Nevadans concerned about nuclear waste can breathe easier, for now
No state should be forced to accept nuclear waste unless approved by residents via ballot referendum, as opposed to being decided by state lawmakers.
Nevada scored a victory this week when the U.S. Department of Energy announced it was embracing a policy of requiring state and local approval for development of any nuclear waste storage site. That move, combined with staunch opposition among Nevada’s leaders to the Yucca Mountain Nuclear Waste Repository, amounted to a reprieve from any immediate prospect of reviving the atrocious facility.
But — and there always seems to be a “but” when it comes to Yucca Mountain — the feds’ announcement unfortunately doesn’t equate to a wooden stake in the project’s heart. While it will effectively keep the waste dump on hold for at least three years, there’s no guarantee that another president will follow the Biden administration’s lead and require consent. In 2025, we could be back in the crosshairs.
Still, a win is a win when it comes to Yucca Mountain, and for that the thanks goes to our congressional, state and local leaders who have fought for decades against efforts to turn our state into a dumpsite for highly radioactive nuclear waste. That list includes Sens. Catherine Cortez Masto and Jacky Rosen, Reps. Dina Titus, Steven Horsford and Susie Lee, and any number of Las Vegas political and civic leaders, notably the Vegas Chamber administration and membership.
For a few years, at least, Nevada can rest a bit, knowing that we have control over Yucca Mountain. In this week’s move by the Department of Energy, officials said they would seek approval from state, local and tribal governments to build an interim storage site until a permanent site can be found. Government officials estimate that there is roughly 86,000 metric tons of nuclear waste currently parked at sites in 33 states.
“When it comes to the storage of nuclear waste, everyone impacted deserves a seat at the table,” Cortez Masto said in a joint statement with Rosen. “I applaud the administration’s move to consider a consent-based siting approach, and am sure that the vast majority of Nevadans who oppose storing dangerous nuclear materials in their backyard will make their voices heard during this process. I’ll keep working in Congress to block any attempts to store nuclear waste at the failed Yucca Mountain project.”
Rosen said in the statement that the “move forward with consent-based interim storage is another step in the right direction toward ensuring Nevada never becomes the nation’s nuclear waste dump.”
Consent-based siting is definitely the right approach, and it needs to be cemented into law as opposed to being an optional choice for the executive branch. This should be a simple matter: No state should be forced to accept nuclear waste unless approved by residents via ballot referendum, as opposed to being decided by state lawmakers. Why a public vote versus a legislative action? Because leaving it in the hands of state lawmakers is too political.
Although Nevada caught a temporary break with the announcement, Yucca Mountain will remain a threat until it’s permanently canceled or Nevada gets legal protections against it at the federal level.
Look no further than the last presidential administration, which tried but failed for three years to convince Congress to approve funding to complete the licensing process for a construction permit. Finally, in former President Donald Trump’s last year in office, he flip-flopped and announced he was abandoning his push on Yucca Mountain — a move largely seen as an attempt to win over Nevada for his run for reelection.
If Trump or a Republican returns to office after the 2024 election, there could very well be another attempt at bringing the project back to life.
President Joe Biden, on the other hand, made a campaign promise not to store any waste at the site during his presidency, citing concerns over seismic activity in the area and the possibility of waste escaping into the atmosphere or the water table.
Nevadans have been saying “hell no” to Yucca Mountain for decades, and with ample reason. An accident or terrorist attack during the transport of this highly radioactive waste could be catastrophic for Nevada — especially for Las Vegas, where the transportation routes would take this nasty stuff directly through the heart of our community. A leak at the site could contaminate water supplies or otherwise make Yucca Mountain and the lands around it inhabitable for the tribal communities and other Nevadans who live in the area.
Then there were the dirty politics that resulted in the Silver State becoming cursed with this project to begin with. That happened in 1987, when lawmakers voted to pare down a list of three potential sites for a national repository to one — Nevada was singled out as the only site that would continue to be studied. That vote, which came despite a lack of conclusive scientific findings and was spurred by powerful lawmakers from the other sites, which were in Texas and Washington, became known in our state as the “Screw Nevada” bill. It called for site development to begin by 2002, and President George W. Bush green-lighted it that year.
Nevadans haven’t forgotten this colossal insult, and we remain as determined as ever not to be the site of the national repository. Remember, the plan for Yucca Mountain would not only send tons of radioactive waste through our community but would also require the material to be transported through 44 states and the home counties of some 175 million Americans.
Yucca Mountain was a terrible idea from the start, and it hasn’t improved with age. The Department of Energy made the right choice in committing to consent-based siting, but Nevada’s leaders will have to keep up our defense until this dump is canceled once and for all or consent becomes the law of the land.