Nevada told to take Yucca Mountain money - News

PRINT THIS Popular

Feb. 27, 2008
Copyright © Las Vegas Review-Journal

Nevada told to take Yucca Mountain money

State official counters no such federal funding exists

By ED VOGEL
REVIEW-JOURNAL CAPITAL BUREAU

Yucca Mountain: Nuclear Waste in Nevada

RENO -- Nuclear waste can be safely stored in Yucca Mountain and the state should consider negotiating for financial benefits in exchange for accepting the long-delayed nuclear repository, a member of Gov. Jim Gibbons' transition team and former Reagan administration security official said Tuesday.

Ty Cobb told a gathering of Reno business and political leaders that some money from a $27.1 billion national fund to construct the repository could be given to the state.

Most Popular Stories

Three suspects arrested in shooting death of police officer

FATAL SHOOTING: Police again mourn comrade

NORM: Biden finds rank has its privileges

Corrections officer dies in collision on U.S. 95

Two suspects in officer's slaying could face death penalty

Two of three suspects in slaying of officer could face death penalty

DEADLY HOME INVASION: Police suspect link to family

NORM: Walton: Coach deserved a punch

Station Casinos posts $455 million third-quarter loss

ANOTHER SOMBER DAY: Fourth officer in short span dies

"The money is there," said Cobb, a former Army colonel, National Security Council and CIA operative. "The monetary benefits are there and warrant a reappraisal of the state stance."

But Bob Loux, director of the Nevada Agency for Nuclear Projects, responded that no money is available for Nevada. He said the latest estimates are that the repository, 100 miles northwest of Las Vegas, will cost more than $100 billion if it is ever built, and taxpayers will end up paying for half of that.

He said one-third of the workers at the site have been laid off and Congress has limited funds. He said both Democratic presidential candidates want to scrap the project.

Loux said the state could have claimed $10 million a year for accepting the dump, but that offer expired long ago.

He said every poll for decades has shown overwhelming citizen opposition to the repository. Loux has voiced the state viewpoint against the dump for every governor since 1984.

While Nevada state government revenues have fallen short of projections by $565 million because of a weakened economy, Gibbons remains opposed to the repository, Loux said in an interview last week.

Before the presentation, University of Nevada, Reno professor John Scire and Cobb released a position paper asking the state to "undertake a neutral, unbiased assessment" of the repository.

They argued that a new appraisal would find that waste can be safely transported by armed guards to the Nevada site. Waste stored in Yucca Mountain would be far more secure from terrorists than continuing to store it at 73 nuclear power plants around the country, they concluded.

Cobb, who is the father of Assemblyman Ty Cobb, R-Reno, even said that an earthquake along the lines of the one that struck Wells last week would not penetrate the waste in casks buried beneath Yucca Mountain.

And he said Illinois has drawn $3 billion and Pennsylvania $2 billion out of the nuclear waste fund.

"And Nevada? The state government hasn't drawn a red cent? The rationale is that should Nevada begin to negotiate for a slice of this funding, it would compromise its 'No Repository Here' stance," he said.

Loux said Cobb was mistaken and had actually cited what Illinois and Pennsylvania ratepayers paid into the waste fund.

"No state has ever drawn money out of the waste fund," Loux said.

But in an interview after the meeting, Cobb even said the power generating states "want to pay us."

Loux questioned whether a Yucca Mountain repository ever could be safe. He said the Energy Department has been called "incompetent" by the Congressional Government Accounting Office.

All 127 nuclear facilities constructed by the DOE have leaked, and cleanup costs the government $500 million a year, he said.

But Scire called Loux's comments "propaganda" and contended DOE inherited facilities in which sloppy work was conducted by the Department of Defense.

Despite joining Cobb in preparing the position statement, Scire said he did not care whether the repository is ever completed.

He said the waste can remain for now outside nuclear plants and eventually be reprocessed.

