Return to the Splitting the Atom top page.
Return to the nuclear waste forum top page.
Topics covered in this forum:
|
The Online NewsHour's editors asks
Is the nuclear industry more responsive to criticism now as opposed to a
decade ago, and has the government taken strong enough measures to
regulate nuclear waste?
Tom Carpenter of the Government Accountability Project replies:
The commercial nuclear industry is no more responsive to criticism
now than ever. The March 1996 Time Magazine article about problems at the
Millstone Plant only serve to highlighht the intransigence of this industry
to internal and external criticism. In my view, the kind of attitudes
expressed by utility executives and government regulators alike are too lax,
dictated by tight budgets, and unresponsive to safety needs. With this
combination, along with the aging of the nuclear reactors themselves, it is
inevitable before a truly serious nuclear accident occurs with the loss of
many lives.
Jim Werner of the Department of Energy replies:
Nuclear energy produces appropximately 20 percent of this nation's
electricity. This share has remained relatively constant over the
past decade. For a variety of reasons, no new plants have been
ordered in almost twenty years. These reasons include the unfavorable
economics of nuclear energy as compared to other sources of
electricity, public opposition to the siting of new nuclear power
plants, and the absence of a site for the disposal of nuclear waste.
Over the past decade, public opinion polls have not indicated a
significant change in public opinion with respect to nuclear energy.
The responsiveness of nuclear utilities to concerns raised by the
Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) and others has varied over time
and by utility. It is difficult to generalize across the entire
industry. Many utilities have been excellent performers and have
either had no problems or have responded well when concerns have been
raised. Other utilities have not responded well and have had
regulatory problems.
The current regulations governing nuclear waste are strong enough
to ensure that if properly done the storage and treatment of nuclear
waste pose no undue risks to the public health and safety for the
immediate future. Thus, for example, it is considered safe to store
spent nuclear fuel at nuclear power plants for up to 100 years.
The Environmental Protection Agency and the Nuclear Regulatory
Commission have established standards for the permanent disposal of
nuclear wastes. There is a general consensus in the scientific
community that these standards are adequate to protect the public and
the environment from the long-term hazards of nuclear waste. Under
these standards, the risks to the public posed by the disposal of
nuclear waste would be relatively small compared to many of the risks
we face on a daily basis. Others believe, however, that our current
scientific understanding is insufficient to be able to predict with
any certainty that disposal systems will be able to last over the
extremely long periods of time (many centuries) for which this waste
will remain dangerously radioactive.
Viewer comments....
|
