This book explores siting dilemmas - situations in which an "authority" (e.g., Congress, a consortium of utilities) deems it in the best interest of society to build a facility such as an incinerator, but opponents living near the proposed site thwart the plan. Facility developers typically attribute local opposition to selfishness or radically inaccurate views of the risks posed by the facility. We examine the validity of these conclusions by looking in depth at the psychological response that arises when residents are faced with the prospect of living near waste disposal facilities. The particular siting dilemma considered in this book is the problem of how to "dispose" of the high-level nuclear wastes accumulating at nuclear power plants in the United States. These wastes, in the form of "spent" fuel rods, will emit dangerous levels of radioactivity for thousands of years - anywhere between 10,000 and 100,000 years, depending on the margin of safety one adopts. The current proposal is to encase the spent fuel in corrosion-resistant canisters and then to bury these canisters deep underground in a geologic repository. The two of us became involved with the high-level waste issue in 1986 as part of an interdisciplinary research team hired by the State of Nevada. The charge of this team was to estimate the socioeconomic impacts that would accompany a repository if it were built at Yucca Mountain, approximately 100 miles northwest of Las Vegas.

Many lament the difficulty of siting hazardous waste facilities that are intended to benefit the public at large but are locally unwanted. Many label local opposition as purely self-interested; as simply a function of the NIMBY (Not In My Backyard) syndrome. Drawing upon the experience of states trying to site new low-level radioactive waste disposal facilities, Mary English argues that we need to think harder and look deeper, to understand--and, possibly, solve--the siting dilemma. The 1980 Low-Level Radioactive Waste Policy Act ushered in a new era in low-level radioactive waste disposal; one of vastly increased state responsibility. By a 1985 amendment, states were given until January 1993 to develop a new system of disposal facilities. English reviews the progress they have made, focusing on one difficulty: that of finding technically and socially acceptable sites. She then turns to issues concerning authority, trust, risk, and justice that help to shape the siting dilemma. This book is made highly readable by vivid examples drawn from recent efforts to site low-level waste disposal facilities. The volume will be a helpful resource to those in the public and private sectors who are immediately concerned with the siting of radioactive waste disposal facilities, hazardous waste facilities, solid waste landfills, incinerators, etc., as well as social scientists who are studying this problem.

Nuclear waste is going nowhere, and neither is the debate over its disposal. The problem, growing every day, has proven intractable, with policymakers on one side, armed with daunting technical data, and the public on the other, declaring: not in my backyard. This timely volume offers a look past our present impasse into the nature and roots of public viewpoints on nuclear waste disposal. A much-needed supplement to the largely technical literature on this problem, the book provides extensive studies of the reaction of citizens--whether rural or urban, near-site residents or prospective visitors--to proposed nuclear waste sites around the nation, particularly Nevada's Yucca Mountain. Conducted by distinguished sociologists, psychologists, political scientists, and economists, these studies constitute the most comprehensive account available of the impact of public perceptions and opinions on the nuclear waste policy process in the United States. As such, the collection will clarify the politics of nuclear waste siting and will give impetus to the stalled debate over the issue. Contributors. Rodney K. Baxter, Julia G. Brody, Bruce Clary, Lori Cramer, William H. Desvousges, Riley E. Dunlap, Douglas Easterling, Judy K. Fleishman, James Flynn, William R. Freudenburg, Michael E. Kraft, Richard S. Krannich, Howard Kunreuther, Mark Layman, Ronald L. Little, Robert Cameron Mitchell, Alvin H. Mushkatel, Joanne M. Nigg, K. David Pijawka, Eugene A. Rosa, Paul Slovic

Gerald Jacob views the history of public policy regarding nuclear waste, culminating in the 1982 Nuclear Waste Policy act and its aftermath. The 1982 act promised a solution, but Jacob believes it deferred to the interests of the nuclear utilities and the U.S. Department of Energy. He describes how the nuclear establishment used science and geography to protect its interests and dominate nuclear waste policy making. He examines the federal promotion of nuclear power, and asserts that federal policies strong-armed public opposition, and locked the country into a single, but flawed waste disposal solution.

Consideration of the technical feasibility of Yucca Mountain in Nevada as the site for a high-level nuclear waste repository has led to an intense debate regarding the economic, social, and political impacts of the repository. Impediments to the siting process mean that the nuclear waste problem is being resolved by adhering to the status quo, in which nuclear waste is stored at scattered sites near major population centers. To assess the merits of alternative siting strategies--including both the permanent repository and the status quo- we consider the variables that would be included in a model designed to select (1) the optimal number of disposal facilities, (2) the types of facilities (e.g., permanent repository or monitored retrievable facility), and (3) the geographic location of storage sites. The objective function in the model is an all-inclusive measure of social cost. The intent of the exercise is not to demonstrate the superiority of any single disposal strategy; uncertainties preclude a conclusive proof of optimality for any of the disposal options. Instead, we want to assess the sensitivity of a variety of proposed solutions to variations in the physical, economic, political, and social variables that influence a siting strategy.

Time is both the ally of high-level nuclear waste (HLNW) managers and the enemy. It is the ally because the radioactivity in elements and isotopes decreases with age, making the waste progressively less dangerous to human health and safety and the environment. This rate of radioactive decline varies, in some cases diminishing by half (the half life) in seconds, minutes, hours, days, weeks, months, or years. In other cases the decay process takes centuries or hundreds of thousands of years before the wastes are safe for human contact. The problem as now conceptualized for HLNW managers is simple to state if not easy to achieve. The HLNW needs to be secured in some fashion until it decays, by virtue of its physical nature, to safe levels. Another possible future solution, not currently available, might be to change the ~~ructure of HLNW through high-technology processing and thus decompose the waste into units with different and less lengthy radioactivity. Learning whether this processing is a future option will require patience and generous amounts of time for research.

When Congress passed the Nuclear Waste Policy Act of 1982, it directed the Department of Energy to locate, study, license, and develop a deep underground repository for high-level nuclear wastes. As the authors of this study show, by 1987 the program was in shambles, beset by opposition from every state that had a potential storage site. Congress passed amendments to the original legislation that designated Yucca Mountain, Nevada, as the only site for study and development.The authors trace the evolution of the political and social turmoil created by this difficult site-selection process, looking at the history of the nation's repository program, the nature of the public's concerns, and the effects of intergovernmental conflict. They also examine how other countries have addressed similar problems. Turning to a promising development—a dry-cask storage method judged by the Nuclear Regulatory Commission to be safe for a century or more—they urge a full reassessment of the nation's high-level nuclear waste policies and of existing DOE programs.The book concludes with carefully considered recommendations for a new national policy for the storage of hazardous nuclear waste. Everyone concerned about nuclear waste and how it should be managed at the federal, state, and local levels will find valuable information in this in-depth study of the issues at hand.

A fascinating and authoritative account of the controversies and possibilities surrounding nuclear waste disposal, providing expert discussion in down-to-earth language.