Counting the Cards in Nevada

 

President Trump is putting Nevada in play for the 2020 election. The Yucca Mountain nuclear waste storage project has always been a political hot potato and a hole in the ground into which Congress pours money. Senator Dean Heller, like Senator Reid before him, is opposed to the Yucca Mountain project, and there are likely not the votes to force the issue. Now the story in important Las Vegas news outlets is President Trump is on Nevada’s side.

This is very savvy. Presidents, Congress, and bureaucrats have been talking but never actually acting to use Yucca Mountain. Over decades, surely smarter answers have emerged than transporting and concentrating high-level nuclear waste in one location.

Now we have a president throwing the bovine scat flag on the old game, enabling real solutions to surface for serious consideration. Yet another win for America on many levels.

  • Nevada wins, gets what people demand.
  • Nuclear power wins if real waste management emerges, removing waste as obstacle to construction.
  • Environment wins with waste management and more non-greenhouse gas energy.
  • Homes, businesses get more megawatts of reliable and truly “green” power at affordable prices.
  • More nuclear power means more ability to power more electric motors, fill more batteries.
Published in Science & Technology
This post was promoted to the Main Feed by a Ricochet Editor at the recommendation of Ricochet members. Like this post? Want to comment? Join Ricochet’s community of conservatives and be part of the conversation. Join Ricochet for Free.

There are 46 comments.

Become a member to join the conversation. Or sign in if you're already a member.
  1. TBA Coolidge
    TBA
    @RobtGilsdorf

    Addiction Is A Choice (View Comment):

    Any energy discussion that doesn’t include nuclear is unserious!

    Every major U.S. military base could house a nuclear power-plant that serves the region in which it is located. The reactors would be safe and we’d have more electricity than we know what do with. All without shredding/incinerating our bird and bat population. And as @oldbuckeye points out, having one, central repository, buried deep in a mountain far away, makes all the sense in the world.

    Now that you mention the military, who actually owns Yucca Mtn?

    Edit: OK, I wikiated it and found that it is Fed land. If I was prez I’d wait until inauguration and then send the nuclear waste right over there in army trucks regardless of what the state wanted.

    One of the legion of reasons I’m not prez. I mean wouldn’t vote for me.

    • #31
  2. TBA Coolidge
    TBA
    @RobtGilsdorf

    Stad (View Comment):

    Arahant (View Comment):

    Can we just nuke Nevada?

    The same people who worry Yucca Mountain will leak are the same people who haven’t asked the government to clean up after all the underground nuclear tests. In fact, the above-ground tests used to be seen from Vegas and were once promoted for tourism:

    https://www.citylab.com/equity/2014/08/atomic-tests-were-a-tourist-draw-in-1950s-las-vegas/375802/

    So why all the worry now? Decades of fear-mongering by anti-nuclear activists, and anti-nuke politicians like Harry Reid capitalizing on those fears (“Elect me, and I’ll kill Yucca Mountain!”). A pro-Yucca Mountain candidate in Nevada would have about the same chance of getting elected as an anti-ethanol candidate in Iowa.

    Speaking of Reid, I’ve proposed we honor Harry by naming the facility “The Harry Reid Nuclear Waste Repository”.

    We could even put his picture on the entrance to the vaults . . .

    We could throw in a free concrete coffin. 

    • #32
  3. TBA Coolidge
    TBA
    @RobtGilsdorf

    Jon1979 (View Comment):

    Bishop Wash (View Comment):

    Arahant (View Comment):

    Can we just nuke Nevada?

    Why did we stop?

    Casinos are downwind of of the fallout from the Trinity site, unlike Nevada, where it’s the opposite way around. Can’t irradiate the tourists.

    Watch me. 

    • #33
  4. Clifford A. Brown Member
    Clifford A. Brown
    @CliffordBrown

    TBA (View Comment):

    Addiction Is A Choice (View Comment):

    Any energy discussion that doesn’t include nuclear is unserious!

    Every major U.S. military base could house a nuclear power-plant that serves the region in which it is located. The reactors would be safe and we’d have more electricity than we know what do with. All without shredding/incinerating our bird and bat population. And as @oldbuckeye points out, having one, central repository, buried deep in a mountain far away, makes all the sense in the world.

    Now that you mention the military, who actually owns Yucca Mtn?

    Edit: OK, I wikiated it and found that it is Fed land. If I was prez I’d wait until inauguration and then send the nuclear waste right over there in army trucks regardless of what the state wanted.

    One of the legion of reasons I’m not prez. I mean I wouldn’t vote for me.

    I can pretty much guarantee that we lack the trucks and crews rated to transport nuclear waste. There are a very serious set of federal laws and regulations, and I doubt we could safely move any significant amount of nuclear waste, with containment systems, within the weight class of almost any military truck.

    Then there is the small matter of security and technical staff on site forevermore. Then there is the annual funding for containment infrastructure support.

    I get your sentiment, but this is part of why President Trump is responding as he is. There is no political will, as a nation, to do what the experts have urged.

