That’s the excellent question Congressman Bart Gordon (D-TN) is asking:
“Let me start off by saying this: There’s only one nation in the world that allows radioactive low-level waste to come in and be stored. That’s the United States,” the Tennessee Democrat said emphatically. “There are about a dozen nations, including Canada and Mexico, that have no storage of their own. So it’s only logical that if we’re the only nation we’re going to see more and more of them bringing their low-level wastes here.”
He added: “If they can do it, there’s no incentive for them to take care of it for themselves.”
Gordon said he has real problems with the EnergySolutions plan, which would process the waste initially at the company’s Oak Ridge facilities and then ship what’s left from processing to the company’s landfill at Clive, Utah.
He said he’s concerned that space will run out at the Utah landfill at the same time the U.S. nuclear industry is ramping up and diversifying to meet the the nation’s energy production requirements.
“There’s a limited, finite amount of storage there,” the congressman said. “And you’re going to see more need for that low-level radioactive storage. So, why in the world are we going to use our limited storage, no matter what it might be, for the rest fot he world, which in turn could harm our ability here? That’s why I have introduced legislation . . . It simply pulls us in line with the rest of the world in (saying) that the United States will not accept low-level radioactive waste unless the president waives that for national security reasons.”
Bad Behavior has blocked 1262 access attempts in the last 7 days.
Yes—but. There are two problems: 1) Poor countries usually don’t have the money, technology, or geology necessary to manage radioactive waste; 2) If they cannot put it into one of our facilities, odds are it will end up in your next bottle of Corona or your next can of tuna. You want that?