropriate approach if Yucca were a referendum on whether
the United States should be producing nuclear waste. 

But it is not. That choice was made long ago, during the frenzy of trying to
win World War II. Now the nation has nuclear waste scattered across 39
states, where it sits in relatively vulnerable conditions -- such as
single-shell tanks at Hanford -- waiting for a safer place to go. 

That place is Yucca. It is the government's best attempt to plan for safe
storage. 

Notice that says "best." Not "perfect." 

The difference between the two is apparent in the disagreement over
establishing radiation protection standards for the site. 

An appeals court ruled this month that a 10,000-year prediction of safety is
too short. 

The U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit ruled that
the feds must follow the lead of the National Academy of Sciences. That's a
direction that could push the radiation protection standard as high as a
million years. 

It's true that some of the waste will be reaching its most dangerous state
after 10,000 years. But consider, for a moment, just how long 10,000 years
is. That's the recorded history of man with an extra 4,000 years thrown in
for good measure. 

Predicting even out that far seems a questionable feat, given the number of
unknowns. The chance that scientists would de-velop new technology for
treating or using nuclear waste before then is as likely as anything else. 

Extending that look to as many as a million years is a fool's errand. But
opponents are insisting on the longer window, which could effectively kill
the project. 

In typical full-speed-ahead Department of Energy fashion, Deputy Secretary
Kyle McSlarrow told Congress last week that Yucca won't be slowed by the
court ruling. 

He said there is no reason why the department cannot file the project
application with the 10,000-year standard now, then update it later if the
Environmental Protection Agency re-quires the million-year standard. 

Still, there is the little matter of the law cited by the court that
requires EPA to follow the recommendations of the National Academy. Barring
a reversal of the court's decision, Congress will need to change the law to
keep the project on track. 

There is no perfect solution to storing nuclear waste. But there is a good
one, and that's Yucca Mountain in Nevada. Lawmakers cannot allow the perfect
to become the enemy of the good.