Subscribe to Receive the Daily Report

Tuesday, May 21st, 2019

Soaring Costs But Meager Progress in Cleanup of “Scariest” Nuclear Sites

Author:     PHIL ZAHODIAKIN
Source:     Fair Warning
Publication Date:     MAY 8, 2019
Link: Soaring Costs But Meager Progress in Cleanup of “Scariest” Nuclear Sites
Stephan:   Everyone who actually knew anything about nuclear power knew from the get go that the only reason civilian nuclear power was developed was that the Navy just wasn't going to buy enough reactors to create a viable industry. To make that possible the country needed to create enough business for Westinghouse, General Electric, and a few smaller companies, so they could keep the technology alive, and employ enough engineers, technicians, welders, and plumbers to be able to build reactors. Everyone knew that no one knew what to do with nuclear waste, and they just hoped that some technology would emerge to handle the problem. Well, that technology never did emerge in any viable way, so as a result dotted across America, like cancerous tumors on a body, are waste sites and dead reactors that are lethally dangerous, and obscenely expensive to maintain. Anyone who tells you nuclear is a viable option to replace carbon energy is either ignorant of the real facts, or just lying. Here is the latest on where this all stands.  

The progress of a Department of Energy program to clean up the nation’s most dangerous nuclear waste sites appears to be slowing down even though it’s still devouring billions of dollars.

That discouraging picture emerges in the latest report by the federal Government Accountability Office on the long-running cleanup effort. Launched in 1989, it was designed to clean up 107 sites engaged in research or production of enriched uranium or plutonium for making nuclear weapons.

Cleanup work at 91 of the Cold War-era sites is finished. But the remaining 16 pose the greatest health risks – especially those with underground storage tanks leaking highly radioactive waste.

Testifying last week before the House Subcommittee on Oversight and Investigations, a GAO official said that for reasons that are unclear, estimated cleanup costs at the 16 ”biggest and scariest sites” have increased by $214 billion despite the Department of Energy (DOE) spending $48 billion since 2011.

David C. Trimble, the GAO’s director for natural resources and the environment, said the soaring costs ”are getting worse as the growth in cleanup liabilities vastly outpaces [the DOE’s] ability to reduce them.”

DOE officials […]

Read the Full Article