Key thoughts about nuclear waste and nuclear waste transport
by Ace Hoffman, Carlsbad, California
1) There is nowhere to put nuclear waste. It's NOT just a political problem (although that's a huge obstacle). There's water intrusion, corrosion, sabotage, earthquakes, volcanoes, asteroids...
2) Truly safe storage of nuclear waste is a fantasy. It could only possibly exist for a limited time and if everyone's lucky. Over time, everything that can go wrong probably will. And there's no way new waste made today is going to be hauled away in ANYONE'S lifetime who is alive today. So why burden our children's children with the added risk of unnecessary new nuclear waste?
3) We can't keep making more nuclear waste. There is now more in America than Yucca Mountain was designed to hold. In any case, it will take a massive storage project to remove all the waste that is already scattered across the country. New waste will be last in line (while also being the most dangerous! One of the many dichotomies of nuclear power).
4) Moving nuclear waste is no small challenge. America's roads and bridges are falling apart and are NOT ready to take thousands of trips of a type of waste that is so toxic that one canister can release "more radiation than Chernobyl" according to some estimates, and it could certainly contaminate a large portion of any city, depending on the winds and other factors.
5) Because of all the risk factors, nuclear spent fuel is too risky to move through major cities such as New York or Los Angeles. The communities the waste will be shipped through are not prepared and will not be prepared for accidents, in part because for security reasons shipping times are unlikely to be made public, and EMTs, fire departments, etc. would not be informed in every town along the way, nor will they have proper equipment, training, protections, instructions, etc..
6) Nobody wants the waste. This problem cannot be solved, not because it is a "political" problem, but because people are educated enough to know they don't want it anywhere near them. Example: The waste from Connecticut Yankee is stored in the midst of a business park, assuming no one would care. They built the whole business park, but no one will move in. It still sits abandoned.
7) "Statistics" do not determine "actual events." The nuclear industry has always overestimated its ability to do things correctly. All waste solutions are as cheap as possible to still pass regulations, but regulations are far weaker than many potential real-world events.
8) Spent nuclear fuel is a proliferation risk. Doing nothing is not an option. Spent fuel contains Plutonium-239 with a half-life of 24,100 years and recoverable quantities for at least 20 times longer. It is the primary source material for a nuclear bomb. It is also one of the most toxic substances known to man, and is entirely man-made in nuclear reactors.
9) During the first millennia (approximately), the fission products are especially plentiful, and thus hazardous if they escape (after that period of time, the plutonium and uranium are the main concerns). By far the most hazardous time for a dry cask breach is when the fuel is the freshest. (This is why a spent fuel pool fire is so hazardous: Fission products would be released during any ensuing zirconium fire (a criticality event might follow...)).
10) The infrastructure for the transfer of nuclear waste to transport casks will require numerous large facilities across the country at enormous cost. Each location will need its own facility, or will have to wait for another location to release a mobile facility, if one exists. It could be a long wait.
11) Even waste that is already in supposedly-transportable canisters may need to be transferred if the move is not made fairly soon, due to the constant and continuing embrittlement from the radiation within and other factors (but mainly the radiation). But NO waste is moving anywhere, any time soon.
12) The support structures within and around each fuel assembly that keep each fuel bundle apart, thus preventing overheating and/or potentially a criticality event, are also embrittling day by day.
13) Because of the embrittlement problem, the longer we wait to solve the waste problem, the more likely an accident becomes. The only benefit to waiting is the decay of various short-lived fission products. But there are also long-lived fission products and plutonium, americium and other transuranics.
14) "Reprocessing" or "recycling" nuclear waste invariably releases fission products (radioactive gasses along with numerous other hazardous waste streams). The two terms are interchangeable and there are a number of different processes that theoretically could be used, but none of them ever should be. Reprocessing causes radiation exposure to workers and the environment, and is a severe proliferation risk, especially if done on a large scale, which would also cost a fortune and accomplish nothing since solar, wind, hydro, wave, tidal, and other energy systems are all cheaper and more reliable. Clean energy storage systems abound: Batteries, raised water or weights, compressed air in abandoned mines, heated salt or other minerals, and many others.
