This story was originally published byGrist.
The process requires remarkable feats of engineering.
(The triptakes 50 minutes.)
Workers walk in the Repository in Onkalo, a deep geological disposal underground facility, designed to safely store nuclear waste, on May 2, 2023, on the island of Eurajoki, western Finland.Photo: JONATHAN NACKSTRAND/AFP (Getty Images)
Each tomb will hold 30 to 40 of these enormous containersensconced in bentonite clayand sealed behind concrete.
Nothing assembled by human hands has stood for more than a fraction of that.
The worlds oldest known structure, Gobekli Tepe in Turkey, is a bit more than 11,000 years old.
Workers inspect the Repository in Onkalo.Photo: JONATHAN NACKSTRAND/AFP (Getty Images)
Safely disposing of it requires stashing it for, essentially, eternity.
Nobody would even know its there, whether were talking about future generations or future aliens or whatever.
Gaining that approval can take decades and rests upon a simple premise.
These are hardly one-offs.
The U.S. intends totriple its nuclear energy capacity by 2050.
Engineers know how to build a repository capable of safeguarding the public for millennia.
The bigger challenge is convincing people that its safe to live next to it.
Earlier that year, geologists and geophysicists wrote a National Academy of Sciences report that proposed burying it.
Opinions havent changed much in the 67 years since.
Theres really no alternative.
Only then is the material cool enough to stash underground.
That last step has never happened, however.
The situation could grow more dire as the nation invests inadvanced small modular reactors.
Congress attempted to rectify that in 1982 when it passed theNuclear Waste Policy Act.
President Ronald Reagan called the law an important step in the pursuit of the peaceful uses of atomic energy.
The plan stalled because the government never took possession of most of the waste.
That failure has allowed the utilities to collect$500 million in finesfrom Washington each year since 1998.
The federal governments missteps continued when plans for a deep geologic repository derailed about 15 years ago.
That recommendation mimicked what Finland had done, and Canada was doing, to build community consensus.
Much of this trash is languishing in dry casks that dot power plants in 37 states.
(Additional grants will be available this summer.)
This is a multi-generational project and we have a political system that changes all the time, she said.
Without assured funding, were checking every year to see if the progress thats made will change.
But Murrays quest to consolidate temporary waste storage may be moot.
That makes Murrays efforts pretty meaningless, Lyman said.
Murray concedes that his mission faces challenges.
Without a robust repository program, its very difficult to site interim storage, he said.
Gaining consensus for a permanent storage site, then building it, could take 50 years, he said.
In the meantime, the nations utilities continue to pile up 2,000 metric tons of nuclear waste each year.
If 50 years sounds preposterous, consider that Finland began its search for a repository site in 1983.
How long that takes will depend upon the rate at which the country generates radioactive waste.
Canadas efforts have not gone so smoothly.
The countrys hunt for a site began in 2002 when parliament passed the Nuclear Fuel Waste Act.
Within two years,21 communitieshad expressed interest in doing just that.
The agency spent the past dozen years winnowing the list to the two most geologically and socially appropriate sites.
Over time, the screening process cut the list of potential sites to two.
The other is Ignace, a rural town about 150 miles northwest of Lake Superior.
That meant selling the idea not only to the community, but to individual landowners.
All told, it has given the townmore than $9.3 millionsince 2013.
(Ignace has received almost $14 million since 2018.)
Michelle Stein isnt so sure about that.
They also raise three children there, with dreams of them taking over.
Now, she worries her land could soon be worthless and her livelihood gone.
Stein joined more than a dozen others in organizing Protect Our Waterways to oppose the project.
But they have felt crowded out by what they considered aggressive marketing by the agency.
Hes also grateful for the financial support the NWMO has provided thus far.
The beauty of the referendum is that everyone gets an equal vote, he said.
That option, called the Revell site, sits about midway between Ignace and the larger town of Dryden.
Its an ideal piece of rock to hold the [deep mined geologic repository], he said.
He called it a real architectural gem that could boost economic development.
There are no pots of money for aging infrastructure, she said.
Few jobs, a tanking housing market, and a dwindling population result in a tiny tax base.
For Defeo, the possibility of hosting a repository brings with it a sense of hope.
I feel like we could be on the cusp of a change, she said.
Wendy OConnor doesnt share her optimism.
Shes the communications officer for Thunder Bay and volunteers with the opposition group We the Nuclear Free North.
Shes worried about the risk of accidents on the highway or at the site.
But, he added, they are studied and mistakes remedied.
A cynic would say that what it really means is that every community has its price, said Lyman.
These are all unanswered questions.
As Lyman noted, the country needs to push forward.
And that, in the eyes of many experts in the field, means developing deep mined geologic repositories.
This article originally appeared inGristathttps://grist.org/energy/how-do-you-convince-someone-to-live-next-to-a-nuclear-waste-site/.
Grist is a nonprofit, independent media organization dedicated to telling stories of climate solutions and a just future.
News from the future, delivered to your present.
For now, the facility will use AI to comply with regulations.
Techs Race to Go Nuclear Is Exciting.
It’s a huge gamble.
