yucca mountain woes give push for plan b - energy storage solutions

WASHINGTON-problems with the government's plan to open up national nuclear waste (search)
Lawmakers and industry officials are increasingly pushing for Plan B at a dump in Nevada.
After a recent setback in Yucca Mountain (search)—
Last week, it was revealed that government workers at the planned dump may have forged documents --
An important Republican in the House urged the Department of Energy to study temporary waste storage solutions.
Pete, chairman of the Senate Energy Committee? search), R-N. M.
At the same time, nuclear power companies are already considering other options and are pushing for discussions on alternatives to Mount Yuka.
Many have started building on-site storage for spent fuel and are planning to build a private dump in Utah.
They also filed a lawsuit against the government for reimbursement of temporary waste storage costs.
While the Department of Energy remains committed to Mount Yuka, there is a growing consensus that the dump
It is planned to open in the most recent month of 2010, but is now postponed indefinitely --
It can no longer be considered as the only answer to the disposal of nuclear waste in the country.
"The important thing is to throw away the fuel," said lawyer Jerry Stouck . " He represented the nuclear power plant in a lawsuit against the government.
"I don't think it's important to have Yucca Mountain as a solution.
"On 2002, Congress approved Yuka Mountain, which is planned to serve as a repository for 77,000 tons of defense waste and used reactor fuel for commercial power plants.
The materials should be buried in the desert, 90 miles northwest of Las Vegas, for at least 10,000 years.
But the project suffered serious setbacks, including funding issues and appeals court rulings last summer, which forced the site to rewrite radiation exposure restrictions.
About 55,000 tons of commercial reactor fuel and about 16,000 tons of high fuel.
Defense waste in 39 states has been waiting on site.
The government initially promised to start accepting their spent fuel in 1998, but faced billions of dollars in litigation because it failed to deliver on that promise.
The increasing responsibility of the representativeDavid Hobson (search), R-
Last week, Ohio urged Energy Department officials in charge of yucca --
Theodore garnish
Start looking for alternatives.
Hobson, chairman of the House Appropriations Committee group overseeing the project, proposed to establish a temporary on-site storage facility at the Nevada test site or elsewhere to accept waste up to 500, giving scientists time to develop new disposal options.
"There is no need for brain science to think that in the long run, we can save money, take these things out of the present position, fulfill an obligation, a contractual obligation, Hobson told Gary at the hearing.
He also suggested looking at the reprocessing of used reactor fuel.
Garish said the Department of Energy is still "100% committed" to Yuka, but he said he understands Hobson's complaints.
Hobson's ideas are not new.
Before abandoning the idea, the Department of Energy implemented a temporary "monitored recyclable storage" facility in late 1980 and early 1990.
The Bush administration also proposed the resumption of reprocessing, which the United States abandoned in the 1970 s because of concerns that the resulting plutonium could be seized by terrorists or rogue states.
The long delay in Yucca Mountain forced these ideas to surface again, even from supporters.
Marnie Funk, a spokeswoman for Domenici, said: "The way the nuclear community sees Mount Yuka has changed dramatically," the chairman of the Energy Committee, a supporter of Yuka, but is open to such discussions.
"It is no longer said that in order for the nuclear industry to revive in this country, Yuka mountain must be completed.
You can still have a nuclear revival without Yuka mountain, but that means other options have to be discussed at some point.
Justice Department reached a settlement with Chicago
Power company based in Exelon (search).
In last August, if Yucca Hill did not open until 2015, the amount could rise to $0. 6 billion.
Other lawsuits are advancing, including those in the Sacramento Municipal Utility area, which began in the United States this week. S.
Federal Court of Claims.
Gary told lawmakers that if Mount Yuka was opened in 2010, the damage to the government was estimated at $2 billion to $3 billion, 12 years after the government began its contractual obligation to store the country's nuclear waste.
The loss for the following year could be $1 billion, which means that the project's annual liability costs will be close to its projected budget needs.
The Department of Energy estimates the total cost of the project at $58 billion, but critics say the cost of the project could rise a lot.
President Bush's 2006 budget request for the project is $0. 651 billion, about half what the Energy Department originally envisioned.
Meanwhile, eight utilities are pushing ahead with a plan to build a private dump on an Indian reserve in Utah.
The plan was approved by the licensing commission in February and is currently awaiting final approval by the Nuclear Regulatory Commission.
The Utah congressional delegation is as strongly opposed to the project as members of Nevada.
Including Senate Minority party leadersearch)—
Against Mount Yuka
Now, many Utah officials say they are starting to agree with Nevada that they are in favor of leaving waste permanently in the utilities.
The nuclear industry and the Energy Department opposed the idea.
"Almost the entire Utah delegation has voted to go to Yucca Mountain and we want to finish this task so it won't get stuck in Utah," the representative said . ".
Chris CannonUtah.
But the world has changed a lot since that vote.
It just makes me see that this shift has become reasonable and is now arguably not Utah, not Nevada, not anywhere.