Deseret News | Only Congress might halt nuclear waste

Reader comments
Only Congress might halt nuclear waste

Robert | 11:26 a.m. Oct. 16, 2009

If we don't import and store this kind of waste, other nations will simply dump it in the oceans or dispose of it in ways that will contaminate not only their own land but also the water and air that we all use.

Because other nations don't have our knowledge and sophistication with respect to this type of hazardous waste, we must step forward and store and treat it until other nations catch up.

What did you say Robert?? | 12:02 p.m. Oct. 16, 2009

These other nations are smart enough to build and operate nuclear power plants, etc, but don't have "our knowledge and sophistication with this type of hazardous waste"? If they can build and operate nuclear power plant tey clearly know the hazards associated with such and MUST assume responsibility for dealing with the waste. Otherwise stop building and operating the plants.

Jake | 12:08 p.m. Oct. 16, 2009

Robert, did you ever see what radio activity can do to the human?????? Check in with people who were in Nagasaki,or Hirshima, or who know someone who went thru it !!!!!!! THEN talk about "our knowledge and sophistication" IT SHOULD NOT BE ALLOWED, LET THEM KEEP IT,!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Comments continue below

Dear Jake | 12:53 p.m. Oct. 16, 2009

Stop acting like this is on the level with A-bomb radiation. The stuff that engegy solutions deals with is not even in the same breath as the drums of toxic ooze seen on the "Simpsons". The level of radioactive material they are allowed to handle is actually far less than things you keep around the house and throw into the county landfill on a daily basis.

Do you have a LCD alarm clock? Did you know that it is too radioactive for ES to legally dispose of? Bet its on the table by your head when you sleep at night, huh?

The things ES disposes of are little paper booties and aprons worn by X-ray techs and the like. X-rays are an excellent example of how that "Dangerous" radiation you are so afraid of is actually very useful when PROPERLY DEALT WITH! This is what ES does.

I dare you to take a tour. THey offer them free of charge, provide transportation to the site, a full access tour, and lunch. Not a glowing rod or ooze covered drum to be found. Stop mindlessly acquiesing to the environmental propeganda and go see it for yourself.

And then,,, | 12:58 p.m. Oct. 16, 2009

I'm still waiting for the environmentalists to start looking at Huntsman Chemical. Nothing quite says "Environmentally friendly" like plastics manufacturing, right?

Perhaps the longer the controversy rages on about Energy Solutions, the longer it will take to wonder what kinds of things that a chemical manufacturer could be doing to the environment.

Hypocrisy Redux | 1:51 a.m. Oct. 17, 2009

If we aren't willing to import other countries environmental problems then we must stop exporting our environmental problems to other countries. That means:

* Cutting down our own trees instead of importing wood from Canada

* Using our own oil reserves (ANWR) instead of importing them from Canada, the Middle East, etc

* Managing our e-waste here instead of exporting it to China

Robert is right! | 5:53 a.m. Oct. 17, 2009

It's sad, but we've let the genie out of the bottle with nuclear waste. We cannot trust anyone to dispose of it properly -- not in this age of terrorism where even a low-radiation bomb threat could create panic in the streets and sink the economy just with the mere report of a "dirty" nuke waste bomb.

The next problem is if a nuke waste train gets into an accident. Imagine a train accidently going off track near the Temple in SLC. All that Italian nuke waste will have to run by the Temple on its way to Energy Solutions waste dump... It would destroy Utah's economy overnight, but I guess railroading it must be done. We have no choices. We've lost our free agency with this stuff loose in the world...

Religious Analogy | 6:44 a.m. Oct. 17, 2009

Yes, ES offers tours, examination and your careful scrutiny but 99.99% of the opponents reject all that and rely on "politically correct" hearsay and environmentalist propaganda. I encountered this kind of close-mindedness when I asked people to read the Book of Mormon as a missionary. Nope, they KNEW it was garbage without reading it. I have found that attitute to prevail in most all aspects of life where minds are made up: "DO NOT confuse me with the facts."

Jeff | 8:06 a.m. Oct. 17, 2009

The comments so far have been refreshingly sane. I was beginning to think there were no rational people in this state. This is actually a relatively small amount of material which will never harm anyone. The trouble with environmental extremists is they throw the baby out with the wash water. Opposing even small amounts of radioactivity makes them look a little nutty. Accepting this material is a purely economic decision. It creates jobs and income for a legitimate company.

