Skip to main content

Part of the book series: Lecture Notes in Energy ((LNEN,volume 2))

  • 3290 Accesses

Abstract

The USA has accumulated a great deal of nuclear and chemical wastes as a result of the production of nuclear weapons and nuclear power. An unambiguous path to managing these legacy wastes, which continue to increase, has been blocked by science and engineering uncertainties, nuclear proliferation concerns, high costs, and compounded by the absence of a comprehensive national government policy framework and a clear public consensus about the issues. The public hears inconsistent and often contradictory messages from advocacy groups and the media, as well as from senior government elected officials and staff who have the responsibility to manage the wastes. In order to understand public preferences and perceptions about new nuclear missions at existing major DOE sites and public preferences for alternative electric energy fuel sources, CRESP surveyed US residents, disproportionately near six major DOE sites, in 2005, 2008, 2009, and 2010. In 2011, after the Fukushima events, another survey was conducted to determine the impacts of the Japanese events on the preferences and perceptions observed in the four earlier surveys.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

eBook
USD 16.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as EPUB and PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Softcover Book
USD 109.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Compact, lightweight edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info
Hardcover Book
USD 109.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Durable hardcover edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

References

  • Ball M (2008) Clinton declares yucca mountain “will be off the table forever”. Las Vegas Rev J. http://www.lvrj.com/news/13860977.html. Accessed February 10, 2012

  • Belsey J (2008) Media exposure and core values. J Mass Commun Quart 85:311–330

    Google Scholar 

  • Blue Ribbon Commission on America’s Nuclear Future (2012) Final Commission Report. January 26

    Google Scholar 

  • Caputo A (1996) A failed experiment. The environmental forum, January/February, 17–21.

    Google Scholar 

  • Cawley K (2010) The federal government’s responsibilities and liabilities under the Nuclear Waste Policy Act. Testimony for the Committee on the Budget US House of Representatives. July 27, 2010

    Google Scholar 

  • Clinton WJ (2011) Back to work: why we need smart government for a strong economy. Alfred A Knopf, NY

    Google Scholar 

  • Committee on Commerce, U.S. House of representatives (2000) Incinerating cash. U.S. Washington, DC, House of representatives

    Google Scholar 

  • CNS News (2011) president Obama defends the use of nuclear energy after Fukushima. March 16, 2011. Cnsnews.com/news/article/presdeint-Obama-defends-nculear-ernergy. Accessed February 10, 2012

    Google Scholar 

  • Deutsch J, Forsberg C, Kadak A, Kazimi M, Moniz E, Parsons J, Yangbo D, Pierpont L (2009) Update of the MIT 2003 future of nuclear power. MIT energy initiative

    Google Scholar 

  • Domenici P (2009) Former Senator Pete Domenic delivers speech on future of global nuclear energy. http://crespupdates.blogspot.com. Accessed December 2, 2009

  • General Accounting Office (2001) Fundamental reassessment needed to address major mission, structure, and accountability problems. GAO-02-51. Washington DC, GAO

    Google Scholar 

  • Gertner J (2006) Atomic balm? The New York Times Magazine. July 16, 56–64.

    Google Scholar 

  • Graetz M (2011) The end of energy. MIT Press, Cambridge, MA

    Google Scholar 

  • Graetz M, Shapiro I (2005) Death by a thousand cuts: the fight over taxiing inherited wealth. Princeton University Press

    Google Scholar 

  • Greenberg M (2009) NIMBY, CLAMP and the location of new nuclear-related facilities: U.S. National and Eleven Site-Specific Surveys. Risk Analysis, An International Journal 29:1242–1254

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Greenberg M, Krueckeberg D, Kaltman M (1984) Population trends around nuclear power plants, pp 189–211. In: Pasqualetti M, Pijawka K (eds) Nuclear power: assessing and managing hazardous technology. Westview, Boulder, Colorado

    Google Scholar 

  • Greenberg M, Krueckeberg D, Kaltman M, Metz W, Wilhelm C (1986) Local planning v. national policy: urban growth near nuclear power stations in the United States. Town Plan Rev 57:225–238

    Google Scholar 

  • Greenberg M, Lewis D, Frisch M, Lowrie K, Mayer H (2002) The US Department of Energy’s regional economic legacy: spatial dimensions of a half century of dependency. Socio-Econ Plan Sci 36:109–125

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Greenberg M, Miller KT, Frisch M, Lewis D (2003) Facing an uncertain economic future: environmental management spending and rural regions surrounding the U.S. DOE’s nuclear weapons facilities. Def Peace Econ 14:85–97

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Greenberg M, West B, Lowrie K, Mayer H (2009) The Reporter’s handbook on nuclear materials, energy, and waste management. Vanderbilt University Press, Nashville, TN

    Google Scholar 

  • Huizenga D (2012) WM symposia 2012 and FY 2013 budget overview. Paper copy received March 15, 2012

    Google Scholar 

  • Inhofe J, et al. (2009) Letter to secretary Steven Chu, April 29. 202009.

