Obama’s sensible Yucca Mountain decision

May 21, 2009

Chicago Tribune  Bruce H. Breslow
“………………………….Yucca Mountain is not coming to grief merely for political reasons. The fundamental problem is that Department of Energy picked a bad site for its proposed nuclear waste dump. It has earthquake faults and is located on a young volcanic field.
Worse, there was much more dripping water (which promotes corrosion of the containers intended to isolate the waste), and water moves faster through Yucca Mountain than the Department of Energy expected. Instead of abandoning the site over this and many other problems uncovered by scientists over the past two decades, the Department of Energy invented what it calls a “drip shield” — the name says it all — to protect each waste package. The department’s design now requires 11,000 titanium “drip shields,” each using five tons of exotic alloy.

Without them, the department’s calculations show the repository would exceed the Nuclear Regulatory Commission’s standards for releasing radiation into the environment by about a factor of 10. Worse, the Department of Energy is putting off installation of these mythical “drip shields” for at least 100 years, when they predict futuristic robots will be invented to do the job in radioactive tunnels where humans could not survive. That is a bureaucratic farce that should not continue.

The Nuclear Regulatory Commission’s licensing boards have just certified that an unprecedented 299 unresolved technical and other issues, put forward by Nevada, California and other hearing participants, would have to be addressed in any licensing hearing for this project to move forward. In short, by backing away from this project, the president acted sensibly and responsibly.
If rail and truck shipments to Yucca Mountain are as safe as past spent nuclear fuel shipments in the Unites States, and if they experience similar accident rates, about 30 to 80 rail accidents and three to six truck accidents would be expected over its 50-year transportation program. The Department of Energy states that the probability of rail accidents would be one for every 300 to 400 shipments, or an estimated seven to 25 rail accidents, involving casks carrying high-level nuclear waste.

Big names and bucks back nuclear ‘bank’ Mother Nature Network 19 May 09 Russia and the U.S. come together to support an international stockpile of enriched uranium for energy purposes. By Charles J. Hanley, Associated Press  May 19 2009 

The $150 million idea, with seed money from U.S. billionaire Warren Buffett, must still navigate the tricky maze of global nuclear politics, along with a parallel Russian plan………………………………….That’s the fear: The centrifuges that enrich uranium with its fissionable isotope U-235, to produce power-plant fuel, can be left spinning to enrich it much more, producing fissile, highly enriched uranium for nuclear bombs…………………………………….”The real risk is that highly enriched uranium could be acquired by, say, terrorist groups,” Russian government adviser Alexander Konovalov told a conference in Rome on nuclear dangers. “All they need is 50 kilograms (110 pounds) of enriched uranium. All the rest (to make a bomb) can be found on the Internet.”………………………….”If a nuclear fuel bank for nuclear energy was created, then Kazakhstan would consider hosting it,” Kazakh President Nursultan Nazarbayev announced to reporters……………………..Most intriguing, perhaps, was the fact that Nazarbayev’s announcement came with Iran’s visiting president, Mahmoud Ahmadinejad, standing at his side. The Iranian called the fuel bank “a very good proposal.” In fact, Tehran has suggested that an international consortium might also enrich uranium on Iranian soil.

Indigenous at UN consider climate change, conflict, their very existence – China View  by William M. Reilly 22 May 09 “………………….The annual meeting of the Permanent Forum on Indigenous Issues is under an urgent mandate to activate the 2007 Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples through national legislation around the world.

    Many are focusing that discussion on the land rights issue which has been brought to the fore by climate change, namely over oil, gas and mineral exploitation and forestation of northern lands……………………………….The annual meeting of the Permanent Forum on Indigenous Issues is under an urgent mandate to activate the 2007 Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples through national legislation around the world.

    Many are focusing that discussion on the land rights issue which has been brought to the fore by climate change, namely over oil, gas and mineral exploitation and forestation of northern lands…………………….. This is a problem for Pacific Islanders in general, she said.