Share & Save

Leave Your Comment	9 Reader Comments
Terms & Conditions The following comments are provided by readers and are the sole responsiblity of the authors. The reviewjournal.com does not review comments before publication nor guarantee their accuracy. By publishing a comment here you agree to abide by the comment policy. If you see a comment that violates the policy, please notify the web editor. Some comments may not display immediately due to an automatic filter. These comments will be reviewed within 48 hours. Please do not submit a comment more than once.
Please enter your name Name: Please enter your email Email: Please enter a comment COMMENTS : (word count limit is 300) You have reached the maximum number of words allowed Current Word Count: Note: Comments made by reporters and editors of the Las Vegas Review-Journal are presented with a yellow background. Emil Franklin wrote on February 28, 2008 06:48 AM: The war of words will continue on the subject of Nuclear Energy pros & cons until the cost of oil and gas reach the point where the pocket book of each American speaks. Until then, the debate continues, the economy suffers and he lights go out for extended periods. Wake up people. bruce wrote on February 27, 2008 06:13 PM: If dinge harry is against yucca mt. i'm for it he is on the wrong side of everything.the only thing that is on his mind for the last 10 years is lose the wor,help illeagels and hate bush .that's not much for a majorty leader.he is a do nothing senator.he is real good at wining. Impeach Dirty Harry and Can Loux-Luthor wrote on February 27, 2008 01:47 PM: Sorry Mama Bear, you're way off... 1) Once the License Application is a vailable, then you can judge the "sound science"... You've had the best scientists in the world from our National Laboratories on this site for over 20 years. 2) Without going into the specific tectonics of the area and the results for the seismic analyses that demonstrate the stability of the Yucca Mountain repository, the public should be able to grasp two simple concepts: i) the surface facilities for the repository are over-designed for the potential seismic events and therefore will not be damaged in an event or put radioactive material at risk, and ii) the vibratory ground motion at the repository depth (~1000 ft.) is exponentially less than what is felt at the surface and therefore the emplaced waste packages will not be "bouncing around" like someone's house southeast of Wells. 3) DOE's poor past record was due to the race to create the bomb and then the Cold War arms race... the Yucca Mountain Repository is not a weapons facility; and has certainly not been studied as a race of any kind. 4) The information that supports the conclusions and the information that identifies problems is in the LSN. Don't fall prey to the talking heads... dwc wrote on February 27, 2008 11:59 AM: Mama Bear- Your statements betray your lack of understanding of the geosciences! Please provide us with your proof of numbers 1,2 (as it relates to the liquifaction of bedrock(!!!)), and 4! I'll concede SOME ground on number 3, but past performance is not necessarily indicative of future returns, as the saying goes. I'm not so sure you're up to date on the physics of sound, either. Mama Bear wrote on February 27, 2008 09:46 AM: Some of you people will do ANYTHING for money. The fact of Yucca Mountain are: 1) All of those volumes of research simply doesn't stand up in the face of sound science. 2) Fault zones and earthquakes are a fact of Nevada's geology. 3) DOE's violations are historical and extensive. Anything that comes from their PR people is nonesense. 4) Formal reports generated by DOE scientists were edited to delete any facts contrary to the "strategy" of DOE shoving Yucca Mountain into the guts of Nevada. Use your brains people. Say "NO" to Yucca Mountain and anything to do with DOE. WaterSource wrote on February 27, 2008 07:55 AM: If Nevada decides to take the money... Why not ask the DOE to sweeten the deal with a NEW fresh water Source of ONE MILLION acre feet for Nevada and Lake Mead ? That is TRIPLE Nevada's allocation of 300,000 acre feet from the Colorado River. Development of the Source will not damage the water rights of anyone, anywhere or the environment. Just a thought.... if you take the $$$...might as well get the water ! Ray Walker (Retired Water Rights Analyst) waterrdw@yahoo.com apdp wrote on February 27, 2008 07:43 AM: Loux has been on the Government tit for 20 years. He does not have any scientific credentials and is basically a propagandist who distorts facts and outright lies. Loux and reid are true deceivers not unlike goebbels of nazi Germany. The Nevada documents that were to be added to the public Yucca Mountain data base are in disarray and incomplete. Loux has told the Nevada Legislature that his office and cronies have produced this study or this document and they have not appeared publicly. Where are they Loux! Evidently the documents do not exist and this guy is perjuring himself in front of Nevada’s legislature or the documents find nothing wrong with Yucca Mountain and Loux is hiding them. Which is it???? Very evident this guy is a complete buffoon and he and reid have cost this nation dearly. susan wrote on February 27, 2008 06:40 AM: Once again, Bob Loux running his mouth with rediculous statements and one-liners. Why doesn't he and Harry Reid provide the LVRJ (which is also biased) with a page of one-line statements so that they can be quoted in every article printed by the LVRJ on YM. It's always biased and full of drama anyway. They both say the same thing over and over. What's the point of asking them for their biased opinion? Bob's professionalism should really be questioned. He can't even express his opposition in a professional manner. Vindictive wrote on February 27, 2008 03:52 AM: Finally, a voice of reason in this debate. The "Anti's" are the ones who have been driving up the cost of this project. And all Americans are paying for the futile delaying tactics of the Anti-Nukes who claim to know better. Quit with the fear-mongering. Do you really think that the waste is safer at all of the Nuclear Power plants spread out across the country, turned into defacto dump sites, than at the repository hundreds of feet below the ground? Quit voting with emotions and let good science prevail. With the growing awareness of Global Warming due to our use of fossil fuels, even once-hostile opponents of Nuclear power are now beginning to see the light. Well said, Mr. Cobb. Bob Loux, you need to get your head out of the sand and face the facts. Regardless of how many roadblocks you try to throw up in opposition to this project, the fact of the matter is that sooner or later, this repository WILL become a reality. Quit wasting the taxpayers' money with your scare tactics. If the terrorists ever succeed in breaching security at one of the plants where the waste is stored, the blood will be on your hands. You need to face the facts, sir. As far as credibility is concerned, you are no expert.