Public Attitudes Toward Siting a High-Level Nuclear Waste Repository in Nevada

This paper examines the sources of public opposition to a high-level nuclear waste repository among samples of 1001 residents of Nevada and a national sample of 1201 residents. Two models of choice are contrasted: A benefit-cost model and a risk-perception model of individual choice. The data suggest that the willingness of Nevada residents to accept a repository at Yucca Mountain depends upon subjective risk factors, especially the perceived seriousness of risk to future generations. Perceived risk depends in part on level of trust placed in the Department of Energy to manage a repository safely. Opposition to a local repository did not decrease significantly if compensation in the form of annual rebates, either ($1000, $3000, or $5000 per year for 20 years) were offered to residents. The public needs to be convinced before compensation is considered, that the repository will possess minimal risks to themselves as well as to future generations, and that the site currently targeted is suitable. One way to do this is through adoption of mitigation and control procedures such as strict federal standards and local control over the operation of the repository. The federal government should also consider returning to the fair procedure for selection between candidate sites specified in the initial Nuclear Waste Policy Act of 1982.     

Trust as a Determinant of Opposition to a High-Level Radioactive Waste Repository: Analysis of a Structural Model

Residents in the State of Nevada hold strong opinions about the federal government's proposal to site the nation's first high-level radioactive waste repository at Yucca Mountain. The model developed in this study is designed to examine the relationship between public perceptions of risk, trust in risk management, and potential economic impacts of the current repository program using a confirmatory multivariate method known as covariance structure analysis. The data used to test the model was collected in a 1989 statewide survey of Nevada residents. The results indicate that, for a statewide sample, perceptions of potential economic benefits do not have a significant role in predicting support or opposition to the repository program. On the other hand, risk perceptions and the level of trust in repository management are closely related to each other and to positions on Yucca Mountain. Trust directly influences risk perceptions which, in turn, have a direct effect on the attitude toward the repository, and an indirect effect through perceived stigma effects.     

A Decision Theory Perspective on the Disposal of High-Level Radioactive Waste

In this paper the problem of high-level nuclear waste disposal is viewed as a five-stage, cascaded decision problem. The first four of these decisions having essentially been made, the work of recent years has been focused on the fifth stage, which concerns specifics of the repository design. The probabilistic performance assessment (PPA) work is viewed as the outcome prediction for this stage, and the site characterization work as the information gathering option. This brief examination of the proposed Yucca Mountain repository through a decision analysis framework resulted in three conclusions: (1) A decision theory approach to the process of selecting and characterizing Yucca Mountain would enhance public understanding of the issues and solutions to high-level waste management; (2) engineered systems are an attractive alternative to offset uncertainties in the containment capability of the natural setting and should receive greater emphasis in the design of the repository; and (3) a strategy of waste management should be adopted, as opposed to waste disposal, as it allows for incremental confirmation and confidence building of a permanent solution to the high-level waste problem.     

The Nevada Initiative: A Risk Communication Fiasco

The U.S. Congress has designated Yucca Mountain, Nevada as the only potential site to be studied for the nation's first high-level nuclear waste repository. People in Nevada strongly oppose the program, managed by the U.S. Department of Energy. Survey research shows that the public believes there are great risks from a repository program, in contrast to a majority of scientists who feel the risks are acceptably small. Delays in the repository program resulting in part from public opposition in Nevada have concerned the nuclear power industry, which collects the fees for the federal repository program and believes it needs the repository as a final disposal facility for its high-level nuclear wastes. To assist the repository program, the American Nuclear Energy Council (ANEC), an industry group, sponsored a massive advertising campaign in Nevada. The campaign attempted to assure people that the risks of a repository were small and that the repository studies should proceed. The campaign failed because its managers misunderstood the issues underlying the controversy, attempted a covert manipulation of public opinion that was revealed, and most importantly, lacked the public trust that was necessary to communicate credibly about the risks of a nuclear waste facility.     

The Vulnerability of the Nevada Visitor Economy to a Repository at Yucca Mountain

This article reviews the studies commissioned by the Nevada Nuclear Waste Project Office to estimate the economic impact of a high-level nuclear waste repository at Yucca Mountain. Case studies found that visitor impacts occur for some analogous facilities, but not for others. Assessments of behavioral intent indicate that at least some economic agents would avoid visiting Nevada under repository scenarios. A third set of studies tested the risk-aversion and negative-imagery models of visitor decision making; people avoid visiting places associated with either a significant health risk or negative imagery, but it has yet to be shown that a repository would induce these perceptions in nearby places. In sum, the NWPO-sponsored studies suggest the potential for visitor impacts, but do confirm that these effects will occur.     