    “What will happen with something like the islands of Tuvalu (which) will sink in about 40 years. Then what about the nationals? Is it still Tuvalu?” .Pelpina Sahureka of the Malucca Islands of Indonesia asked. “Where will the people go?”

    “Will they go to Australia, for instance?” Sahureka asked. “There will be a community of Tuvalu in Australia but how will they be called? Still Tuvalus or are they still Australians? They will say they have their own country but how or when can they come back to the country when there is nothing because it has totally sunk.”

Scotland leads Europe with green energy, says Alex Salmond Daily Record  May 21 2009 By Dave KingEUROPE’S largest wind farm was officially switched on yesterday by First Minister Alex Salmond.He said Whitelee wind farm in Renfrewshire was the envy of Europe – then announced a £300million extension for it.That will create about 300 jobs and boost Scotland’s green energy capability even further.The wind farm was only one of a series of boosts for the renewable energy industry on what the Scottish government called Scotland’s “Green Wednesday”.Whitelee has 140 turbines capable of generating enough power to run 180,000 homes.The extension will see a further 36 of the 330ft turbines put up, making enough electricity for 250,000 homes.Salmond said: “Whitelee is already flying the flag for onshore wind power in Europe.

12 statewide groups: Investment in nuclear power over efficiency and renewable energy endangers taxpayers, ratepayers & public health

 WISBUSINESS.COM 5/21/2009Contact: Pam Kleiss, Physicians for Social Responsibility WisconsinTel. 608/232-9945A coalition of twelve Wisconsin groups submitted a letter to the Governor and State Legislators today asserting that the substantive problems of long-term storage of radioactive waste and astronomically high lifecycle costs make expanded nuclear power inadvisable for Wisconsin’s energy future.In a letter to Governor Doyle and State Legislators, Physicians for Social Responsibility Wisconsin and eleven other organizations show that the liabilities of nuclear power make it a risky investment, both to the public health and the public pocket book.
The letter states, “Unlike renewable electricity sources, the by-products of nuclear electricity generation exist in the environment for hundreds of years and are highly toxic.” In Wisconsin alone, 1,365 metric tons of high-level nuclear waste will be stored at nuclear reactor sites by 2011, and 58,000 metric tons have already accumulated at sites throughout the US. Current EPA standards require that the environment and public be kept safe from exposure to stored radioactive waste for up to one million years.

The letter also shows that the lifecycle costs of nuclear power and means by which plants are funded shift the financial risk from the nuclear industry to ratepayers and taxpayers. From the failed multi-billion dollar taxpayer investment in Yucca Mountain to ratepayer surcharges funding on-site storage of radioactive waste – all these costs and more are borne by the ratepayer and taxpayer, not the nuclear industry. The fifty -year old nuclear power industry can not even claim lower cost per kilowatt of delivered electricity, with costs higher than traditional coal and gas fired plants, and higher than wind power. …………………The coalition asserts that conservation and efficiency in all sectors of the economy are better investments for Wisconsin’s energy futur

BHP Billiton bets big on new uranium as new era spawns $17bn mine

THE AUSTRALIAN Matt Chambers 22 May 09 “…………….Yeelirrie in Western Australia ……………………..The mine is yet to be approved by the board of BHP Billiton, which also owns Olympic Dam, where it is planning a massive expansion to 19,000 tonnes of uranium oxide a year. Olympic Dam, which also produces copper and gold, was the last major uranium mine to be developed, starting production in 1988.The documents lodged with the Environment Department are part of the environmental impact statement process, the first steps in obtaining government approval for the Yeelirrie project. Processed radioactive uranium oxide is planned to be trucked to Kalgoorlie in drums then put on trains to Adelaide or Darwin – the only ports currently allowed to export uranium.
A spokeswoman for Mr Barnett said last night the state Government did not intend to ship uranium from its ports. She said that even if volumes required it, uranium would never be allowed through residential ports such as Fremantle……………………………….. federal Labor continues to ban the export of uranium to any country that has refused to sign the nuclear non-proliferation treaty, such as India. In 2006, the Howard government allowed the export of uranium to China, which has not signed the NPT,