    • #34
  5. Clifford A. Brown Member
    Clifford A. Brown
    @CliffordBrown

    TBA (View Comment):

    Stad (View Comment):

    Arahant (View Comment):

    Can we just nuke Nevada?

    The same people who worry Yucca Mountain will leak are the same people who haven’t asked the government to clean up after all the underground nuclear tests. In fact, the above-ground tests used to be seen from Vegas and were once promoted for tourism:

    https://www.citylab.com/equity/2014/08/atomic-tests-were-a-tourist-draw-in-1950s-las-vegas/375802/

    So why all the worry now? Decades of fear-mongering by anti-nuclear activists, and anti-nuke politicians like Harry Reid capitalizing on those fears (“Elect me, and I’ll kill Yucca Mountain!”). A pro-Yucca Mountain candidate in Nevada would have about the same chance of getting elected as an anti-ethanol candidate in Iowa.

    Speaking of Reid, I’ve proposed we honor Harry by naming the facility “The Harry Reid Nuclear Waste Repository”.

    We could even put his picture on the entrance to the vaults . . .

    We could throw in a free concrete coffin.

    Bad horror/ sci-fi movie ideas come to mind here. A politician interred with high level radiation. That weird black mold that likes radiation starts growing. The coffin is found empty…

    • #35
  6. Doug Kimball Thatcher
    Doug Kimball
    @DougKimball

    Arahant (View Comment):

    Doug Kimball (View Comment):
    The additional water in the atmosphere would spur cloud cover, countering warming and cooling the earth

    Uh, you do realize that water vapor is the most powerful greenhouse gas there is in our atmosphere? It causes hundreds of times more warming than CO2.

    Kinda.  But cloud cover blocks and reflects solar radiation, so water vapor is both a powerful greenhouse gas and a cause of global cooling.  When there is a major volcanic eruption spewing dust particulate into the upper atmosphere, this causes cloud formation (water vapor clings to the particulate) cooling the earth.  It just depends on how long the cloud formation persists.  Like insulation, clouds keep warmth in but if the source of that heat is solar radiation, if clouds persist long enough, they keep the heat out and the cool, in.

    • #36
  7. TBA Coolidge
    TBA
    @RobtGilsdorf

    Clifford A. Brown (View Comment):

    TBA (View Comment):

    Addiction Is A Choice (View Comment):

    Any energy discussion that doesn’t include nuclear is unserious!

    Every major U.S. military base could house a nuclear power-plant that serves the region in which it is located. The reactors would be safe and we’d have more electricity than we know what do with. All without shredding/incinerating our bird and bat population. And as @oldbuckeye points out, having one, central repository, buried deep in a mountain far away, makes all the sense in the world.

    Now that you mention the military, who actually owns Yucca Mtn?

    Edit: OK, I wikiated it and found that it is Fed land. If I was prez I’d wait until inauguration and then send the nuclear waste right over there in army trucks regardless of what the state wanted.

    One of the legion of reasons I’m not prez. I mean I wouldn’t vote for me.

    I can pretty much guarantee that we lack the trucks and crews rated to transport nuclear waste. There are a very serious set of federal laws and regulations, and I doubt we could safely move any significant amount of nuclear waste, with containment systems, within the weight class of almost any military truck.

    Then there is the small matter of security and technical staff on site forevermore. Then there is the annual funding for containment infrastructure support.

    I get your sentiment, but this is part of why President Trump is responding as he is. There is no political will, as a nation, to do what the experts have urged.

    Nothing Can Prepare You For

    Radioactive Pork Barrel Mutants!

    Filmed in Stunning NEVAD-O-VISION™

    • #37
  8. Clifford A. Brown Member
    Clifford A. Brown
    @CliffordBrown

    Doug Kimball (View Comment):

    Arahant (View Comment):

    Doug Kimball (View Comment):
    The additional water in the atmosphere would spur cloud cover, countering warming and cooling the earth

    Uh, you do realize that water vapor is the most powerful greenhouse gas there is in our atmosphere? It causes hundreds of times more warming than CO2.

    Kinda. But cloud cover blocks and reflects solar radiation, so water vapor is both a powerful greenhouse gas and a cause of global cooling. When there is a major volcanic eruption spewing dust particulate into the upper atmosphere, this causes cloud formation (water vapor clings to the particulate) cooling the earth. It just depends on how long the cloud formation persists. Like insulation, clouds keep warmth in but if the source of that heat is solar radiation, if clouds persist long enough, they keep the heat out and the cool, in.

    Are we in agreement on wanting more cost effective nuclear power with better waste reduction/ recycling/ storage?

    • #38
  9. RyanFalcone Member
    RyanFalcone
    @RyanFalcone

    I remember seeing an evening news program like 60 Minutes do a segment of France’s nuclear power efforts. They got most of their energy from nuclear for decades. They stored all their waste in a office builing inside Paris. Something is very strange with this story.

    • #39
  10. OmegaPaladin Moderator
    OmegaPaladin
    @OmegaPaladin

    RyanFalcone (View Comment):

    I remember seeing an evening news program like 60 Minutes do a segment of France’s nuclear power efforts. They got most of their energy from nuclear for decades. They stored all their waste in a office builing inside Paris. Something is very strange with this story.