On-Site Storage of High Level Nuclear Waste: Attitudes and Perceptions of Local Residents

No public policy issue has been as difficult as high-level nuclear waste. Debates continue regarding Yucca Mountain as a disposal site, and—more generally—the appropriateness of geologic disposal and the need to act quickly. Previous research has focused on possible social, political, and economic consequences of a facility in Nevada. Impacts have been predicted to be potentially large and to emanate mainly from stigmatization of the region due to increased perceptions of risk. Analogous impacts from leaving waste at power plants have been either ignored or assumed to be negligible. This paper presents survey results on attitudes of residents in three counties where nuclear waste is currently stored. Topics include perceived risk, knowledge of nuclear waste and radiation, and impacts on jobs, tourism, and housing values from leaving waste on site. Results are similar to what has been reported for Nevada; the public is concerned about possible adverse effects from on-site storage of waste.     

Public Opposition to a Proposed Nuclear Waste Repository in Canada: An Investigation of Cultural and Economic Effects

Residents of four northern communities were surveyed about Atomic Energy of Canada Limited's proposal to site an underground repository for high-level nuclear waste somewhere in the Canadian Shield. Opposition to the repository was relatively strong in all communities, but was strongest among aboriginal respondents. Path analysis revealed that trust in nuclear regulators, faith in science and technology, and anticipated net costs were important mediators of this effect. Aboriginals were less trusting, exhibited less faith in science and technology, and perceived the costs associated with the repository to be higher than their nonaboriginal counterparts. No support was found for the hypothesis that, after controlling for aboriginal status, financially insecure individuals would display greater support for the nuclear waste repository than financially secure individuals. Policy implications for balancing perceived risks and siting needs are discussed.     

Improbability of Igneous Intrusion Promoting a Critical Event in Spent Nuclear Fuel Disposed in Unsaturated Tuff

In their regulations, the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency and the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission permit the omission of features, events, or processes with probabilities of <10(-4) in 10(4) yr (e.g., a constant frequency of <10(-8) per yr) in assessments of the performance of radioactive waste disposal systems. Igneous intrusion (or "volcanism") of a geologic repository at Yucca Mountain for radioactive waste is one disruptive event that has a probability with a range of uncertainty that straddles this regulatory criterion and is considered directly in performance assessment calculations. A self-sustained nuclear chain reaction (or "criticality") is another potentially disruptive event to consider, although it was never found to be important when evaluating the efficacy of radioactive waste disposal since the early 1970s. The thesis of this article is that the consideration of the joint event--volcanism and criticality--occurring in any 10,000-year period following closure can be eliminated from performance calculations at Yucca Mountain. The probability of the joint event must be less than the fairly well-accepted but low probability of volcanism. Furthermore, volcanism does not "remove" or "fail" existing hydrologic or geochemical constraints at Yucca Mountain that tend to prevent concentration of fissile material. Prior to general corrosion failure of waste packages, the mean release of fissile mass caused by a low-probability, igneous intrusive event is so small that the probability of a critical event is remote, even for highly enriched spent nuclear fuel owned by the U.S. Department of Energy. After widespread failure of packages occurs, the probability of the joint event is less than the probability of criticality because of the very small influence of volcanism on the mean fissile mass release. Hence, volcanism plays an insignificant role in inducing criticality over any 10(4)-yr period. We also argue that the Oklo reactors serve as a natural analogue and provide a rough bound on probability of criticality given favorable hydrologic or geochemical conditions on the scale of the repository that is less than 0.10. Because the product of this bound with the probability of volcanism represents the probability of the joint event and the product is less than 10(-4) in 10(4) yr, consideration of the joint event can be eliminated from performance calculations.     

