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



No comments:
Post a Comment
Comments should be in good taste and include the commentator's full name and affiliation.