Politics Waste Links

DDI 2008 GT
Brad Bolman

Index
Index........................................................................................................................................................................1
Congress Opposes..................................................................................................................................................2
Nevada Opposes.....................................................................................................................................................3
Republicans Oppose..............................................................................................................................................4
Democrats Oppose.................................................................................................................................................5
Reid Opposes..........................................................................................................................................................7
Public Opposition...................................................................................................................................................8
Environmental Groups Oppose..........................................................................................................................10

1
Politics Waste Links
DDI 2008 GT
Brad Bolman

Congress Opposes
Nuclear energy faces strong opposition in Congress – Reid leads the pack
Edmonton Sun, June 25, 2008, “Obama slams McCain over nuclear plans,” lexis [BB]
Opposition in the U.S. Congress to the Yucca Mountain waste site is among the hurdles it faces.
Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid, a Democrat from Nevada, is among those who oppose it.
McCain, an Arizona senator, backs the project, while Obama is against it. Asked his views on nuclear
power in Jacksonville, Florida on Friday, Obama said, "I think that nuclear power should be in the mix
when it comes to energy." But he added, "I don't think it's our optimal energy source because we haven't
figured out how to store the waste safely or recycle the waste." Obama supports using federal research
and development dollars to explore whether nuclear waste can be stored safely for reuse.

Legislation giving nuclear power free-reign on waste is heavily unpopular

Utah Chronicle, 2/16/07, “Legislature has no solution for EnergySolutions” University Wire, lexis [BB]
EnergySolutions has strongly pushed an unpopular bill, Senate Bill 155, through legislation. The bill
alleviates legislative and gubernatorial responsibility for the oversight of the nuclear waste
company. This gives America's largest nuclear-waste corporation free reign on its property in Tooele
-- with some trigger measures, such as any proposed "hotter" levels of waste, or property annex, that
would bring the company back under legislative scrutiny.

2
Politics Waste Links
DDI 2008 GT
Brad Bolman

Nevada Opposes
Nuclear disposal unpopular in Nevada
LA Times, 6/25/08, “Santa Barbara fumes over drill plan; Even some of McCain's supporters berate him for
backing the idea of offshore oil exploration,” lexis [BB]
Obama also lambasted McCain for wanting to open more federal land to oil exploration when energy
companies are not fully exploiting the drilling rights they already have. And he cited McCain's support
for storing nuclear waste at the remote Nevada desert site of Yucca Mountain, a highly unpopular
proposal in the political battleground state, where the Arizona senator will campaign today.

3
Politics Waste Links
DDI 2008 GT
Brad Bolman

Republicans Oppose
Strong administration and Republican opposition to nuclear waste storage
DOE Superfund Report July 31, 2006, “SENATE INTERIM NUCLEAR STORAGE PLAN FACES
OPPOSITION FROM HOUSE,” lexis [BB]
Key members of a House committee and the Bush administration are strongly opposing a
bipartisan Senate plan to allow interim storage of nuclear waste, saying it could detract from the long-
delayed Yucca Mountain permanent repository project. Rep. John Shimkus (R-IL) called the interim
storage plan the "the stupidest idea I've ever heard of," during a July 19 Yucca Mountain oversight
hearing adding, "If I see Sen. [Pete] Domenici [(R-NM), one of the sponsors of the plan], I'll tell him
that." Domenici, chairman of the Senate Energy & Natural Resources Committee, and Sen. Harry Reid
(D-NV), the minority leader and a strong opponent of Yucca Mountain, agreed recently on legislation that
authorizes the Department of Energy (DOE) to designate a temporary site for consolidated storage of
spent fuel within a state or region. The Senate plan would provide DOE $10 million to begin looking at
sites where it could temporarily store the waste for 25 years but, according to an Appropriations
Committee source, more funding may be required in the future for construction once a site is selected.
The interim storage plan is already attracting criticism from environmentalists and the state of
Nevada since it was introduced earlier this month by the Senate Appropriations Committee.
Environmentalists say the plan would create additional risks by increasing the number of times the waste
would have to be physically moved (Superfund Report, July 3, p16). Members of the House Energy &
Commerce Committee said during the July 19 Yucca Mountain oversight hearing they feared
backlash from states chosen to host interim storage facilities would further complicate the debate
over nuclear waste storage and ultimately lead to further delays at the planned permanent
repository.