An Analysis of the Portfolio of Sites to Characterize for Selecting a Nuclear Repository

The U.S. Department of Energy has selected three sites, from five nominated, to characterize for a nuclear repository to permanently dispose of nuclear waste. This decision was made without the benefit of an analysis of this "portfolio" problem. This paper analyzes different portfolios of three sites for simultaneous characterization and strategies for sequential characterization. Characterization of each site, which involves significant subsurface excavation, is now estimated to cost $1 billion. Mainly because of the high characterization costs, sequential characterization strategies are identified which are the equivalent of $1.7-2.0 billion less expensive than the selected DOE simultaneous characterization of the three sites. If three sites are simultaneously characterized, one portfolio is estimated to be the equivalent of $100-400 million better than the selected DOE portfolio. Because of these potential savings and several other complicating factors that may influence the relative desirability of characterization strategies, a thorough analysis of characterization strategies that addresses the likelihood of finding disqualifying conditions during site characterization, uncertainties, and dependencies in forecast site repository costs, preclosure and postclosure health and safety impacts, potential delays of both sequential and simultaneous characterization strategies, and the environmental, socioeconomic, and health and safety impacts of characterization activities is recommended.     

A Multiattribute Utility Analysis of Alternative Sites for the Disposal of Nuclear Waste

Five potential sites nominated for the Nation's first geologic repository for disposing of nuclear waste are evaluated using multiattribute utility analysis. The analysis was designed to aid the Department of Energy in its selection of 3 sites for characterization, a detailed data-gathering process that will involve the construction of exploratory shafts for underground testing and that may cost as much as $1 billion per site. The analysis produced insights into the relative advantages and disadvantages of the nominated sites and clarified current uncertainties regarding repository performance.     

Bounding Estimates for Critical Events When Directly Disposing Highly Enriched Spent Nuclear Fuel in Unsaturated Tuff

This paper examines the possibility of criticality in a nuclear waste repository. The estimated probabilities are rough bounds and do not entirely dismiss the possibility of a critical condition; however, they do point to the difficulty of creating conditions under which a critical mass could be assembled (i.e., corrosion of containers, separation of neutron absorbers from the fissile material, and collapse or precipitation of the fissile material). In addition, should a criticality occur in or near a container, the bounding consequence calculations showed that fissions from one critical event are quite small (<˜10²⁰ fissions, if similar to aqueous and metal accidents and experiments). Furthermore, a reasonable upper bound of total critical events of 10²⁸ fissions corresponds to only 0.1% of the number of fissions represented by the spent nuclear fuel inventory in a repository containing 70,000 metric tons of heavy metal (MTHM) (the expected size for the proposed repository at Yucca Mountain, Nevada).     

Waste Package Performance Evaluations for the Proposed High-Level Nuclear Waste Repository at Yucca Mountain

The evaluation studies of the proposed repository for long-term storage of spent nuclear fuel and high-level nuclear waste at Yucca Mountain, Nevada, are underway. Fulfillment of the requirements for limiting dose to the public, which includes containment of the radioactive waste emplaced in the proposed repository and subsequent slow release of radionuclides from the Engineered Barrier System (EBS) into the geosphere, will rely on a robust waste container design, among other EBS components. Part of the evaluation process involves sensitivity studies aimed at elucidating which model parameters contribute most to the waste package and overlying drip shield degradation characteristics. The model parameters identified for this study include (1) general corrosion rate parameters and (2) stress corrosion cracking (SCC) parameters. Temperature dependence and parameter uncertainty are evaluated for the general corrosion rate model parameters while for the SCC model parameters, uncertainty treatment of stress intensity factor, crack initiation threshold, and manufacturing flaw orientations are evaluated. Based on these evaluations new uncertainty distributions are generated and recommended for future analyses. Also, early waste package failures due to improper heat treatment were added to the waste package degradation model. The results of these investigations indicate that the waste package failure profiles are governed by the manufacturing flaw orientation model parameters.     

Analysis of the Treatment, by the U.S. Department of Energy, of the FEP Hydrothermal Activity in the Yucca Mountain Performance Assessment

The U.S. Code of Federal Regulations, 10 CFR Part 63, stipulates that the expected performance of the geological high-level nuclear waste repository must be demonstrated through a total system performance assessment (TSPA). The TSPA represents an analysis that identifies all features, events, and processes (FEPs) that might affect the disposal system and examines the effects of the identified FEPs upon the performance of the system. Secondary minerals from the thick unsaturated zone of Yucca Mountain were deposited from waters with temperatures up to 70-90 degrees C. U-Pb dating constrained the ages of the elevated temperatures to the period between 10 and 5-6 million years ago. Relatively youthful circulation of thermal waters (hydrothermal activity) would be of concern for the safety of the disposal facility. A phenomenological model was advanced by the U.S. Department of Energy (DOE), which proposed that the minerals were deposited by infiltrating meteoric waters that were heated upon contact with the bedrock; it was hypothesized that the latter was conductively heated by a shallow silicic magma body. The model rendered processes responsible for elevated water temperatures inconsequential for the safety of the proposed nuclear waste facility. However, attempts by DOE at validating the model by means of numeric thermal simulations and analogue system observations were unsuccessful. Regulations specify two criteria for exclusion of a FEP from consideration in the TSPA: low probability and low consequence. The lack of a plausible phenomenological model makes it impossible to apply either of these two criteria to the FEP Hydrothermal Activity. Despite the lack of a valid criterion for exclusion, it was excluded from the TSPA. Both the development of DOE's thermal model and the formal FEP analysis were associated with deviations from DOE's quality assurance regulations.     

