|
||||
  
 
 |
What's Nevada's problem got to do with us? A lot! By
Emily Hutchinson
The U.S. Department of Energy is proposing that 70,000 metric tons of high-level nuclear waste be stored deep within Yucca Mountain in Nye County, Nev. If the DOE deems Yucca safe for nuclear waste storage, a 30-year transport process will begin. The transportation process is where 43 states, including Utah, come into the picture. The DOE says it will take 28,000 highway and 10,000 railway shipments over a 30-year period to fill the Yucca repository. The highway and rail routes most likely to be used could affect at least 109 cities with populations over 100,000. Many Utah cities would be among those 109, including St. George, Ogden and Salt Lake City. Many safety concerns come to mind when thinking about the tens of thousands of tons of nuclear waste traveling through Utah. The nuclear waste industry and the DOE would like us to look at the history of nuclear waste shipments. Since 1962, there have been no transportation accidents resulting in the release of radioactive material. Nevada would like all concerned to know that the amount of waste that would be shipped to the repository in a single year would exceed the total amount shipped in the last 30 years in the United States. Another concern raised in transporting such a large quantity of high-level nuclear waste is the containers it would travel in. As of August 1999, the DOE had refused to commit itself to actually test nuclear waste shipping containers. The DOE and the nuclear industry insist they are confident that the containers to be used to ship the waste will be strong enough to withstand any "credible accident". Yet, the state of Nevada points out that the containers the DOE is so confident will work haven't even been designed yet. All concerned also need to address the issue of safety for the Utah workers that would be required to be near the waste on its way through the state. The federal government allows for a low level of radiation to be emitted from the travelling casks because the low levels are not harmful under normal conditions. But Nevada holds that repeated and long-term exposure to even these low levels of radiation can have ill effects on a person's health. Now consider that three of the five most likely rail routes and two of the three most likely highway routes empty into the heart of Utah. Utah's highways and railroads would see a high percentage of the proposed 70,000 metric tons of nuclear waste pass over them and through Utah. If Yucca Mountain is determined by the DOE to be safe to store high-level nuclear waste, a high-percentage of the waste would pass through Utah on its way there. The DOE has never attempted a nuclear waste transport of this size or this distance. The DOE hasn't even designed the casks to hold the waste during transport, yet are confident the casks are safe. Since a transport effort of this magnitude has never been attempted, the DOE really doesn't know how long-term exposure to the federally allowable low levels of radiation will affect drivers, engineers and all those who experience long-term exposure. Should Utahns worry about what's going on in Nevada? Absolutely! Can Utahns make their voices heard concerning the proposed nuclear waste repository at Yucca Mountain, Nevada? Absolutely! Let Senator Hatch and Senator Bennett know how you feel about transporting nuclear waste through Utah. For more information see: http://www.epa.gov/radiation/yucca/
|
Archived Months:
January
1999 January
2000 |
||