Can Sisyphus Succeed? Getting U.S. High‐Level Nuclear Waste into a Geological Repository

The U.S. government has the obligation of managing the high‐level radioactive waste from its defense activities and also, under existing law, from civilian nuclear power generation. This obligation is not being met. The January 2012 Final Report from the Blue Ribbon Commission on America's Nuclear Future provides commendable guidance but little that is new. The author, who served on the federal Nuclear Waste Technical Review Board from 1989 to 1994 and subsequently on the Board on Radioactive Waste Management of the National Research Council from 1994 to 1999, provides a perspective both on the Commission's recommendations and a potential path toward progress in meeting the federal obligation. By analogy to Sisyphus of Greek mythology, our nation needs to find a way to roll the rock to the top of the hill and have it stay there, rather than continuing to roll back down again.     

Developing and Testing a Facility Location Model for Canadian Nuclear Fuel Waste

The purpose of this paper is to develop and test a facility location model for the siting of a nuclear fuel waste disposal facility in Canada. The model is based on successful Canadian siting processes related to hazardous waste and low level radioactive waste facilities, as well as attributes of facility siting found in the literature. The proposed model was presented to a sample of participants in the federal environmental assessment review of the technical feasibility of the Canadian Nuclear Fuel Waste Disposal Concept (CNFWDC) held throughout Canada in 1990. Results demonstrate that despite the fact that over half of the survey respondents did not support the CNFWDC during the public hearings, the majority favorably rated the proposed facility location model. Components of the model that were tested included siting criteria and goals, decision-making groups, and siting safeguards. On the basis of these results, it is concluded that the siting of a nuclear fuel waste disposal facility must make the decentralization of decision-making authority to local communities and governments a priority.     

Reversing Nuclear Opposition: Evolving Public Acceptance of a Permanent Nuclear Waste Disposal Facility

Nuclear facilities have long been seen as the top of the list of locally unwanted land uses (LULUs), with nuclear waste repositories generating the greatest opposition. Focusing on the case of the Waste Isolation Pilot Plant (WIPP) in southern New Mexico, we test competing hypotheses concerning the sources of opposition and support for siting the facility, including demographics, proximity, political ideology, and partisanship, and the unfolding policy process over time. This study tracks the changes of risk perception and acceptance of WIPP over a decade, using measures taken from 35 statewide surveys of New Mexico citizens spanning an 11‐year period from fall 1990 to summer 2001. This time span includes periods before and after WIPP became operational. We find that acceptance of WIPP is greater among those whose residences are closest to the WIPP facility. Surprisingly, and contrary to expectations drawn from the broader literature, acceptance is also greater among those who live closest to the nuclear waste transportation route. We also find that ideology, partisanship, government approval, and broader environmental concerns influence support for WIPP acceptance. Finally, the sequence of procedural steps taken toward formal approval of WIPP by government agencies proved to be important to gaining public acceptance, the most significant being the opening of the WIPP facility itself.     

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.     

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.     

Book Reviews

Book review in this Article:
San Francisco: Center for Science Information (CSI)
¹ Risk Analysis Section, Oak Ridge National Laboratory
Purdue University Industrial Waste Conference Proceedings Edited by John M. Bell Chelsea
Health and Safety in Small Industry: A Practical Guide for Managers Environmental and Occupational Health Information Program
Drinking Water Health Advisory: Pesticides U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
Safety Series 100: Evaluating the Reliability of Predictions Made Using Environmental Transfer Models The International Atomic Energy Agency Vienna
Irrigation-Induced Water Quality Problems: what Can Be Learned from the San Joaquin Valley Experience
Committee on Irrigation-Induced Water Quality Problems, Water Science and Technology Board, Commission on Physical Sciences
Toxicology Chemistry: A Guide to Toxic Substances in Chemistry
Handbook of Environmental Fate and Exposure of Organic Chemicals, Volume I: Large Production and Priority Pollutants
Chelsea, Michigan:
Biologic Markers in Reproductive Toxicology Subcommittee on Reproductive and Neurodevelopmental Toxicology, Committee on Biologic Markers, Board on Environmental Studies and Toxicology, Commission on Life Sciences, National Research Council     

Book Reviews

Book Reviewed in this article:
Environmental Statutes, 1988 Edition Rockville
Developmental Toxicology: Mechanisms and Risk Edited by John A. McLachlan, Robert M. Pratt, and Clement L. Markert
Carcinogen Risk Assessment Edited by Curtis C. Travis
Improving Dialogue with Communities By Billie Jo Hance, Caron Chess, Peter M. Sandman
Risk Communication Edited by J. Clarence Davies, Vincent T. Covello, and Frederick W. Allen
Hazardous Waste Site Management: Water Quality Issues Water Science and Technology Board, Commission on Engineering and Technical Systems, Commission on Physical Sciences, Mathematics, and Resources, National Research Council Washington
Organo-Chlorine Solvents: Health Risks to Workers By the Royal Society of Chemistry Brussels
Risks, Concerns, and Social Legislation: Forces That Led to Laws on Health, Safety, and the Environment By W. Curtiss
Health Risks of Radon and Other Internally Deposited Alpha-Emitters: BIER IV Committee on the Biological Effects of Ionizing Radiations, Board on Radiation Effects Research, Commission on Life Sciences, National Research Council Washington
Human Risk Assessment: The Role of Animal Selection and Extrapolation Edited by M. V. Roloff, AS. G. Wilson, W. E. Ribelin, W. P. Ridley, and F. A. Ruecker     

