In his Dec. 28 Maine Voices column, Richard Bedard advocates for nuclear energy, stating that “a realistic look” at electricity needs leads to nuclear power. In fact, a realistic look at nuclear power requires dealing with the problem of nuclear waste.

Currently, 542 metric tons of nuclear waste are still on site at Maine Yankee, costing $10 million per year to store safely.  The waste has been stranded there for 15 years. Across the U.S., 86,000 tons of spent nuclear fuel waste await safe disposal, and that number continues to grow.

The government has no policy for the safe disposal of this mountain of waste and has not had one for over a decade, because no community wants to accept it and no state wants to host a nuclear waste disposal site. According to Stanford University, the cost of storing the existing waste is $500 million per year.

Before building another nuclear power plant, advocates should prove that the inevitable nuclear waste can and will be safely and affordably disposed of. They can start with the 542 tons of waste in Wiscasset and the 86,000 tons of nuclear waste in sites all across America. Until the existing waste is safely disposed of, a realistic look at nuclear power shows a growing mountain of waste stranded on sites never designed for long-term storage of nuclear waste and costing taxpayers billions.

Sigrid Olson
Cape Elizabeth

Copy the Story Link

« Previous

Letter to the editor: State still falling short in services to Maine’s unemployed

Next »

Letter to the editor: Portland vaccine passport backers targeting others’ freedom