Towns: Plants should pay for storing nuclear waste (Wisconsin)

[jpak]

http://www.htrnews.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20080412/MAN0101/804120422/1984

TWO CREEKS — Town residents and officials living near two nuclear power plants told their elected representatives they don't want to be a "dumping ground" for radioactive waste.


But if the plants must store their waste on site, then towns should be compensated, residents said.


"When this plant was being built, they promised us that there would be no storage out there," said Kenneth Duveneck, town of Two Creeks chairman, referring to the nearby Point Beach Nuclear Plant.


Duveneck, other officials from the towns of Two Creeks and Carlton and fellow residents met at Two Creeks Town Hall with representatives for U.S. Sens. Herb Kohl and Russ Feingold and U.S. Reps. Tom Petri and Steve Kagen. Manitowoc County Executive Bob Ziegelbauer and fellow state Reps. Frank Lasee and Garey Bies also were in attendance during the Wednesday event.

<more>

[texanshatingbush]

1. OK, I'm revealing my ignorance and need some educating......

Dim Son touted nuclear energy, among others, as America's savior in gaining freedom from the dastardly grip of fossil fuels. As I recall, much was made at the time (don't remember if it was by Bushco or by the media) of France's reliance on nuclear as a clean source of energy.

Here's what I have never heard: how does France deal with it's nuclear waste? How do other countries which rely on nuclear energy for power deal with THEIR nuclear waste?

I seem to recall that the initial experimental nuclear plant at Hanford placed its nuclear waste in concrete-lined storage pits, because that was the best they had at the time and they were banking on future technology innovations to discover a foolproof way to sequester the deadly stuff until it no longer posed a problem for mankind. I think they're still waiting.

Someone knowledgeable, please clue me in.....and thanks for the education!

[madokie]

2. As it stands today no one has solved the problem of what to do with the waste

theres lots of bullshit stories to be told but no solutions to be offered. If one ignores that one tidbit of nuclear energy production then nuclear energy sounds like the cats meow but when the reality sets in as to what to do with something as dangerous as it is for the length of time it is then, well, nuclear doesn't sound so good any more. Hell, in the last post I made asking what to do with the waste at one point I was told that I was getting on someones nerves and wasting everyone elses time by asking. It'll be interesting to see what answers you get to that very basic of questions, what to do with the waste?
Today this administration is using depleted uranium in weapons with thousands of tons of the stuff used in Iraq alone. Oh and thats the only use I've found that they've found for it too. actually;-)

I live near a coal fired power plant and they have a hugh mountain of fly ash that is only getting bigger but its pretty benign as it is.

[texanshatingbush]

3. Thanks, madokie......

I was afraid that's what the answer would be.

I love sci-fi movies from the 50's. They place such great belief in the omnipotence of science. Science DOES provide a lot of answers, but every scientist knows how much we STILL DON'T KNOW about things. Looks like that remains true about nuclear energy by-products.

Caveat emptor, indeed.

[JohnWxy]

4. Also, this stuff has to be stored for thousands of years.