Where is the waste going to go?
Not in theory or if the politicos act later.
Probably Nevada’s Yucca Mountain or some other location that makes enough technical sense and whose neighbors receive a big enough bribe.
The crux is that much of the opposition to having it anywhere ever in any form is from the Boomer generation, for whom nuclear was (quite reasonably) the biggest boogie man. I still have boomer friends who will not enter my kitchen because I have a microwave oven in it, and everybody else simply walks in and uses it asking neither permission nor instructions on how to blast radiation into their cup of tea…. We boomers are now dwindling away and GCC is loomng much larger everywhere in REALITY.
As to where? Good place to start is: Storage and Disposal of Radioactive Waste - World Nuclear Association
Deep geological disposal is the preferred option for nuclear waste management in most countries, including Argentina, Australia, Belgium,…., the UK, and the USA. Hence, there is much information available on different disposal concepts; a few examples are given here. The only purpose-built deep geological repository that is currently licensed for disposal of nuclear material is the Waste Isolation Pilot Plant (WIPP) in the USA, but it does not have a licence for disposal of used fuel or HLW. Plans for disposal of spent fuel are particularly well advanced in Finland, as well as Sweden, France, and the USA, though in the USA there have been political delays. In Canada and the UK, deep disposal has been selected and the site selection processes have commenced.
I have been particularly impressed (as always!!!) with the Finns:
d fb
I get that in theory. But it never happens.
What? I’m a near original boomer and I’ve never heard such a thing. Although I can never rule out hearing such a thing and not remembering it. Where was I going with this? Oh; was this microwave thing a real thing for boomers?
JimA
1 Like
Current policy in the US is to store the spent reactor fuel at the power plant site. At existing plants, after it is done in the reactor, the fuel is moved to pools of water to allow it to cool off. After 5 years or so, it can then be moved to dry storage containers on-site. For these new TRISO fueled power plants (X-Energy, for example), evidently the fuel does not need time in a cooling pool, so it is moved directly to storage containers.
From the FAQ in the link above…
Q: How will nuclear waste be managed?
A: The spent fuel goes directly into a canister, where it remains until placed in a final repository. It does not need to cool in water, as is the case with traditional nuclear fuel.
The Xe-100 plant is designed to store all spent fuel for the entire 60-year operational life in one designated spent fuel storage building per reactor.
As is the case today with all commercial spent nuclear fuel, plant owners are responsible for the management of the fuel as it leaves each reactor, and the U.S. Department of Energy has the final legal responsibility to take title to the fuel, and for final disposal in a geologic repository under the Nuclear Waste Policy Act, as amended.
~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~
Here is a Google maps image of a typical spent fuel storage facility. This one is at the Watts Bar plant in Tennessee. Most other US nuclear plants have something similar. For this image, I count 26 canisters.
At some point, the government may get its act together on creating a centralized repository, but I’m not holding my breath.
_ Pete
Me, too. David had me scratchin’ on that one. I’m right in the heart of boomerdom myself and the only thing I remember was a few older folks (Silent/Greatest) who made some squeaks about radiation way back when, but I’ve no experience at all of that type of thinking in my cohort.
Pete
I just thought to mention there is no such thing as a perfect energy source. Here’s what happens to old wind turbine blades.
Image from here.
_ Pete
1 Like
This is another major point of contention. The current status drives down the costs by not taking care of things.
We have increased worries over time of terrorism against targets.
A high PM2.5 level indicates very poor air quality. A very low PM2.5 level denotes clean air. Saudi Arabia has an air quality value of 57.2PM2.5 , placing it 5th of 124 in the global listing of countries with worst air quality.
I could not find useful reliable polling data as to the generational difference, and I am certainly not holding breath until it happens, but I have lots of godchildren and nieces nephews I talk with regularly, and they are puzzled as to why we are being so stupid.
The main block to the reasonably good Nevada site (nowhere near as good as the Finnish one, too close to the almost unmoveable Colorado River over spans of geologic time) was the formidable Senator and Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid. Blocking Yucca Mountain use (but not the funding to construct it) was a crucial and purely political calculus for him — allowing him both to hold his caucus together and the Dems in power in nip and tuck Nevada.
Reid is gone. The ecological extremists are now fixated other energy sources as evil, and I find in arguments with the moderate ecological combatants a comprehension that difficult choices must be made, and nuclear waste and far less vulnerable newer reactors MIGHT be a better choice.
