The article titled "What Now for Nuclear Waste" addresses the complications that we currently face in terms of nuclear waste disposal. While it is known that nuclear waste persists in the environment for hundreds of years, there are several options for handling this waste, including reprocessing the fuel to remove the long-lived isotopes to be burned in a fast reactor, burying the spent fuel, or simply maintaining aboveground storage until politicians and scientists alike have decided the next step. Although the disposal of nuclear waste, as seen in the Yucca Mountain debate, is at a standstill, at least the spent waste is well inventoried and managed, and unlike carbon dioxide, it does not disperse into the atmosphere, nor does it seep from storage lagoons.
As there are no plausible scenarios for controlling climate change which do not require the use of nuclear energy, and apart from hydroelectricity, it is one of the only consistent and reliable sources which does not require the burning of fossil fuels. Since the US does not have any major hydro sources available, nuclear waste seems like a good option in terms of renewable energy. For those viewing the development of new nuclear plants as a negative thing due to the lack of a 'proper' disposal mechanism, I think it is time to move away from discussions and disagreements regarding the disposal of nuclear waste, and perhaps focus on the beneficial qualities that nuclear energy can bring to our country.
No comments:
Post a Comment