Perceived Risk, Stigma, and Potential Economic Impacts of a High-Level Nuclear Waste Repository in Nevada

This study investigates the potential impacts of the proposed nuclear waste repository at Yucca Mountain, Nevada, upon tourism, retirement and job-related migration, and business development in Las Vegas and the state. Adverse impacts may be expected to result from perceptions of risk, stigmatization, and socially amplified reactions to "unfortunate events" associated with the repository (major and minor accidents, discoveries of radiation releases, evidence of mismanagement, attempts to sabotage or disrupt the facility, etc.). The conceptual underpinnings of risk perception, stigmatization, and social amplification are discussed and empirical data are presented to demonstrate how nuclear images associated with Las Vegas and the State of Nevada might trigger adverse economic effects. The possibility that intense negative imagery associated with the repository may cause significant harm to Nevada's economy can no longer be ignored by serious attempts to assess the risks and impacts of this unique facility. The behavioral processes described here appear relevant as well to the social impact assessment of any proposed facility that produces, uses, transports, or disposes of hazardous materials.     

Local Acceptance of a High-Level Nuclear Waste Repository

The siting of nuclear waste facilities has been very difficult in all countries. Recent experience in Sweden indicates, however, that it may be possible, under certain circumstances, to gain local support for the siting of a high-level nuclear waste (HLNW) repository. The article reports on a study of attitudes and risk perceptions of people living in four municipalities in Sweden where HLNW siting was being intensely discussed at the political level, in media, and among the public. Data showed a relatively high level of consensus on acceptability of at least further investigation of the issue; in two cases local councils have since voted in favor of a go-ahead, and in one case only a very small majority defeated the issue. Models of policy attitudes showed that these were related to attitude to nuclear power, attributes of the perceived HLNW risk, and trust. Factors responsible for acceptance are discussed at several levels. One is the attitude to nuclear power, which is becoming more positive, probably because no viable alternatives are in sight. Other factors have to do with the extensive information programs conducted in these municipalities, and with the logical nature of the conclusion that they would be good candidates for hosting the national HLNW repository.     

Decidedly Different: Expert and Public Views of Risks from a Radioactive Waste Repository

A questionnaire with items that had been used in a national survey of the general public was administered to persons attending an American Nuclear Society meeting. The items asked about risks associated with high-level nuclear waste (HLNW), trust in nuclear-waste program managers, costs and benefits of a repository project, and images of a HLNW repository. The results suggest that nuclear industry experts may have very different opinions from the general public about most of these items and their images of a repository indicate a vastly different conceptual framework within which their opinions are formed.     

Ramifications of Risk Measures in Implementing Quantitative Performance Assessment for the Proposed Radioactive Waste Repository at Yucca Mountain, Nevada, USA

As part of its preparation to review a potential license application from the U.S. Department of Energy (DOE), the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) is examining the performance of the proposed Yucca Mountain nuclear waste repository. In this regard, we evaluated postclosure repository performance using Monte Carlo analyses with an NRC-developed system model that has 950 input parameters, of which 330 are sampled to represent system uncertainties. The quantitative compliance criterion for dose was established by NRC to protect inhabitants who might be exposed to any releases from the repository. The NRC criterion limits the peak-of-the-mean dose, which in our analysis is estimated by averaging the potential exposure at any instant in time for all Monte Carlo realizations, and then determining the maximum value of the mean curve within 10000 years, the compliance period. This procedure contrasts in important ways with a more common measure of risk based on the mean of the ensemble of peaks from each Monte Carlo realization. The NRC chose the former (peak-of-the-mean) because it more correctly represents the risk to an exposed individual. Procedures for calculating risk in the expected case of slow repository degradation differ from those for low-probability cases of disruption by external forces such as volcanism. We also explored the possibility of risk dilution (i.e., lower calculated risk) that could result from arbitrarily defining wide probability distributions for certain parameters. Finally, our sensitivity analyses to identify influential parameters used two approaches: (1). the ensemble of doses from each Monte Carlo realization at the time of the peak risk (i.e., peak-of-the-mean) and (2). the ensemble of peak doses calculated from each realization within 10000 years. The latter measure appears to have more discriminatory power than the former for many parameters (based on the greater magnitude of the sensitivity coefficient), but can yield different rankings, especially for parameters that influence the timing of releases.     