Resolution of the Long-Term Performance Issues at the Waste Isolation Pilot Plant

The Waste Isolation Pilot Plant (WIPP) is a geological repository for disposal of U.S. defense transuranic radioactive waste. Built and operated by the U.S. Department of Energy (DOE), it is located in the Permian age salt beds in southeastern New Mexico at a depth of 655 m. Performance assessment for the repository's compliance with the 10,000-year containment standards was completed in 1996 and the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) certified in 1998 that the repository meets compliance with the EPA standards 40 CFR 191 and 40 CFR 194. The Environmental Evaluation Group (EEG) review of the DOE's application for certification identified a number of issues. These related to the scenarios, conceptual models, and values of the input parameters used in the calculations. It is expected that these issues will be addressed and resolved during the first 5-year recertification process that began with the first receipt of waste at WIPP on March 26, 1999, and scheduled to be completed in March 2004.     

Strategic Appraisal of Environmental Risks: A Contrast Between the United Kingdom's Stern Review on the Economics of Climate Change and its Committee on Radioactive Waste Management

In this article, we compare two high‐profile strategic policy reviews undertaken for the U.K. government on environmental risks: radioactive waste management and climate change. These reviews took very different forms, both in terms of analytic approach and deliberation strategy. The Stern Review on the Economics of Climate Change was largely an exercise in expert modeling, building, within a cost‐benefit framework, an argument for immediate reductions in carbon emissions. The Committee on Radioactive Waste Management, on the other hand, followed a much more explicitly deliberative and participative process, using multicriteria decision analysis to bring together scientific evidence and stakeholder and public values. In this article, we ask why the two reviews were different, and whether the differences are justified. We conclude that the differences were mainly due to political context, rather than the underpinning science, and as a consequence that, while in our view “fit for purpose,” they would both have been stronger had they been less different. Stern's grappling with ethical issues could have been strengthened by a greater degree of public and stakeholder engagement, and the Committee on Radioactive Waste Management's handling of issues of uncertainty could have been strengthened by the explicitly probabilistic framework of Stern.     

Managing Nuclear Waste from Power Plants

National strategies to manage nuclear waste from commercial nuclear power plants are analyzed and compared. The current strategy is to try to operate a repository at Yucca Mountain, Nevada, to dispose of high-level nuclear waste underground. The main alternatives involve temporary above-ground storage at a centralized facility or next to nuclear power plants. If either of these is pursued now, the analysis assumes that a repository will be built in 2100 for waste not subsequently put to use. The analysis treats various uncertainties: whether a repository at Yucca Mountain would be licensed, possible theft and misuse of the waste, innovations in repository design and waste management, the potential availability of a cancer cure by 2100, and possible future uses of nuclear waste. The objectives used to compare alternatives include concerns for health and safety, environmental and socioeconomic impacts, and direct economic costs, as well as equity concerns (geographical, intergenerational, and procedural), indirect economic costs to electricity ratepayers, federal government responsibility to manage nuclear waste, and implications of theft and misuse of nuclear waste. The analysis shows that currently building an underground repository at Yucca Mountain is inferior to other available strategies by the equivalent of $10,000 million to $50,000 million. This strongly suggests that this policy should be reconsidered. A more detailed analysis using the framework presented would help to define a new national policy to manage nuclear waste.     

Intergenerational Issues Regarding Nuclear Power, Nuclear Waste, and Nuclear Weapons

Nuclear power, nuclear waste, and nuclear weapons raise substantial public concern in many countries. While new support for nuclear power can be found in arguments concerning greenhouse gases and global warming, the long-term existence of radioactive waste has led to requirements for 10,000-year isolation. Some of the support for such requirements is based on intergenerational equity arguments. This, however, places a very high value on lives far in the future. An alternative is to use discounting, as is applied to other resource applications. Nuclear weapons, even though being dismantled by the major nations, are growing in number due to the increase in the number of countries possessing these weapons of mass destruction. This is an unfortunate legacy for future generations.     

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.     

