The U.S. House of Representatives voted overwhelmingly, 340-72, this past week to restart the licensing process to make Yucca Mountain in Nye County the nation?s permanent repository of nuclear waste. H.R. 3053, the Nuclear Waste Policy Amendments Act, also ups the ante, increasing the storage cap from 70 metric tons of highly radioactive material to 110,000 metric tons ? a 57 percent increase.
All four of Nevada?s representatives voted nay, even Northern Nevada Congressman Mark Amodei, a Republican who in the past has held out for negotiations that might provide some benefits for Nevada.
Amodei issued a press release explaining that he voted against the bill after the House Rules Committee rejected an amendment he had proposed.
?Since I was elected to Congress, I have always said I do not believe Yucca Mountain should be a simple dumping site for our nation?s nuclear waste,? Amodei said. ?Additionally, I have always been cognizant that policy makers should not consider Yucca Mountain to be a ?dead? issue, meaning Nevada?s congressional delegation should use this opportunity to dictate the terms of the repository under the best conditions for our state. That?s exactly what I chose to do this week by offering an amendment to H.R. 3053 that would have given Nevada a seat at the table to expand upon the mission of the repository.?
His amendment would have directed that the state?s higher eduction system would head up nuclear research and development, designated proper routes for transportation, cleaned up contaminated facilities in Nevada and required the Department of Energy to locate reprocessing facilities at Yucca Mountain instead of just burying the waste. He said reprocessing could create thousands of jobs and recycle spent fuel for further energy production.
Nevada?s Democratic representatives were all in over-my-dead-body mode.
?I have fought the misguided and dangerous Yucca Mountain nuclear waste dump project for my entire career and I?m not giving up,? said Rep. Dina Titus. ?This legislation is fundamentally flawed and going nowhere in the Senate.?
Rep. Jacky Rosen, who is running for Republican Sen. Dean Heller?s seat in the upper chamber, called permanent storage of nuclear waste at Yucca Mountain a ?reckless and ill-conceived plan that could put communities across the country in danger, jeopardize our military testing and training, waste billions more in taxpayer dollars, and harm Nevada?s tourism industry.?
Though 119 Democrats voted for the bill and only 67 against, Rosen blamed the Republican-controlled Congress.
Lame duck Rep. Ruben Kihuen lamented, ?I am disappointed that Congress has once again chosen to ignore the will of Nevadans and residents of Nevada?s Fourth Congressional District. 30 years have passed since Nevada was unfairly targeted by the ?Screw Nevada? bill and this new bill is nothing more than lipstick on a pig.?
Perhaps, Nevadans are not as knee-jerk opposed as some would have us believe.
Earlier this year, in an op-ed penned for the Reno newspaper, Dan Schinhofen, vice chairman of the Nye County Commission, noted that a poll taken by that newspaper showed 29.3 percent of respondents believed the project, if it included reprocessing, would be good for the economy, while 17.7 percent said Yucca Mountain would be OK if the state cuts a good deal, and 6.4 percent said Nevada should do it for national security ? 53.4 percent open to discussion, as opposed to 43.4 percent who said the state should just fight the project.
Schinhofen wrote, ?It is time to stop the unfounded fearmongering just to delay this multigenerational, multibillion-dollar project. Many, if not most, Nevadans want to have an honest discussion about Yucca Mountain, and the state?s politicians and opinion writers should start to listen.?
In a recent online article, retired Air Force Col. Bob Frank, chairman and co-founder of Nevadans CAN (Citizen Action Network), noted that recent breakthroughs in technology make it possible to safely and efficiently recycle spent nuclear fuel.
?The advanced reactors no longer require huge volumes of circulating external water to cool them,? Frank writes. ?They can be independently installed anywhere in remote or populated areas where power is needed. They can produce uninterruptible power for 24/7/365 at varying levels for up to 30 years without needing more recycled fuel.?
He argues that Nevada has been an international pioneer in nuclear technology and could continue to lead the nation.
Explore the possibilities instead of throwing a futile tantrum. ? TM