Anonymous | 9:48 a.m. Oct. 17, 2009

Since the beginning of transportation of radioactive waste there have been no radiological related injuries or deaths as a result of the transportation of low-level waste.

I fail to see how transporting low-level waste would ruin the economy. In fact I'm pretty sure it won't- as you probably wouldn't be able to distinguish the cars from those carrying other products.

I think it's funny that Rep. Markey welcomes Ferrari cars when they kill more people than their radioactive waste. Even one death would be more than from low-level radioactive waste. Haha.

jfarmer9 | 11:11 a.m. Oct. 17, 2009

I have to agree with the previous comments that if we do not take care of this low level waste we will loose control of this waste and there could be unknown consequences. I am sure all of the readers of this article are familiar with the Somalia pirates but I doubt many realize that these pirates claim to have gotten there start as an ad hoc coast guard protecting their coastline when it was used as a dumping ground for Italian nuclear waste. Back in the 1990’s a Swiss company Achair Partners and an Italian waste broker, Progresso routinely dumped nuclear and toxic waste from Italy off the cost of Somalia.

As a pro nuclear activist I would hate to see a similar event occur. It is obvious to me that if Italian, Brazilian, or Mexican nuclear waste starts showing up on the coast lines of the world the current nuclear renaissance will suffer greatly.

200 new nuke plants now,

Jfarmer9

an observer | 3:01 p.m. Oct. 17, 2009

Low level wastes have sufficiently low levels of radioactivity, that decays away sufficiently fast, that they have almost zero hazard after a few hundred years. That's why regulations allow them to be disposed of in engineered landfills. All of this discussion about the "dangers" of low level waste is completely off the mark.

Low level waste has such low radiation levels that it's impossible for it to directly kill anybody, and the radiation levels are so low that even if people come into contact, which essentially never happens, the actual increase in cancer risks are so small that one would never be able to detect them statistically in a population.

Off topic | 6:03 p.m. Oct. 17, 2009

Slightly off topic, but regardless of whether or not EnergySolutions is allowed to import waste for processing, no one deserves to be treated the way Mr. Christensen was treated during the sub-committee hearing. Matheson wouldn't talk to him and Gordon's (Tennessee) only goal was to paint Christensen as a liar. I used to be a Democrat and voted for Matheson. Not a fan of the Republicans, so I guess I am an official Independent (whatever that means).

The three democrats at the subcommittee did lie, stating that we do not have sufficient capacity for our own Class A waste. We don't have a place for the spent fuel (thanks Senator Reid), but we have sufficient Class A capacity.

RADMAN | 9:07 a.m. Oct. 18, 2009

Why doesn't Utah wake up and tax EnergySolutions on the waste they recieve? Like other states , South Carolina and Washington, the volume of disposal is driven by the cost to the generator. If the waste is expensive they either do not generate it or they volume reduce it.Energysolutions is a monolpoly that should be taxed as one by Utah, say $50 per FT3 recieved for the low stuff and increase as the curie content increases to $200 per foot. This risk based approach would generate millions for Utah and make generators act responsible
As far as international waste, I wonder who will be responsible for a clean-up in Utah in say 50 years if the site has to be fixed? Good luck getting some defunct Italian company to pay up. In the Hazardous waste business there are laws that state the generator is responsible for waste disposition, handling and disopsal in perpetuity. These "Potentially Responsible Parties" or PRP's were the basis for the entire superfund clean-up and revolutionized the Hazardous waste business.

to RADMAN | 5:46 p.m. Oct. 18, 2009

EnergySolutions is taxed. They are taxed a lot. Duh.

Re: Off topic | 9:26 p.m. Nov. 7, 2009

I agree that Mr. Christensen deserved to be treated respectfully.
I do not know those who interviewed Mr. Christensen, but I do know Val, and can vouch for his character. He would not say or stand by something in which he did not believe.
That being said, everyone will have their own opinion. I hope that those elected to represent will represent the population by treating others courteously. I will admit, that I have been impressed with the comments made so far on this board- honest and opinionated, yet knowledgeable, and respectful. Refreshing. Let's keep it up.

Add your comment

Comments are monitored. Any comments found to be abusive, offensive, off-topic, misrepresentative, more than 200 words or containing URLs will not be posted.

Words Remaining

E-mail address: For internal use only. We may want to contact you to publish your comment (not your e-mail address) in the newspaper or for a separate story idea.