15) ALL the steel and other components in spent fuel canisters are highly contaminated, and should never be used for any other purpose. (That's many times the weight of the spent fuel itself.) That's all wasted energy, wasted materials, wasted time and effort, and added risk to the world.
16) Military actions around the world are proving both that nuclear sites are targets for attack, and are also extremely vulnerable to the new threat of drone warfare. (Small Modular Reactors make no sense on the battlefield, for example.)
List posted online June 22, 2026 by Ace Hoffman, Carlsbad, California USA
###
Contact information for the author of this newsletter:
Ace Hoffman
Carlsbad, California USA
Author, The Code Killers:
An Expose of the Nuclear Industry
Free download: acehoffman.org
Blog: acehoffman.blogspot.com
YouTube: youtube.com/user/AceHoffman
Email: ace [at] acehoffman.org
Founder & Owner, The Animated Software Company
Ace Hoffman's Nuclear Failures Reports
Ace has studied nuclear issues since the 1960s. This site was NOT written with AI! (A January 2025 conversation with a chatbot is the ONLY exception.)
Monday, June 22, 2026
Sunday, June 14, 2026
Comments on NRC-2025-0379-0011 must be submitted before 11:59pm EDT on Monday (June 15, 2026)!!
Link to submit comments: https://www.regulations.gov/document/NRC-2025-0379-0011
Here is what we just submitted (our confirmation code is mqe-edcg-toht )
We strongly oppose the rulemaking defined by NRC-2025-0379-0011, which would make it easier to license new nuclear reactor designs with nowhere near the level of regulation that has been used for all commercial reactors to date.
The stated intent is: "... to establish a licensing pathway for factory-fabricated microreactors and other low-consequence reactors." Every reactor will produce large quantities of unmanageable, highly toxic radioactive waste, starting the day they are turned on. Therefore, there can never be a guarantee that accidents to either the reactor or its spent fuel will be "low-consequence".
We do not need a new licensing pathway for nuclear reactors, we do not need new reactor designs, and most of all, we do not need any more nuclear waste.
Every ounce of nuclear waste that has ever been created (and that hasn't already been lost to the environment) is still in "temporary storage" because it is impossible to guarantee safe permanent storage for materials that will be dangerous for longer than civilization has lasted. So NOBODY wants the waste.
New reactors will create new hazardous waste streams, regardless of type (TRISO, MOX, HALEU, FAFO*, etc.).
No SMR (Small Modular Reactor) is likely to be more efficient (that is, more cost-effective) than today's large reactors. And because they'll be LESS efficient, they will produce MORE nuclear waste per kilowatt of energy produced. And there will be nothing "small" about the financial costs or the environmental risks.
This and other ongoing attempts to destroy proper regulation of nuclear power in the United States make it clear that nuclear technology is unsustainable and unsafe.
If it was safe, you wouldn't need to relax the safety regulations and cap the insurance level with Price-Anderson.
If it was cost-effective, you wouldn't need to subsidize it.
This rulemaking doesn't focus on protecting the public or the environment. Rather, the rulemaking is concerned with making it easier for stakeholders (meaning companies that might profit) to license new (or previously tried-and-failed) reactor designs. Concurrently, the rulemaking ignores the very real stakes for people living near new reactors or waste disposal sites, or those who might be endangered by transportation accidents. Not only transportation of spent nuclear fuel, but potentially reactors loaded with fuel, since the rulemaking would allow "... transporting fueled reactors to deployment sites (loaded with unirradiated or irradiated fuel) ...".