    Google Scholar 

  • Jenkins-Smith H, Silva C (1998) The role of risk perception and technical information in scientific debates over nuclear waste storage. Reliab Eng Syst Saf 59:107–122

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Keller B (2002) Nuclear nightmares, New York Times. May 26, 22–29, 51, 54–55, 57.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lindell M, Earle T (1983) How close is close enough: public perceptions of the risk of industrial facilities. Risk Analysis 3:245–253

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • MIT (2003) The future of nuclear power. Boston, MA, MIT. http://web.mit.edu/nuclearpower. Accessed January 15, 2004

  • MSNBC (2010) Obama renews commitment to nuclear energy. February 16, 2000 and http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/35421517/ns/business-oil_and_energy.

  • NJ DEP news (2011) Christie Administration Challenges Rule on Nuclear Waste. http://www.nj.gov/dep/docs/nrcmotion20110315.pdf. Accessed March 15, 2011

  • Northey H (2011) Lawmakers bitterly divided over Jaczko’s future. http://www.eenews.net/public/EEDaily/2011/12/12. Accessed December 12, 2011

  • Nuclear Energy Institute (2002) President Bush OKs recommendation of York account mountain as disposal site for nuclear material. http://www.nei.org/newsandevents/bushokasrecomemndation. Accessed February 10, 2012

  • Nuclear Energy Institute (2003) Nuclear power plants vital element in President Bush’s greenhouse gas reduction initiative. http://www.nei.org/newsandevents/nuclearbush/initiative. Accessed February 10, 2012

  • Office of Environmental Management, DOE (1995) Closing the circle on the splitting of the atom. DOE, Washington, DC

    Google Scholar 

  • Office of Environmental Management, DOE (1996) Estimating the cold war mortgage: the 1996 baseline environmental management report, 1996, DOE/EM-0290. DOE, Washington, DC

    Google Scholar 

  • Pegg J (2005) Bush calls for development of more nuclear power. http://www.ens-newswire.com/ens/apr2005/2005-04-28-10.asp. Accessed February 10, 2012

  • Pinto J (ed) (1998) The project management handbook. Jossey-Bass, San Francisco

    Google Scholar 

  • Probst K, Lowe A (2000) Cleaning up the nuclear weapons complex: does anybody care? Center for risk management, resources for the future, Washington DC

    Google Scholar 

  • Russell M (1997) Toward a productive divorce: separating DOE cleanups from transition assistance. Joint Institute for Energy and Environment, University of Tennessee, Knoxville, TN

    Google Scholar 

  • Shanahan J (1995) Television viewing and adolescent authoritarianism. J Adolesc 18:271–288

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Shrum L (2001) Mainstreaming, residents, and impersonal impact: testing moderators of the cultivation affects for estimates of crime risk. Hum Commun Res 27:187–215

    Google Scholar 

  • Spangler M (1981) The role of syndrome management and the future of nuclear energy. Risk Analysis 1:179–188

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Stewart R, Stewart J (2011) Fuel cycle to nowhere: U.S. law and policy on nuclear waste. Vanderbilt University Press, Nashville TN

    Google Scholar 

  • Top-to-Bottom Review Team (2002) A review of the environmental management program.

    Google Scholar 

  • US DOE (2006) Accelerating cleanup: Focus on 2006. Washington, DC

    Google Scholar 

  • US Department of Energy. Department of energy releases (2001) Strategic plan (2011) May 10, 2011. http://energy.gove/articles/department-energy-releaes-2011-stratgegci-plan. Accessed may 12, 20111

  • Von Hippel F, ed. (2010) The uncertain future of nuclear energy. International panel of fissile materials, Research Report Number 9. http://www.fissilematerials.org Accessed October 9, 2010

  • Wagner R, Arthur E, Cunningham P (1999) Plutonium, nuclear power, and nuclear weapons. Issue Sci Technol. Spring, 29–33

    Google Scholar 

  • Wallenstein P, Lynn Yang J (2011) Obama support for nuclear power faces a test. Washington Post. March 18, 2011. http://www.Washngtonpost.com/politics/obmasas-support-for-nculear-power. Accessed February 10, 2012

  • Wilkinson H (2006) Schmidt considers nuke waste. The Enquirer. http://news.enquirer.com/apps/pbcs.dII/article?AID=/20061029. Accessed November 1, 2006

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2013 Springer-Verlag London

About this chapter

Cite this chapter

Greenberg, M.R. (2013). Managing the Nuclear Legacies. In: Nuclear Waste Management, Nuclear Power, and Energy Choices. Lecture Notes in Energy, vol 2. Springer, London. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4471-4231-7_1

Download citation

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4471-4231-7_1

  • Published:

  • Publisher Name: Springer, London

  • Print ISBN: 978-1-4471-4230-0

  • Online ISBN: 978-1-4471-4231-7

  • eBook Packages: EngineeringEngineering (R0)

Publish with us

Policies and ethics