    Once nuclear waste is in a dry cask, it is not going anywhere without a heavy-lift trailer, and it is essentially safe to store anywhere with reasonable security.  If I owned a lot of desert land, I’d look into it.  Nuclear fuel casks are incredibly tough – they are tested by ramming them with a train, dropping them onto a steel spike, etc..

    The real benefit to Yucca Mountain is for long-term storage.  The stuff will be safe there for millenia.

    • #40
  11. Stad Coolidge
    Stad
    @Stad

    JimGoneWild (View Comment):
    Keep it at the power plant forever.

    Very bad idea.  The power plants are there to make money.  Where do you think a utility would be tempted to cut corners?  Correct – something that requires just as much protection as the reactor but produces zero revenue.

    • #41
  12. The Reticulator Member
    The Reticulator
    @TheReticulator

    Stad (View Comment):

    JimGoneWild (View Comment):
    Keep it at the power plant forever.

    Very bad idea. The power plants are there to make money. Where do you think a utility would be tempted to cut corners? Correct – something that requires just as much protection as the reactor but produces zero revenue.

    Mmmm. I’m in favor of nuclear energy, but is this one of those “privatize the gains, socialize the losses” deals? Isn’t there a temptation to cut corners even on the revenue-enhancing parts of the deal? 

    • #42
  13. Stad Coolidge
    Stad
    @Stad

    The Reticulator (View Comment):

    Stad (View Comment):

    JimGoneWild (View Comment):
    Keep it at the power plant forever.

    Very bad idea. The power plants are there to make money. Where do you think a utility would be tempted to cut corners? Correct – something that requires just as much protection as the reactor but produces zero revenue.

    Mmmm. I’m in favor of nuclear energy, but is this one of those “privatize the gains, socialize the losses” deals? Isn’t there a temptation to cut corners even on the revenue-enhancing parts of the deal?

    There’s a temptation to cut corners in every business.  However, commercial nuclear power has the NRC to oversee safety.  It’s easy to get on their sh*t list, but very hard to get off.

    As for transportation of nuclear waste, it’s heavily regulated too.  Shipments of radioactive material occur every day, both by truck and by rail.

    • #43
  14. The Reticulator Member
    The Reticulator
    @TheReticulator

    Stad (View Comment):

    The Reticulator (View Comment):

    Stad (View Comment):

    JimGoneWild (View Comment):
    Keep it at the power plant forever.

    Very bad idea. The power plants are there to make money. Where do you think a utility would be tempted to cut corners? Correct – something that requires just as much protection as the reactor but produces zero revenue.

    Mmmm. I’m in favor of nuclear energy, but is this one of those “privatize the gains, socialize the losses” deals? Isn’t there a temptation to cut corners even on the revenue-enhancing parts of the deal?

    There’s a temptation to cut corners in every business. However, commercial nuclear power has the NRC to oversee safety. It’s easy to get on their sh*t list, but very hard to get off.

    As for transportation of nuclear waste, it’s heavily regulated too. Shipments of radioactive material occur every day, both by truck and by rail.

    Sure. The use of radioactive isotopes was heavily regulated at my workplace, and for good reason.

    But if storage of waste is at the site that produced the waste, that’s going to involve the plant operators. Whereas if it’s shipped to Nevada, I presume they will be able to wash their hands of it.

    • #44
  15. OmegaPaladin Moderator
    OmegaPaladin
    @OmegaPaladin

    The Reticulator (View Comment):

    Stad (View Comment):

    The Reticulator (View Comment):

    Stad (View Comment):

    JimGoneWild (View Comment):
    Keep it at the power plant forever.

    Very bad idea. The power plants are there to make money. Where do you think a utility would be tempted to cut corners? Correct – something that requires just as much protection as the reactor but produces zero revenue.

    Mmmm. I’m in favor of nuclear energy, but is this one of those “privatize the gains, socialize the losses” deals? Isn’t there a temptation to cut corners even on the revenue-enhancing parts of the deal?

    There’s a temptation to cut corners in every business. However, commercial nuclear power has the NRC to oversee safety. It’s easy to get on their sh*t list, but very hard to get off.

    As for transportation of nuclear waste, it’s heavily regulated too. Shipments of radioactive material occur every day, both by truck and by rail.

    Sure. The use of radioactive isotopes was heavily regulated at my workplace, and for good reason.

    But if storage of waste is at the site that produced the waste, that’s going to involve the plant operators. Whereas if it’s shipped to Nevada, I presume they will be able to wash their hands of it.

    Nuclear plants do not have the room for all of the waste generated because they have been storing it on the site since they began operation.

    • #45
  16. Addiction Is A Choice Member
    Addiction Is A Choice
    @AddictionIsAChoice

    Interesting piece in Forbes: “Stop Letting Your Ridiculous Fear of Nuclear Waste Kill the Planet

    And if all else fails, maybe we can get some of that radiation-eating fungi from the former-Soviet Union.

    • #46
Become a member to join the conversation. Or sign in if you're already a member.