News today

« Nailed: the lie about Chernobyl's death toll | Main | Iran's nukes - more politics than reality »

Comments

Steve Hawkins

Why can't nuclear waste go back to the producer and be reburied in the mines where it came from? Presumably they are already radioactive so why shouldn't the companies/countries that produce it deal with it?

Ian Jackson

The fundamental question Rob Edwards really asks is what's changed since since the 1980s and 1990s that now makes nuclear waste siting more feasible? In the United States nuclear energy investors have been pondering the same question and come up with a rather different answer - reprocessing. Commercial nuclear utility companies are privately becoming increasingly uncomfortable with relying on the availability of the Yucca Mountain repository for disposal of spent reactor fuel. Yucca is seen as potentially an important barrier to new nuclear reactor build in the US, and this business uncertainty is driving cross-party interest in nuclear reprocessing as an alternative way forward to repository siting. Perhaps the solution to CoRWM's dilemma is to create a nuclear waste trading market, letting the UK government specify the outcomes needed and the private sector deciding the best means of delivery.

The comments to this entry are closed.