4
Politics Waste Links
DDI 2008 GT
Brad Bolman

Democrats Oppose
Democrats oppose nuclear waste storage – Yucca proves
McClatchy News, third-largest newspaper company in the United States, 12/18/06. "With Democrats in
Control, Yucca Project May Be Doomed," http://www.commondreams.org/headlines06/1218-04.htm
A few years ago, the plan to store the nation's nuclear waste in Nevada seemed all but certain. Congress decided
that highly radioactive waste from commercial nuclear-power plants, which takes centuries to decay, needed to
be stored underground. And it reaffirmed by wide margins in 2002 that Yucca Mountain, 100 miles from Las
Vegas, was the place to build such a repository. The repository site, located 90 miles northwest of Las Vegas,
Nevada on the edge of the Nevada Nuclear Test Site, was approved by Congress and President George W. Bush
in 2002. (Photo courtesy Energy Department) But now that's being rethought, for a variety of reasons. And the
Nov. 7 elections, which propelled Democrats into power on Capitol Hill, are likely to accelerate that thinking
despite strong bipartisan support for Yucca Mountain in Congress. * The incoming majority leader of the
Senate, Nevadan Harry Reid, long has pledged that Yucca Mountain will never open. The incoming
chairman of the Senate Environment and Public Works Committee, Californian Barbara Boxer, agrees.
Both voted against the Yucca repository. They think that nuclear waste should stay right where it is - at the
nation's nuclear power plants - at least until better waste technology comes along.

Empirically proven – Lieberman didn’t add waste disposal to the Lieberman-

Warner amendment because of opposition
CongressNow, 5/22/08, “Lieberman, Warner Prepare Nuclear Amendment to Cap-And-Trade Bill,” lexis [BB]
Lieberman, Warner Prepare Nuclear Amendment to Cap-And-Trade Bill CongressNow May 22, 2008
"We want to put together a nuclear energy support amendment that will be relatively noncontroversial,"
Lieberman said this afternoon following a press conference in which religious leaders expressed support
for their bill, the Lieberman-Warner Climate Security Act (S. 2191). The bill creates a greenhouse gas
cap-and-trade scheme to reduce global warming. The measure is currently silent on nuclear power, but the
addition of nuclear provisions could help attract Republican votes. While some Democrats are wary of
nuclear energy, Senate Environment and Public Works Chairman Barbara Boxer (D-Calif.) said she would
not oppose the amendment as long as it did not weaken nuclear safety requirements or the ability of local
communities to weigh in on sitting and permitting issues. She said she was confident that Lieberman and
Warner would not include language that she objected to, and she acknowledged that the amendment
would likely be approved. "By the way, they have the votes," she noted. Lieberman said the amendment
would be "broader" than provisions in an earlier climate bill he sponsored with presumptive GOP
presidential nominee Sen. John McCain (Ariz.), and would address a shortage of specialized nuclear
workers in the United States. Lieberman said that he and Warner would "take a look at" provisions to
expand federal loan guarantees opposed by environmentalists. He said of possible nuclear waste
disposal provisions, "That's a mountain we haven't climbed yet." Easing nuclear waste disposal
standards at the proposed nuclear waste site at Yucca Mountain in Nevada would prove extremely
controversial and would attract the fierce opposition of Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid (D-
Nev.). Other potential domestic sites could be problematic as well. Warner said the amendment would
"lay the foundation" for other Senators to build on. On Tuesday, Sen. Johnny Isakson (R-Ga.) said he
would offer a nuclear amendment similar to one he proposed at the full committee markup in December
that does not address nuclear waste. Warner said he expected additional Republican nuclear amendments.
Boxer, who will manage the debate, said that a substitute bill containing a new cost-containment
mechanism and tax title may be released later today. The new bill also details trillions of dollars of aid
geared toward helping consumers, workers and industry transition to a new carbon-constrained economy.
5
Politics Waste Links
DDI 2008 GT
Brad Bolman

Warner said the changes to the bill should "go a long way" toward addressing Republican concerns that
the bill's mandates would wreak economic havoc in the absence of significant technological advances for
reducing emissions. Lieberman estimated that the bill's supporters have more than 50 votes lined up and
"are within reach" of the 60 needed for passage. However, he acknowledged that reaching the 60-vote
threshold will be a challenge. Boxer said the floor debate is still currently scheduled to begin June 2, but
could slip if Reid deems it necessary because of other pressing business.