NIMBY, CLAMP, and the Location of New Nuclear-Related Facilities: U.S. National and 11 Site-Specific Surveys

Public and political opposition have made finding locations for new nuclear power plants, waste management, and nuclear research and development facilities a challenge for the U.S. government and the nuclear industry. U.S. government-owned properties that already have nuclear-related activities and commercial nuclear power generating stations are logical locations. Several studies and utility applications to the Nuclear Regulatory Commission suggest that concentrating locations at major plants (CLAMP) has become an implicit siting policy. We surveyed 2,101 people who lived within 50 miles of 11 existing major nuclear sites and 600 who lived elsewhere in the United States. Thirty-four percent favored CLAMP for new nuclear power plants, 52% for waste management facilities, and 50% for new nuclear laboratories. College educated, relatively affluent male whites were the strongest CLAMP supporters. They disproportionately trusted those responsible for the facilities and were not worried about existing nuclear facilities or other local environmental issues. Notably, they were concerned about continuing coal use. Not surprisingly, CLAMP proponents tended to be familiar with their existing local nuclear site. In short, likely CLAMP sites have a large and politically powerful core group to support a CLAMP policy. The challenge to proponents of nuclear technologies will be to sustain this support and expand the base among those who clearly are less connected and receptive to new nearby sites.     

Nuclear Waste Management under Approaching Disaster: A Comparison of Decommissioning Strategies for the German Repository Asse II

This article compares different strategies for handling low‐ and medium‐level nuclear waste buried in a retired potassium mine in Germany (Asse II) that faces significant risk of uncontrollable brine intrusion and, hence, long‐term groundwater contamination. We survey the policy process that has resulted in the identification of three possible so‐called decommissioning options: complete backfilling, relocation of the waste to deeper levels in the mine, and retrieval. The selection of a decommissioning strategy must compare expected investment costs with expected social damage costs (economic, environmental, and health damage costs) caused by flooding and subsequent groundwater contamination. We apply a cost minimization approach that accounts for the uncertainty regarding the stability of the rock formation and the risk of an uncontrollable brine intrusion. Since economic and health impacts stretch out into the far future, we examine the impact of different discounting methods and rates. Due to parameter uncertainty, we conduct a sensitivity analysis concerning key assumptions. We find that retrieval, the currently preferred option by policymakers, has the lowest expected social damage costs for low discount rates. However, this advantage is overcompensated by higher expected investment costs. Considering all costs, backfilling is the best option for all discounting scenarios considered.     

Terrorism Risks and Cost‐Benefit Analysis of Aviation Security

We evaluate, for the U.S. case, the costs and benefits of three security measures designed to reduce the likelihood of a direct replication of the 9/11 terrorist attacks. To do so, we assess risk reduction, losses, and security costs in the context of the full set of security layers. The three measures evaluated are installed physical secondary barriers (IPSB) to restrict access to the hardened cockpit door during door transitions, the Federal Air Marshal Service (FAMS), and the Federal Flight Deck Officer (FFDO) Program. In the process, we examine an alternate policy measure: doubling the budget of the FFDO program to $44 million per year, installing IPSBs in all U.S. aircraft at a cost of $13.5 million per year, and reducing funding for FAMS by 75% to $300 million per year. A break‐even cost‐benefit analysis then finds the minimum probability of an otherwise successful attack required for the benefit of each security measures to equal its cost. We find that the IPSB is costeffective if the annual attack probability of an otherwise successful attack exceeds 0.5% or one attack every 200 years. The FFDO program is costeffective if the annual attack probability exceeds 2%. On the other hand, more than two otherwise successful attacks per year are required for FAMS to be costeffective. A policy that includes IPSBs, an increased budget for FFDOs, and a reduced budget for FAMS may be a viable policy alternative, potentially saving hundreds of millions of dollars per year with consequences for security that are, at most, negligible.