The Crucial Role of Nomothetic and Idiographic Conceptions of Time: Interdisciplinary Collaboration in Nuclear Waste Management

The disposal of nuclear waste involves extensive time scales. Technical experts consider up to 1 million years for the disposal of spent fuel and high‐level waste in their safety assessment. Yet nuclear waste is not only a technical but also a so‐called sociotechnical problem and, therefore, requires interdisciplinary collaboration between technical, natural, social sciences, and the humanities in its management. Given that these disciplines differ in their language, epistemics, and interests, such collaboration might be problematic. Based on evidence from cognitive psychology, we suggest that, in particular, a concept like time is presumably critical and can be understood differently. This study explores how different scientific disciplines understand extensive time scales in general and then focuses on nuclear waste. Eighteen qualitative exploratory interviews were conducted with experts for time‐related phenomena of different disciplines, among them experts working in nuclear waste management. Analyses revealed two distinct conceptions of time corresponding to idiographic and nomothetic research approaches: scientists from the humanities and social sciences tend to have a more open, undetermined conception of time, whereas natural scientists tend to focus on a more determined conception that includes some undetermined aspects. Our analyses lead to reflections on potential difficulties for interdisciplinary teams in nuclear waste management. We focus on the understanding of the safety assessment, on potential implications for communication between experts from different disciplines (e.g., between experts from the humanities and engineering for risk assessment and risk communication), and we reflect on the roles of different disciplines in nuclear waste management.     

Energy Choices and Risk Beliefs: Is It Just Global Warming and Fear of a Nuclear Power Plant Accident?

A survey of 3,200 U.S. residents focused on two issues associated with the use of nuclear and coal fuels to produce electrical energy. The first was the association between risk beliefs and preferences for coal and nuclear energy. As expected, concern about nuclear power plant accidents led to decreased support for nuclear power, and those who believed that coal causes global warming preferred less coal use. Yet other risk beliefs about the coal and nuclear energy fuel cycles were stronger or equal correlates of public preferences. The second issue is the existence of what we call acknowledged risk takers, respondents who favored increased reliance on nuclear energy, although also noting that there could be a serious nuclear plant accident, and those who favored greater coal use, despite acknowledging a link to global warming. The pro‐nuclear group disproportionately was affluent educated white males, and the pro‐coal group was relatively poor less educated African‐American and Latino females. Yet both shared four similarities: older age, trust in management, belief that the energy facilities help the local economy, and individualistic personal values. These findings show that there is no single public with regard to energy preferences and risk beliefs. Rather, there are multiple populations with different viewpoints that surely would benefit by hearing a clear and comprehensive national energy life cycle policy from the national government.     

Decision-Making, Time Horizons, and Risk in the Very Long-Term Perspective

Some decisions made today have far-reaching consequences as exemplified by those concerning nuclear power and spent nuclear fuel. The investigation presented here uses a decision theoretic framework in which time horizons and the discounting of negative consequences play significant roles. The results indicated wide variations in the lengths of the planning horizons judged to be adequate not only across a number of activities, including nuclear waste management, but also across groups of subjects (e.g., engineering students, retired people, and nuclear fuel experts). The paper reports typical judgments and correlations between different variables for different groups of subjects. The differences across groups reflect potential sources of conflict, depending in part on different values and different perceptions of more or less uncertain facts. Discounting functions for negative consequences in the future were also established. A range in differences in the speed of discounting were found and illustrated. Furthermore, it was found that substantial proportions in all groups regarded negative consequences related to nuclear waste as nondiscountable. When asked about the effect of time until outcome on acceptable probability of a negative outcome, many subjects used the probability concept in an incoherent way, illustrating the great difficulty in communicating small probabilities in a long-term risk context.     

Stigma Happens: Social Problems in the Siting of Nuclear Waste Facilities

The paper by Metz challenges the view that stigma associated with a nuclear waste repository might lead to significant economic losses to the host region. We have been invited to comment on the general issues raised by this paper. We find that much of the evidence presented in the paper consists of factual and conceptual errors and misrepresentations of the research literature. Based on our review of evidence documenting the social and economic impacts of perceived risk, we conclude that stigma is an important phenomenon that is symptomatic of fundamental problems with the way in which nuclear waste facilities are sited.     

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.     

Perceived Risks of Radioactive Waste Transport Through Oregon: Results of a Statewide Survey

Transportation of hazardous materials, and particularly radioactive wastes, on public highways has become an important risk management issue. The unfavorability of public attitudes regarding hazardous and nuclear wastes signals the potential for strong public opposition to programs for transporting these materials. This paper presents the results of a survey conducted to assess public reactions to a long-term nuclear waste transport program planned to follow a route through a portion of rural Oregon. The survey assessed a number of key risk perception issues, including perceived health and safety risks of nuclear waste transport, relative risks of transport vs. storage at an existing site, trust in state officials, and satisfaction with life in communities along the transport route. The survey identified a number of attitudes and concerns that need to be understood and considered by those in charge of designing and implementing the waste-transportation program.     

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.