Democrats strongly oppose – major democrats lead the opposition

New Mexican, 8/4/06, “DOMENICI BACKS YUCCA MOUNTAIN PLANS” The Santa Fe New Mexican
(New Mexico)
U.S. Sen. Pete Domenici, R-N.M., has been asked by President Bush's administration to push a measure
that would raise the amount of waste that could be stored there; ease environmental and regulatory
requirements and give the U.S. Department of Energy more authority to manage the area. He also
met fierce resistance from some Democrats who said the measure would limit environmental
regulations. "Yucca Mountain is the cornerstone of a comprehensive spent nuclear-fuel-management
strategy for this country," Domenici told the Senate Committee on Energy and Natural Resources on
Thursday. Yucca Mountain is located 100 miles northwest of Las Vegas, Nev. The nuclear waste -- spent
nuclear fuel from power plants and high-level military waste -- would be stored 1,000 feet underground
on federally owned land. About 20 percent of the country's electricity today comes from 104 nuclear
reactors, a Los Alamos National Laboratory scientist has said. And waste generated from those plants
keeps piling up in temporary storage facilities, Domenici said. By 2010, Domenici said, there will be
more than 75,000 tons of spent fuel and other waste in places all over the country. The department has a
goal to open the facility by 2017, but would only send 3,000 tons a year to the site. "If everything goes
perfectly," he said, "it will take over 30 years -- longer than I have been in the Senate -- to eliminate the
existing backlog of spent fuel." U.S. Sen. Jeff Bingaman, D-N.M., is opposed to the bill Domenici is
carrying. "This bill would limit safety and environmental reviews of the Yucca Mountain project, and for
that reason, I do not support it," Bingaman said in a statement. U.S. Sen. Harry Reid, D-Nevada,
expressed strong opposition to the bill. "Everyone knows that the proposed Yucca Mountain nuclear-
waste dump is a dying beast," Reid said." And it should die -- it is a scientifically unsound project that
would needlessly threaten the public health and safety of Americans everywhere. "Even the
administration knows this is a flawed, dangerous project. We can see this in the bill. It tells you everything
that the administration knows is wrong with Yucca. They have sent us this legislation to change the rules,
break the law and prevent states from protecting their citizens."

6
Politics Waste Links
DDI 2008 GT
Brad Bolman

Reid Opposes
Senate Majority Leader Reid has been blocking Yucca mountain – doesn't want
it opened in his home state
The White House Bulletin, 3/6/07. "Energy Department Seeks To Spur Construction Of Yucca Mountain
Nuclear Waste Site," Lexis
The Department of Energy proposed legislation today to spur construction of a national nuclear waste site at
Yucca Mountain, Nevada, but Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid, who hails from Nevada, promised to
block such a bill. Department's Director of the Office of Civilian Radioactive Waste Management Edward
Sproat said that without new funding, the goal of opening the site by 2017 cannot be met. Sproat also said that if
the capacity designated for the Yucca Mountain site is not increased from the current 77,000 tons, he would
recommend to Congress that a second waste dump be built. Reid said, "This is just the department's latest
attempt to breathe life into this dying beast, and it will fail. I will continue to leverage my leadership
position to prevent the dump from ever being built."

Reid is a hater – wants Yucca dead and controls the agenda.

Elaine Hiruo and Daniel Whitten, Washington – Nuclear Fuels, 11/20/2006, Reid might slow Yucca Mt.
program, but project will survive, sources say, Vol. 31 No. 24, L/N
Though opponents of DOE's repository project at Yucca Mountain, Nevada have likened Senator Harry
Reid's rise to majority leader next year to the final nail in the project's coffin, nuclear industry officials and
other supporters have countered that Reid could likely slow, not kill, the program. Reid has been an
unrelenting opponent of DOE's plans to dispose of 70,000 metric tons of utility spent fuel and defense
high-level waste in his home state of Nevada, maintaining that the repository DOE plans to build at Yucca
Mountain is neither safe nor wanted. As majority leader come January, Reid's responsibilities will include
gatekeeper to the Senate floor as he decides which bills move to the floor for a vote. Last week, after he was
elected to the top Democratic post in the Senate, Reid stressed in a press statement that he remains committed
"to putting Nevada's priorities at the top of the list" and that, more than ever, he'll leverage his leadership
position "to keep Nevada from becoming the nation's nuclear dumping ground."

Majority Leader Reid hates the plan – he'll do all he can to block it.
Avery Palmer and Coral Davenport, CQ Staff, 6/3/2008, Nuclear Energy Votes Could Doom Senate Climate
Change Legislation, Print Edition Energy, L/N
Nuclear Energy Votes Could Doom Senate Climate Change Legislation
James M. Inhofe , R-Okla., may offer an amendment that incorporates his bill (S 2551) to overhaul the licensing
process for Yucca Mountain. But Majority Leader Harry Reid , D-Nev., a longstanding opponent of the
project, rejected such legislation out of hand: "Yucca Mountain is panting for air. It's as close to being
dead as any piece of any legislation can be." Even if the Senate does not pass climate legislation this year,
the role of nuclear power will be a key question for the next Congress. "I don't see how you can possibly get
to a world of significantly reduced CO2 emissions without more nuclear," said Dr. Victor Reis, a senior adviser
to the Energy secretary who has served in both the Clinton and Bush administrations. "But I don't see any way
this can get through this Congress, so I am speaking in terms of the challenge for the next administration."

7
Politics Waste Links
DDI 2008 GT
Brad Bolman

Public Opposition
Plan's unpopular – waste storage concerns fuel opposition.
Anne Trafton, News Office staff writer, 7/23/2007, Americans warming to nuclear power - MIT survey, L/N
The Bush administration has been pushing to expand nuclear power, which doesn't produce carbon dioxide, but
Americans are still concerned about storing nuclear waste. Nearly 40 percent oppose the proposed
storage site at Yucca Mountain, Nev., and only 28 percent agree that "nuclear waste could be stored
safely for long periods of time." Because of those concerns, "getting the public behind a serious expansion
of nuclear power in the U.S. is going to be difficult," Ansolabehere said.

Plan's unpopular – location selection.

Steven Cohen, Grist staff writer, 8/8/2006, Just Say No: Nuclear power is complicated, dangerous, and
definitely not the answer, http://www.grist.org/comments/soapbox/2006/08/08/cohen/
That leads to the politics. No one wants to host the nuclear-waste repository. No one wants a nuclear power
plant next door. This is not an engineering or economic issue, but one of politics. In an increasingly
crowded and interdependent world, people have grown more sensitive about questions of land-use
development. Environmental justice has also reached the political stage, because the rich are better able to
defend themselves against environmental insults than the poor. In the United States, local politics in many
places has become the politics of land use and development. If we can't site Wal-Marts without a lengthy
battle, why does anyone seriously think that we will be able to site the hundreds of new nuclear power
plants that may be necessary to meet our energy needs without increasing greenhouse-gas emissions?

Plan's unpopular – public perceives escalating costs.

John Murawski, staff writer, 4/24/2008, Cost of nuclear plant fuels battle,
http://www.newsobserver.com/business/story/1048035.html
The estimated cost of new nuclear power plants has tripled in the past few years, with projections now
hitting $6 billion to $9 billion per reactor. Cost estimates are expected to continue escalating. Soaring
costs make the prospect of new nuclear power even harder to sell to a public that will ultimately pay for
new plants through rate increases. Nuclear critics are homing in on the staggering costs to lobby their case. It
helps the opponents to have a dollar figure to object to, but electric utilities are reluctant to cooperate.

No turns – public's reluctant to pay and 35% approval.

Anne Trafton, News Office staff writer, 7/23/2007, Americans warming to nuclear power - MIT survey, L/N
CAMBRIDGE, Mass. - Americans' icy attitudes toward nuclear power are beginning to thaw, according to a
new survey from MIT. The report also found a U.S. public increasingly unhappy with oil and more willing to
develop alternative energy sources like wind and solar. Moreover, the national survey of 1,200 Americans'
opinions on different types of energy indicated growing concern about global warming -- but an apparent
reluctance to pay to fight it. Professor Stephen Ansolabehere, the MIT political scientist who conducted the
survey through Knowledge Networks, a consumer information company, said he hopes that tracking Americans'
attitudes toward energy will help policy-makers decide how to chart the United States' energy future. "We're
trying to understand what public policy in the U.S. should do to encourage new kinds of energy development or
different patterns of energy consumption," Ansolabehere said. The report, "Public Attitudes Toward America's
Energy Options: Insights for Nuclear Energy," was recently published by MIT's Center for Advanced Nuclear
Energy Systems. Ansolabehere conducted a similar survey in 2002 as part of the MIT study, "The Future of
Nuclear Power." In the five years since the last survey, public preferences have remained fairly stable, but the
percentage of people who want to increase nuclear power use has grown from 28 percent to 35 percent.
8
Politics Waste Links
DDI 2008 GT
Brad Bolman

That increase in popularity is likely due to concern over global warming caused by carbon emissions from fossil
fuels, Ansolabehere said.

Not-in-my-backyard means nuclear power is heavily unpopular among general

populace
Washington Independent, 6/12/08, “Pricey Alternative: Nuclear Energy,” lexis [BB]
If costs don't come down, that waiting period could stretch out much longer. So far, these obstacles
haven't stopped energy companies from submitting applications to the government for new plants,
according to the Energy Information Administration. "Even with the rising cost of materials," said
JohnMoens, nuclear industry specialist at the EIA , "it sounds like more companies are getting interested
in building the reactors and the list of companies that [the government] anticipates will apply has been
growing rather than shrinking."But, Moens says, just because companies are applying to build new plants,
doesn't mean those plants will definitely get built. "There are so many things that can change in a hurry,"
he said. The rising cost is one of those things. And it's something that can only add to an already
poor public perception of nuclear energy. The "Not In My Backyard" factor associated with
nuclear waste makes nuclear energy unpopular in some communities. The economic factor could
prove to be the tipping point.

9
Politics Waste Links
DDI 2008 GT
Brad Bolman

Environmental Groups Oppose

Environmental and scientific groups hate the plan.
Tom Usher, former CEO of US steel, 6/6/2008, AMENDMENTS PROMOTING MORE SUBSIDIES FOR
NUCLEAR POWER IN PROPOSED CLIMATE BILL WASHINGTON
A number of environmental, science and public health groups today commended the Senate for beginning
debate on the most comprehensive legislation to date addressing climate change and urged lawmakers to
reject adding nuclear power subsidies to the bill. According to the organizations, the Climate Security Act of
2008 (S. 3036) -- sponsored by Sens. Joe Lieberman (I-Ct.) and John Warner (R-Va.) - potentially offers an
opportunity to put our nation on the path to avoid the worst consequences of global warming. But they voiced
concerns that some senators will attempt to attach amendments to the bill that would give the nuclear power
industry billions of dollars in unwarranted taxpayer subsidies at the expense of conservation, efficiency and
renewable energy sources that could be deployed much more quickly. (See below for a list of the organizations
and contact information.) The groups pointed out that the nuclear industry already has benefited from more than
$100 billion in taxpayer subsidies over the past half century, billions more in the Energy Policy Act of 2005
(more than $13 billion), and even more in the Omnibus Appropriations Act for Fiscal Year 2008 (more than $18
billion in federal loan guarantees). Despite this support, just this week Moody's Investor Service stated that a
utility's credit rating could be undermined by building a new nuclear power plant due to the skyrocketing cost of
new reactors. The price tag for just one reactor could exceed $7,000 a kilowatt, far more than many preferable
low-carbon options.

10