The government agencies whose job it should be to ensure public safety are instead being tasked to expedite licensing of new reactors and promote the use of nuclear power. These overreaching executive orders contradict the NRC's charter and thus violate existing federal law, and probably international agreements as well.
According to the proposed rulemaking document: "E.O. 14300 directs the NRC to reach a final decision on an application to construct and operate a new reactor of any type within 18 months." If the intent was to speed up the rejection process and thus reduce investments in bad technology, this would make sense. However, the rule is clearly written with the intent of pushing acceptance based on a firm deadline, regardless of what might get overlooked.
In reality, speed is the antithesis of safety. And yet, the proposed rule would allow any company requesting a license to shortcut safety regulations for the sake of expediency. For example, instead of a rule that would "... impose quality assurance requirements under the existing regulations ..." the new rule would "... allow the applicant to choose an industry approved quality assurance program ...". Self-regulation DOES NOT WORK! That's why the NRC was created in the first place: America tried self-regulation with the Atomic Energy Commission (AEC) and it failed miserably.
Lastly, although that is never explicitly stated, the new ruling appears to assume AI will be used for many control room tasks, with phrases like these: "... autonomous performance of operations and safety functions." and "... the expectation that the role of operators would be reduced for microreactors ...".
AI has yet to be found trustworthy, free of hallucinations, or right all the time. It may be better than humans at all these things some day, but nuclear reactors already require super-human efforts to operate — and that is why they have failed, sometimes catastrophically, numerous times in the past. There is no reason to believe that AI, or better-trained humans, or better-selected control room operators, or anything else, can ever guarantee the level of perfection needed to safely operate ANY nuclear reactor under all possible, probable, or expected conditions.
Sharon & Ace Hoffman, Carlsbad, California USA
* FAFO: Most fuel will probably be this type in the long run
###
Contact information for the author of this newsletter:
Ace Hoffman
Carlsbad, California USA
Author, The Code Killers:
An Expose of the Nuclear Industry
Free download: acehoffman.org
Blog: acehoffman.blogspot.com
YouTube: youtube.com/user/AceHoffman
Email: ace [at] acehoffman.org
Founder & Owner, The Animated Software Company
Contact information for the author of this newsletter:
Ace Hoffman
Carlsbad, California USA
Author, The Code Killers:
An Expose of the Nuclear Industry
Free download: acehoffman.org
Blog: acehoffman.blogspot.com
YouTube: youtube.com/user/AceHoffman
Email: ace [at] acehoffman.org
Founder & Owner, The Animated Software Company
Saturday, June 13, 2026
One EMP (Electro-Magnetic Pulse) from a single nuclear explosion could destroy the whole world...and you wouldn't even know it happened (at first).
Imagine this:
You live in New York, or maybe Los Angeles. Boston or San Francisco. Chicago or Houston. Seattle or Miami. It won't matter.
You're toiling away at life, maybe at work or at home, sitting at your computer, or watching a game on your 4K TV, when the power goes out. Sudden silence.
Of course, you know that happens sometimes. But off in the distance you hear a crash and wonder: "Did the traffic lights fail too? That's rare, but I suppose it can happen."
But quickly you notice something else: Your UPS (Uninterruptible Power Supply) isn't beeping. Not only did it fail you just when it was supposed to protect your system, but normally it would be beeping now, and it's not.
The power isn't coming back on, and you don't hear sirens for whatever accident you think you might have heard... nothing. Just silence.
You're wondering what could have happened.
What you don't know is that it's happening throughout the entire continent: All of America, Canada, and Mexico are completely powerless.
Someone has exploded a nuclear device above the atmosphere. Approximately above Kansas, more than a thousand miles away from you. So of course you don't know this. Even a lot of the people in Kansas don't know it. There was no pressure wave. No mushroom cloud. There was a burst of light that quickly faded but not everyone (the whole of North America) was close enough to see it. You didn't see it. No one in your state saw it.
It was an EMP (Electro-Magnetic Pulse) from the nuclear explosion. By exploding it where they did, its effect was able to spread across a vast area.
