The following
are the most frequently cited objections to the Yucca Mountain
project and the response based on scientific analysis.
Scientific Bias
Concern: DOE skews its
scientific results to make the repository look OK.
Answer:
- An independent Inspector General's investigation,
completed in April 2001, found no evidence of pro-repository
bias in DOE's scientific program.
- The DOE science is the product 1000's of respected
scientists representing dozens of reputable organizations,
all of whom build their careers on professional credibility.
- DOE's scientific methods are backed by strong
international consensus.
- DOE has taken a conservative approach in areas of
scientific uncertainty (where large uncertainties exist
scientists typically choose assumptions that are less
favorable to repository performance).
Upwelling of groundwater
Concern: Geothermal
processes could force up the water table from 1000' below the
repository to flood the waste emplacement area.
Answer:
- Multiple studies have completely debunked this theory:
- National Academy of Sciences
- University of Nevada at Las Vegas
- U.S. Geologic Service
- Virginia Polytechnic University.
Corrosion
Concern: Water will degrade the
waste package containers.
Answer:
- Very little water falls on Yucca Mountain and most of
what does runs off (does not seep into the mountain).
Scientists have done extensive work to model how very small
amounts of water may infiltrate the repository and have
designed corrosion resistant containers made of advanced
Alloy C-22 covered by Titanium drip shields to protect the
waste against any seepage that may occur.
- Studies conducted to date confirm the corrosion
resistance of Alloy C-22.
- Alloy C-22 is more corrosion resistant than other
materials (it has evolved from of 103 years of experience
with Ni-Cr alloys developed to combat corrosion).
- Natural analogues—objects not protected by advanced
materials—have survived 1000's of years in the environment
under similar or even less favorable conditions.
- Confirmatory research to be conducted over the 100+
years before repository closure will either verify theories
about the longevity of Alloy C-22 or provide opportunity for
necessary modifications in repository design.
- Nevada sponsored studies showing C-22 corrosion under
extreme conditions did not accurately model the repository
environment.
Earthquakes
Concern: It is not safe to bury
nuclear waste in a seismically active area.
Answer:
- The seismicity of Yucca Mountain is well known and
understood.
- Repository surface and operational facilities will be
designed to withstand worst case earthquakes.
- The occurrence of earthquakes has been considered in
repository design and long term performance assessments. The
waste containers themselves will be designed to withstand
worst case earthquakes and DOE's analysis already assumes
that falling rocks will contribute to the long term
degradation of the containers.
- The repository layout will avoid well characterized
fault lines.
- Earthquakes release most of their destructive force at
the surface, earthquakes strong enough to cause damage in
the scientific trailers currently on the surface have gone
unnoticed by workers in the tunnels.
Volcanoes (igneous activity)
Concern: A
volcano could erupt through the repository.
Answer:
- A volcanic eruption that affects the repository is a
highly improbable event.
- Nevertheless, NRC is requiring that DOE analyze the
consequences of such an event and include this analysis in
the repository performance assessment.
- Millions of years of history shows that the region is
becoming less volcanically active with time.
- Volcano itself likely to cause more harm than any
radiation it might release.
Leaky Mountain
Concern: Evidence of Cl-36 from
nuclear weapons testing suggests that radioactive molecules
will leak rapidly out of Yucca Mountain.
Answer:
- Evidence of possible Cl-36 (less than 50 years old) does
not invalidate DOE's performance assessment:
- DOE is already conservatively assuming fast pathways
in its analysis.
- Small quantities of one radioactive element are not
indicative of the transport characteristics of all
radioactive elements.
- Cl-36 is not a major contributor to repository
radiological performance.
- Typical radioactive element travel time through the
mountain is on the order of 1000's of years (even with
fast pathways).
- The validity of the Cl-36 data is in
dispute.
Transportation is too risky
Concern: Moving
used fuel along road & rail threatens millions of
homes.
Answer:
- Used nuclear fuel transportation has a well established
safety record (1000's of shipments have already been
conducted world-wide without any radiation impact on public
health and safety).
- Used nuclear fuel transportation is carried out with
numerous precautions and is heavily regulated.
- Used nuclear fuel shipping containers are designed to
withstand severe accidents.
- Highly improbable (non-credible) accident release
scenarios have been analyzed and can be mitigated, emergency
responders will be prepared if they happen.
Human Intrusion
Concern: Future residents of
Yucca Mountain may inadvertently drill or mine into the
repository.
Answer:
- It is difficult to believe that future populations will
lose knowledge of or ability to detect the repository yet
retain the technology to drill through and/or mine into it.
- Even if this was credible, high ground in a resource
barren area is an unlikely drilling/mining location.
- Nevertheless, NRC will require DOE to evaluate a human
intrusion scenario and demonstrate that potential
radiological consequences to the public would be within
regulatory safety limits.
DOE is changing the rules to fit the
mountain
Concern: The new draft regulations DOE is
working to were conceived because DOE knows it can't meet the
old rules (this refers to NRC and DOE proposals to replace
repository licensing rules - 10CFRPart63 replacing 10CFRPart60
- and siting criteria - 10CFRPart963 replacing 10CFRPart960 to
enable regulatory and site selection decisions to be made
using the latest repository performance assessment tools).
Answer:
- The new regulations are the result of over a decade of
scientific and technical advance.
- The new regulations are more protective of public health
and safety than the old.
- The new regulations are backed by strong international
consensus.
- DOE's safety case most likely exceeds the old
regulations.
DOE is engineering their way around a bad site
Concern: DOE is getting all of its performance from miracle
metals (C-22, titanium) because the geology isn't working for
them.
Answer:
- No other nation has a site as dry, stable, & remote
as Yucca.
- Engineered barriers perform so well partly because they
are being emplaced in dry stable rock.
- DOE's performance assessment intentionally
underestimates the capability of the site's natural
features:
- Provides margin of safety (conservatism).
- Forces over-design of the engineered system (defense
in depth).
- Facilitates licensing (NRC processes are more familiar
with engineering information).
Climate change
Concern: Yucca will not be as
dry 1000's of years in the future as it is today.
Answer:
- Past climate change patterns have been evaluated, if
Yucca gets wetter, it won't get that much wetter.
- DOE conservatively assumes a wetter climate in its
performance assessment.
Surface flooding
Concern: Flash floods could
inundate the surface facilities during repository operations,
causing release of radioactive materials.
Answer:
- The surface facilities will be designed to withstand
worst case floods.
- Transportation and storage casks are already designed to
withstand submersion in water.
- The reason Nevada has such flooding whenever it rains,
is that the ground does not absorb water well. Ground that
doesn't like to absorb water is a good thing to have above a
repository.
Zero tolerance for radiation
Concern: Even a
single millirem of additional radiation is immoral.
Answer:
- There is no difference between man-made & natural
radiation.
- The potential radiological consequences of Yucca
Mountain are small compared to natural sources and well
below any level at which health effects have been observed.
- The benefits of Yucca Mountain far outweigh the risks.
- Over the 100+ years to repository closure, understanding
of radiation is likely to improve
greatly.