As to microwave ovens, well, I lived in and even managed a lot of communal homes in California and Massachusetts, and I sure ran into horror over microwaves — maybe a fluck.
d fb
1 Like
I wonder how much Bechtel pocketed for their work on that facility that will never be used?
Steve
I preached that 20 years ago going forward to anyone age 20 to 30 I could lay my hands on.
While I did not utter “boomer”…I said the baby boomer generation is about as stupid as they come. We have zero bragging rights. Back in those days kids slowly caught on. Now it is like running water to the home. Everyone gets it.
Three years ago the walruses coming off the golf course into the clubhouse suddenly said, “it’s terrible out there this summer”. Their defenses were gone.
That is said like an engineer in every problem is analyzed. That does not make it so either. The mind working on something should not be taken as concrete.
Like running in a manic market thinking fantastic, “I have greed, power, and money. This is only going to get better”. Concrete thinking forgets when the bottom falls out.
The endgame is solar. Now? I do not know when but the endgame will always be solar.
1 Like
Coincidentally the fairly competent Guardian swoops in just in time for my post post!
d fb
1 Like
Jaagu
Just for completeness sake, our we looking at Hanford, Oak Ridge, or something else?
I am betting Hanford. It is not far from my Family’s historic stomping grounds.
Wars of perceived existential survival have extreme downsides, especially when a rich, economically capable nation such as the USA in 1940 gets “worried” and decides to proceed because “I will worry about that some other day, when I have time to worry about it.”
I have heard that there are far worse but less photographable nuclear nightmare landscapes in Russia, because Stalin did not even pretend to worry much ever because God, ahem, “the dialectics of history” were on his side.
d fb
I agree about Russian accidents at nuclear sites, at oil & gas sites, and military munitions sites from 1950s to now. And I suspect China, North Korea, India, Pakistan, UK and France have similar accident sites.
You including France and Japan with their recycling?
We can now include Meta (Facebook, Instagram, WhatsApp) on the list of tech companies looking to invest in nuclear power. This appears to be interest in new nuclear power plants, instead of purchasing power from existing or recently retired plants.
The target is between 1 and 4 GW of new nuclear generation capacity in the USA. “We are seeking developers with strong community engagement, development, and permitting, and execution expertise that have development opportunities for new nuclear energy resources - either small modular reactors or larger nuclear reactors,” the notice announcing the request for proposals (RFP) says.
It adds “we are taking an open approach with this RFP so we can partner with others across the industry to bring new nuclear energy to the grid”. Qualification to be considered closes on 3 January with initial RFP proposals due by 7 February.
~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~
A large nuclear power reactor can usually supply around 1 to 1.5 GW of electric power, so Meta is looking at up to 3 or 4 new large plants, or a greater number of small, modular plants.
_ Pete
2 Likes
Where is the ideal place to put these new plants. Close to the customers is logical but where cooling water is plentiful, land is inexpensive and permitting not difficult.
I would guess about 100 miles from major business centers.
It depends what kind of new nuclear plant will be built. The developers of some of the new small modular reactors claim their plants can be built closer to population centers, since they are ultra-safe designs. Whether or not the NRC agrees with that assessment is another question.
The tech companies that have lately expressed interest in nuclear power (Google, Amazon, Meta, Microsoft) want the power plants to supply data centers and the computers located within. Those data centers are probably more flexible with their locations and can be built just about anywhere. The data center that Amazon recently bought in Pennsylvania is literally right next door to the Susquehanna nuclear power plant in the eastern part of the state. It is important the data centers are close to the switchyards and the high voltage power lines that run to it.
Regarding the locations of the new plants, there are currently plans for eastern Washington state, near the existing Columbia station, which is close to the Hanford government nuclear facilities. There are also plans for some kind of new plant near Oak Ridge in Tennessee. We shall see what else develops.
I expect, if there are new plants, some of them will be built close to existing nuclear locations. There are reasons for this related to licensing, but also those existing plants already have work forces that are familiar with nuclear plant procedures and those work forces have the skills to operate and maintain new plants. Vogtle 3 and 4, for instance, were built right next to the existing units 1 and 2.
A map of the currently operating nuclear plants in the US.
_ Pete