Today's Most: Recent


Yucca Mountain Nuclear Waste Site to Cost an Extra $32 Billion Posted by Andy Kondrat on July 16, 2008 at 2:54 pm

Remember Yucca Mountain?  The place in Nevada where the government decided it would be a good place to put all our nuclear waste, and then seal it up forever and ever?  And how it was going to cost $58 billion?  Well, you may not remember that last one, specifically, but that’s the part that’s moot anyway.   A new estimate released Tuesday by the administration now has costs pegged at over $90 billion to get the site open and operational.   The Associated Press reports,

Ward Sproat, the Energy Department official in charge of managing the controversial Yucca Mountain repository project in Nevada, disclosed the new number to reporters after a congressional hearing Tuesday.   The estimate includes $9 billion already spent and covers about 100 years of operation until the dump, 90 miles northwest of Las Vegas, is sealed up forever.   Some of the increase is due to inflation, Sproat said. Also Energy Department officials now expect the dump will hold more radioactive waste than the 77,000 tons initially approved by Congress.

$90 billion of money, my sources tell me. And that figure is contingent on the plant opening in 2020, which is now the earliest possible date we’re looking at.  Now, the issue is that 33 states already hold a combined 64,000 tons of radioactive material, and Nevada’s really not too jazzed about getting all of it.   Harry Reid, the Senate Majority Leader (who, you know, happens to be from Nevada) has so far blocked a steady supply of money to the project, and is working to stall permits for a construction license that the Energy Department needs.

So, basically, I guess the point is, $90 billion most likely isn’t the last figure we’re going to hear.   However, you can takepart here and see an unbiased list of some pros and cons of nuclear energy.   And here’s an “unbiased” for nuclear power, and here’s an “unbiased” against it.


CATEGORIES:  Environment, Ethics


4
Discuss
Share
Act

Required information:



Add your comment:

Page 1 of 1
Posted by eeyun on July 16, 2008 at 9:03 pm

90 billion is definitely a lot of money, but it’s cheap compared to say, oh, I dunno, a war for oil. If it wasn’t for Jimmy Carter, the U.S. could be reprocessing their spent fuel, ultimately winding up with waste that has lost most of it’s punch within hundreds of years, not tens of thousands.

Replies (0)
Posted by eeyun on July 16, 2008 at 9:05 pm

Oh, and I should have added that when you amortize that over the expected useful life of the facility (minimum 10,000 years) it’s not so bad ;)

Replies (0)
Posted by Andy Kondrat on July 17, 2008 at 12:14 pm

eeyun -

You make good points, and I suppose I should clarify that I’m not trying to say whether the Yucca Mountain facility is a good idea or a bad one. To be perfectly honest, I can’t aver one way or another, as I certainly am no expert. I mean, the waste has already been created, so there’s no backtracking on that. So where should it go? Anyone get any good ideas?

Replies (0)
Posted by Martha Stewart on November 14, 2008 at 2:06 pm

i think all this is crap. Throw the wastes in rivers and the ocean

Replies (0)
Page 1 of 1
Current Actions:

Stay Informed with TakePart:

Get Blog Updates:

Archives By Month: