NUCLEAR waste management??

Question

How would you feel if you're town had nuclear waste buried deep underneath it, but in return, you got new hospitals, libraries, schools and jobs?

That's what the Committee on Radioactive Waste Management is proposing

Answer 1

With all due respect to the guy that mentioned Sellafield, I worked on and off (contract work) at Sellafield for 10 years. I wouldn't say the economy in the area is booming by any means, and when (or if) the nuclear plant is ever decommissioned it will all be a disaster area.The only people in the area making a decent living are the plants employees. Or contractors, who spend a good few quid in the local pubs, but send most of their cash home.
Sellafield area was devastated some time back because of a leak , cows milk was contaminated etc etc!
The question is "how would you feel with one of these
facilities on your doorstep, in return for x y and z?
The answer has got to be "not very happy at all"
I honestly didn't see much evidence of British Nuclear Fuels ploughing a lot of capital back into the local community!
I have made quite a few quid working at nuclear plants in most of the UK, (I admit I'm a mercenary), I certainly would not like one on my door step.
The next question has to be "What can we do with the cra* then"? But you havent asked that have you?
Go on have a go!!

Answer 2

I wouldn't trust anything Waste Management proposes. For years the citizens of New Haven, Indiana (USA) fought a toxic waste dump that company brought to town. Today, citizens refer to it as "the mountain". The mayor of this small town fought the company tooth-and-nail, and - with the help of a local volunteer group called 'Dumpstoppers' - finally got the thing closed, but not before millions of tons of toxic waste got buried...and which could, at any time, begin to leach into the community's water supplies. Waste Management proved itself to be the "Goliath" in this fight, arrogantly using every legal tactic possible to keep its costs down. It never once tried to be a good, responsible corporate citizen, regardless of the 'warm and fuzzy' TV commercials they air to the contrary.
This mutli-billion-dollar corporation will do anything it wants without any sensitivity to the community-at-large, and with total disregard for the delicate ecological balance between man, plants, and animals that nature intended for our environment.
The company concerns itself only with profits - and, whatever fines or costly penalties are imposed by environmental agencies or governments, the company simply chalks up as "a cost of doing business" and passes those expenses onto its customers.
Bribing the community with new hospitals, libraries schools and jobs isn't worth the safety and health of the population, and the potential risk factors such a radioactive facility brings with it.
If, of course, your town already has the nuclear waste buried underneath it, then there's nothing you can do to prevent what's already been inflicted on your community. If that's the case, I'd take the hospitals, libraries, schools and jobs - but only under the condition that the company retains a long-time presence in the community and accepts full responsibility for any leaks, leach, or devastation caused by their radioactive waste.
That junk isn't going to go away in the next few hundred years; your community deserves to be protected.
Yes, Waste Management will argue, "It's not OUR fault that all this nuclear waste has to be buried. It has to be dealt with somehow, somewhere - and we're the best in the business, experienced at dealing with it." That might be true - and the federal government certainly plays a collusionary role in having allowed such nuclear garbage to exist in the first place. Just make sure your local political leaders don't 'sell out' to Waste Management and/or the federal government for thirty pieces of silver. Your community, and every citizen living there, deserves to be protected and compensated for being forced to live near such potential danger. -RKO-

Answer 3

ask this question to anyone who lives close to the Sellafield Nuclear facility, which (whilst being in a pretty depressed region of the UK) was booming economically last time I visited.

It depends how deep the burial site was , whether the geology of the site was suitable, and what sort of level of waste was being put there. But you have got to put the stuff somewhere. Or keep the situation as it is and watch CO2 levels get higher and the climate get hotter. Never mind about the schools and hospitals...

Answer 4

A company is a legal entity that is treated in Law as a person in its own right. Unfortunately, although it is legally a person it lacks one thing that distinguishes man from most animals - a conscience and another thing that distiguishes a society from 'nature, red in tooth and claw' - ethics.

No matter how you try to ring-fence any organisation responsible for dealing with nuclear waste you will come up against two undefeatable enemies; venality and stupidity. There is no such thing as a fool-proof system.

To save energy we should stop making things in countries with cheap labour and carting them all round the world and instead arrange to make things in the country where they are going to be used. This would eliminate the energy waste of constant shipping too-and-fro and protect local industries and differences that make places and peoples important as individuals. This is too important to be left in the hands of companies and 'market forces'.

Answer 5

It can't be any worse than living above a uranium deposit, which has never caused any problems that I heard of. High level waste would be vitrified into a stone like material that is less radioactive than uranium ore before being buried.

Answer 6

Sounds like a good idea to me. Let's face it, the waste has to go somewhere - at least this way it's likely that it would be extremely well monitored, so it would probably be a lot safer than say dumping it in the ocean.

Answer 7

As usual, people are prepared to use the electricity but don't want the waste in their back yard.

Properly engineered?.... no problem

As a passing comment what do you think are the relative death rates in the world from poverty and radiation sickness? I would guess about 1,000,000 to 1

Answer 8

but would they continue to support the area by paying the saleries for the schools hospitals etc.

Answer 9

then I would do everythingI could to prevent them from using my town as a nuclear dumpyard

Answer 10

if the proper security measures are respected, then I would welcome it. If not, then I would do everythingI could to prevent them from using my town as a nuclear dumpyard.