No cities (or people) were turned to dust. No concussive shock wave was knocking over buildings, sending cars and people flying through the air. None of that happened anywhere, and yet...
...And yet this will soon become the biggest catastrophe in history, roughly equivalent to the wiping out of the dinosaurs from an asteroid impact 65 million years ago, only this time the dominant species being wiped out is us, and the cause... is also us.
But those moments haven't come yet. The nuclear reactors will quickly overheat and melt down, and the water in their spent fuel pools would soon evaporate, causing the zirconium fuel cladding to self-ignite, perhaps even causing a criticality event when the uranium fuel pellets gather as they drop to the bottom of the dry, on-fire spent fuel pool.
You look at your phone. To your surprise, it still seems to work, but it can't connect to anything, and... you smell smoke.
Something's caught fire somewhere, but again, no sirens. You try to use your phone some more, but it can't connect. People are coming out of their houses. You hear glass breaking. People can't get out of their cars any other way. The smell of smoke gets worse.
Science fiction? Or scientific fact? Could one nuclear bomb do all that?
A complete study was done years ago. It's still classified, but there's every reason to believe this an utterly realistic scenario. Not only that, but any nuclear-tipped missile that reaches the upper atmosphere could cause an EMP that could devastate an area hundreds or thousands of miles wide if it detonates prematurely, or if that's what someone actually wants to do with it, or if it's designed so that if someone tries to destroy it in-flight (after it leaves the launch area) it will blow up — and someone tries.
For a society running on energy, this would be bad enough. For one running on nuclear energy this would be fatal, because the backup generators would not work, the control systems would not work, MAYBE some of the automated SCRAM equipment would work (if they're based on always-on electromagnets and gravity or springs if the power fails)... but that would only provide a temporary solution. Without circulating water, it's a lost cause. The reactor staff runs — literally, because their cars won't start. Some are stuck behind electronic doors and gates that won't open.
Most of the military would be incapable of moving, other than on foot with what they can carry. The most sophisticated long-range bombers and a few other things are theoretically protected from an EMP, but full testing has never been done, because atmospheric testing of nuclear weapons was prohibited when this writer was six years old — 64 years ago. Delicate electronics have come a long way since then and are in every major weapons system — including the triggers in the nuclear warheads.
The runway lights, maintenance hanger lights and doors, testing equipment, lifts, power tools... would all be unavailable, and power itself — would never return. (Oddly enough, a Ford Model A might still run -- if it had gas!)
The tissue of living organisms would not be affected by the EMP, but it cannot be said that absolutely no one would be killed by the EMP burst itself. If you have a pacemaker or were being operated on at the time — those people might not make it.
Which might mean they're the lucky ones, because things will keep getting worse.
As the power grid fails to come on, water cannot be pumped, fires cannot be put out, and soon, food spoils and thirst, hunger and desperation drive those with weapons to start to overpower those without. But even before that, the nuclear power plants would be spewing toxic radioactive gasses and people living downwind would be getting violently ill, not recovering, their insides melting away, turning to mush, like Alexander Litvinenko, after he was poisoned by Putin's henchmen with Polonium-210.
Few people, if any, would know why people were getting so sick. No one would be able to do anything, or know where to go to get away from whatever is making everyone so sick.
Wandering gangs would grab whatever they can, kill whoever they want, and it would never, ever get better.
One bomb. One EMP. One entire continent, with over 100 nuclear reactors destroyed (94 in America, 19 in Canada and two in Mexico).
The rest of the planet would not get away unscathed. Not with over 100 nuclear reactors melting down, their fuel pools catching fire, and if any airplanes fell out of the sky onto a nuclear waste dump (dry storage system) that too would probably be on fire too.
The genetic code of every living thing would soon be affected, and within a few decades, there would be few large living things left on earth.
