Here is a piece I've submitted to the Econews, our local environmental news media.
The Nuclear Regulatory Commission held a public hearing in Eureka on August 26th to gather input and ideas on formulating a policy for creating the many Community Advisory Boards that will be set up to monitor decommissioning activities at nuclear sites across the nation. Members of the local CAB, set up 20 years ago by PG&E, not only supplied useful information, but also released the giant “elephant in the room” - what will happen to the 6 casks of high-level spent fuel that is stored on the bluff adjacent to Humboldt Bay.
After 10 years of complex dismantling and shipping off some 16,000 truckloads of radioactively contaminated metal, concrete, soil, and other debris, the $1+ Billion decommissioning project is virtually complete. All that remains now, is finishing the final site restorations to bring it into California environmental compliance. However, PG&E holds the amended nuclear license requiring it to monitor and safeguard the dry casks in the Independent Spent Fuel Storage Installation (ISFSI) which is located on site about 150 feet from Humboldt Bay. The license is for 40 years, and PG&E will continue gathering monthly payments from ratepayers to pay the $10-15 Million per year storage bill for at least the next 10 years. What will happen after that is anybody’s guess, since there are no current viable solutions to the very long term needs of safeguarding this waste.
As was said by both PG&E and the NRC at the meeting, there is nothing they/we can do, since it is the Department of Energy’s problem. Mandated by Congress in 1982, the DOE was to take ownership and possession of all the waste fuel, and place it in a deep geologic repository by 1998. That deadline came, and there was no place to put the tens of thousands of tons of high-level wastes. DOE spent $15 Billion trying to develop Yucca Mountain for deep burial. Although the nuclear industry blames political issues, that site (or in reality, any other site) is currently unrealistic due to the enormous technological challenges dealing with the heat-emitting radioactivity of the fuel, and the huge costs estimates for very long term storage. Thus, the spent fuel from the defunct Humboldt Bay reactor is sitting in 6 dry casks in a concrete bunker right next to Humboldt Bay, under the guardianship of PG&E, and will most likely may remain there forever!
This next phase of the decommissioning process, is figuring out what to do with this very complex and challenging issue. There are many options which will be addressed in the future, not only by the CAB and, hopefully, by the local community and the public in general. How long will these casks do what they are supposed to do…their expected life is about 40-50 years (we're 10 years in.) What happens if there is a failure, due to the technology itself, due to earthquakes, due to tsunami, due to the increasing impacts of climate change on sea level rise and site integrity. Who pays for all this…ratepayers, taxpayers, PG&E, the nuclear industry??? We are easily talking about impacts occurring now and well into the lives of future generations. PG&E is currently in bankruptcy. Who's in charge? Will they sell the license to a private company (as has recently occurred with several other nuclear sites in the US) leading to corporate gamesmanship and incompetence? How does Humboldt Bay factor into the much bigger challenges of decommissioning PG&E’s Diablo Canyon reactors and their spent fuel? What about California’s other decommissioning site at San Onofre and Rancho Seco? How does this fit in with the 110 reactor sites across the nation?
These are very large and complex issues that will be debated and acted on in the political, technological, economic, and social arena for many years to come. It will take serious concerted citizen action to monitor and fight the humongous nuclear industry which even today touts the various hoaxes as it has over the years. Cheap, affordable, necessary, carbon-free. Nowhere in all the current pro-nuclear propaganda does it state the true costs and incredible challenges of all nuclear waste management, not only for reactors, but all across the entire nuclear industry.
It’s all about corporate money! Get informed, and stay tuned!!!!
The Nuclear Regulatory Commission held a public hearing in Eureka on August 26th to gather input and ideas on formulating a policy for creating the many Community Advisory Boards that will be set up to monitor decommissioning activities at nuclear sites across the nation. Members of the local CAB, set up 20 years ago by PG&E, not only supplied useful information, but also released the giant “elephant in the room” - what will happen to the 6 casks of high-level spent fuel that is stored on the bluff adjacent to Humboldt Bay.
After 10 years of complex dismantling and shipping off some 16,000 truckloads of radioactively contaminated metal, concrete, soil, and other debris, the $1+ Billion decommissioning project is virtually complete. All that remains now, is finishing the final site restorations to bring it into California environmental compliance. However, PG&E holds the amended nuclear license requiring it to monitor and safeguard the dry casks in the Independent Spent Fuel Storage Installation (ISFSI) which is located on site about 150 feet from Humboldt Bay. The license is for 40 years, and PG&E will continue gathering monthly payments from ratepayers to pay the $10-15 Million per year storage bill for at least the next 10 years. What will happen after that is anybody’s guess, since there are no current viable solutions to the very long term needs of safeguarding this waste.
As was said by both PG&E and the NRC at the meeting, there is nothing they/we can do, since it is the Department of Energy’s problem. Mandated by Congress in 1982, the DOE was to take ownership and possession of all the waste fuel, and place it in a deep geologic repository by 1998. That deadline came, and there was no place to put the tens of thousands of tons of high-level wastes. DOE spent $15 Billion trying to develop Yucca Mountain for deep burial. Although the nuclear industry blames political issues, that site (or in reality, any other site) is currently unrealistic due to the enormous technological challenges dealing with the heat-emitting radioactivity of the fuel, and the huge costs estimates for very long term storage. Thus, the spent fuel from the defunct Humboldt Bay reactor is sitting in 6 dry casks in a concrete bunker right next to Humboldt Bay, under the guardianship of PG&E, and will most likely may remain there forever!
This next phase of the decommissioning process, is figuring out what to do with this very complex and challenging issue. There are many options which will be addressed in the future, not only by the CAB and, hopefully, by the local community and the public in general. How long will these casks do what they are supposed to do…their expected life is about 40-50 years (we're 10 years in.) What happens if there is a failure, due to the technology itself, due to earthquakes, due to tsunami, due to the increasing impacts of climate change on sea level rise and site integrity. Who pays for all this…ratepayers, taxpayers, PG&E, the nuclear industry??? We are easily talking about impacts occurring now and well into the lives of future generations. PG&E is currently in bankruptcy. Who's in charge? Will they sell the license to a private company (as has recently occurred with several other nuclear sites in the US) leading to corporate gamesmanship and incompetence? How does Humboldt Bay factor into the much bigger challenges of decommissioning PG&E’s Diablo Canyon reactors and their spent fuel? What about California’s other decommissioning site at San Onofre and Rancho Seco? How does this fit in with the 110 reactor sites across the nation?
These are very large and complex issues that will be debated and acted on in the political, technological, economic, and social arena for many years to come. It will take serious concerted citizen action to monitor and fight the humongous nuclear industry which even today touts the various hoaxes as it has over the years. Cheap, affordable, necessary, carbon-free. Nowhere in all the current pro-nuclear propaganda does it state the true costs and incredible challenges of all nuclear waste management, not only for reactors, but all across the entire nuclear industry.
It’s all about corporate money! Get informed, and stay tuned!!!!
