Ed Lyman Discusses Nuclear Waste on “Living on Earth”

, co-director and senior scientist | August 28, 2013, 6:00 am EST
Bookmark and Share

Ed Lyman talked with Living on Earth’s Steve Curwood last week about waste from US nuclear power plants and the ongoing problems with disposing of it.


Posted in: Nuclear Power Safety Tags: , , , ,

Support from UCS members make work like this possible. Will you join us? Help UCS advance independent science for a healthy environment and a safer world.

Show Comments

Comment Policy

UCS welcomes comments that foster civil conversation and debate. To help maintain a healthy, respectful discussion, please focus comments on the issues, topics, and facts at hand, and refrain from personal attacks. Posts that are commercial, obscene, rude or disruptive will be removed.

Please note that comments are open for two weeks following each blog post. When commenting, you must use your real name. Valid email addresses are required. (UCS respects your privacy; we will not display, lend, or sell your email address for any reason.)

  • http://www.energytrendsinsider.com/columns/biodiversivist/ Russ Finley

    “The Fukushima disaster in Japan is grabbing headlines, but the United States has a nuclear problem on its hands as well.”

    Which disaster are you talking about? This one?


    It would be nice if the anti-nuclear ideologues would let us do a better job dealing with our waste.

    I learned a great deal about Lyman’s expertise when I reviewed his review of Pandora’s Promise:


    “That legislation would create a new authority for managing nuclear waste outside the Department of Energy, which a lot of people believe is necessary to make progress. It would actually begin the process for what’s called consent-based citing, for both consolidated interim storage sites above ground and a geologic repository in the future. But one has to be very careful that you don’t have a process which is essentially bribing a disadvantaged community to take nuclear waste. I mean from an ethical point of view, that’s very questionable.”

    Once the anti-nuclear lobby realizes that passage of this consent-based community storage will kick off a bidding war from hundreds, if not thousands of communities perfectly happy to have the income, their tactics will change to stopping the legislation.

  • http://sanonofresafety.org Donna Gilmore

    Your interview doesn’t address the problems with cask storage of high burnup fuel. Data is available showing problems with less than 20 years of cask storage. I’ve captured some of the key documents here: http://sanonofresafety.org/nuclear-waste/

    What is your view on this?