Is there a solution? A way to stop this from being possible? Or do we just have to hope nobody does it?
Of course it can be prevented, but the solution is not found in any non-proliferation TREATY. Treaties can be broken. In reality, this tragic possibility can only be prevented by all sides dismantling anything that could launch such an attack. Dismantling the nuclear warheads AND the nuclear reactors.
And we still won't have solved the problem of what to do with the waste, but at the very least, we should stop making more.
Society needs to shut down the nuclear reactors and stop making the primary ingredient for nuclear weapons (Plutonium-239), and the primary (most vulnerable) TARGET for nuclear weapons (nuclear reactors and nuclear waste dumps).
Ace Hoffman, Carlsbad, California USA
Notes:
Fortunately, the prolific and very talented author Annie Jacobsen has researched the topic of EMPs fairly thoroughly and her book Nuclear War: A Scenario (Copyright © 2024) (our review is online here) presents some of this information (although all of it was fairly well-known long before her book came out). From Nuclear War: A Scenario, pages 154-155: "Richard Garwin wrote the first paper on nuclear EMP in 1954, at Los Alamos (its findings are classified)." In 1962, after Starfish Prime (a high-altitude nuclear test blast), "it became clear that an EMP weapon exploded at high altitudes has the capability of permanently destroying large-scale infrastructure on the ground." Also on page 155, Jacobsen mentions a former CIA analyst telling about a Russian nuclear EMP test blast that destroyed "all manner of electronics within an enormous footprint extending hundreds of miles." Jacobsen also mentions that no one really knows if the EMP-protection for Marine One will really work. On page 254, Jacobsen refers to a U.S. EMP Commission which has — for decades — "asserted that a high-altitude EMP attack will damage or destroy America's entire block power grid." On pages 265 and 266, Jacobsen describes how every electronic controller in every factory would fail. Valves for gas pipelines would "rupture and explode." Planes would fall out of the sky... one disaster after another would begin to occur.
Contact information for the author of this newsletter:
Ace Hoffman
Carlsbad, California USA
Author, The Code Killers:
An Expose of the Nuclear Industry
Free download: acehoffman.org
Blog: acehoffman.blogspot.com
YouTube: youtube.com/user/AceHoffman
Email: ace [at] acehoffman.org
Founder & Owner, The Animated Software Company
Notes:
Fortunately, the prolific and very talented author Annie Jacobsen has researched the topic of EMPs fairly thoroughly and her book Nuclear War: A Scenario (Copyright © 2024) (our review is online here) presents some of this information (although all of it was fairly well-known long before her book came out). From Nuclear War: A Scenario, pages 154-155: "Richard Garwin wrote the first paper on nuclear EMP in 1954, at Los Alamos (its findings are classified)." In 1962, after Starfish Prime (a high-altitude nuclear test blast), "it became clear that an EMP weapon exploded at high altitudes has the capability of permanently destroying large-scale infrastructure on the ground." Also on page 155, Jacobsen mentions a former CIA analyst telling about a Russian nuclear EMP test blast that destroyed "all manner of electronics within an enormous footprint extending hundreds of miles." Jacobsen also mentions that no one really knows if the EMP-protection for Marine One will really work. On page 254, Jacobsen refers to a U.S. EMP Commission which has — for decades — "asserted that a high-altitude EMP attack will damage or destroy America's entire block power grid." On pages 265 and 266, Jacobsen describes how every electronic controller in every factory would fail. Valves for gas pipelines would "rupture and explode." Planes would fall out of the sky... one disaster after another would begin to occur.
Contact information for the author of this newsletter:
Ace Hoffman
Carlsbad, California USA
Author, The Code Killers:
An Expose of the Nuclear Industry
Free download: acehoffman.org
Blog: acehoffman.blogspot.com
YouTube: youtube.com/user/AceHoffman
Email: ace [at] acehoffman.org
Founder & Owner, The Animated Software Company
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)



