Nuclear transport ordinance is an ounce of prevention

No new nuclear plants have been built in the United States for decades, due in part to high costs and lack of a good plan for storage/disposal of spent fuel. But now the need for energy independence and less carbon emissions has the federal government and corporate interests pushing again for new reactors.

The problems remain. Currently, 60,000 tonnes of spent nuclear fuel sit on the grounds of power plants, an amount that grows by 2,000 tonnes per year. Power companies have been wary of building new nukes. They want to see the backlog of waste being hauled away to permanent geologic storage or reprocessing, possibly at the Savannah River Site in South Carolina. Once off the grounds, the government owns the spent fuel. Until then, the utility companies are stuck with it.

The National Academy of Sciences estimates it will take 9600 rail and 1100 heavy-haul highway shipments to move the first 70,000 tonnes. Spent fuel is viciously hot stuff, up to a million times more radioactive than new fuel rods, enriched uranium, or plutonium. Unshielded exposure to spent fuel or other high-level radioactive wastes can be fatal in seconds. In a fiery accident situation, the release of even a small percentage of one shipment would force evacuations (possibly permanent). An accident around here could have long-term impacts on our mountains, water, farms, commerce, and of course, the health of our children.

Containers for spent fuel are built to withstand severe accidents. The ones being designed for shipments are also huge, weighing 250,000 lb. This is a normal weight for a railroad coal car but far in excess of the 80,000 lb. highway limit. Including the weight of the beefed-up tractor trailer, one of these rigs would tip the scales at around 300,000 lb. Not something you’d like to meet on the road or a questionable overpass, especially in a part of the world where winding roads, steep slopes, and bad weather make accidents more common. Ten years ago, Western North Carolina was spared from having spent fuel shipments pass through for these very reasons.

It still isn’t an acceptable risk. Faced with the prospect of spent fuel shipments many times greater than all that have gone before in this country, a local group of concerned citizens checked into hazardous materials issues, cask safety, and how spent fuel might travel to South Carolina from power plants in the northeastern quadrant of the United States.

Common Sense at the Nuclear Crossroads (CSNC) published and presented two reports on the findings. One was that we are blessed with exceptionally good HAZMAT, EMS, and other emergency services. Another was that I-40, and I-26 when completed, would very likely be considered for spent fuel shipments.

On November 25th, the Asheville City Council will consider an ordinance making it a misdemeanor to transport spent nuclear fuel or other high-level radioactive wastes through the city. The ordinance is modeled on one passed by the City of Las Vegas a few years ago, but several other jurisdictions have also acted, including Wadesboro in Anson County.

History shows that state wishes are seriously considered in the selection of highway routes for spent fuel. The proposed ordinance would alert our state delegation and other decision makers to Asheville’s unequivocal opposition. The time for action is now, proactively, before any shipping plans firm up. 

Help decrease the chance that a new class of highly dangerous and unwieldy cargo will one day travel through town. Please tell the City Council you don’t want spent nuclear fuel on our roads. Consider attending the council meeting when the ordinance is explained and considered.  Together, we can act to protect the mountains we love.

--Anne Craig, © 2008