Burying Uncertainty: Risk and the Case Against Geological Disposal of Nuclear Waste
University of California Press, 1993 M12 3 - 368 pages
Shrader-Frechette looks at current U.S. government policy regarding the nation's high-level radioactive waste both scientifically and ethically.
What should be done with our nation's high-level radioactive waste, which will remain hazardous for thousands of years? This is one of the most pressing problems faced by the nuclear power industry, and current U.S. government policy is to bury "radwastes" in specially designed deep repositories.
K. S. Shrader-Frechette argues that this policy is profoundly misguided on both scientific and ethical grounds. Scientifically—because we cannot trust the precision of 10,000-year predictions that promise containment of the waste. Ethically—because geological disposal ignores the rights of present and future generations to equal treatment, due process, and free informed consent.
Shrader-Frechette focuses her argument on the world's first proposed high-level radioactive waste facility at Yucca Mountain, Nevada. Analyzing a mass of technical literature, she demonstrates the weaknesses in the professional risk-assessors' arguments that claim the site is sufficiently safe for such a plan. We should postpone the question of geological disposal for at least a century and use monitored, retrievable, above-ground storage of the waste until then. Her message regarding radwaste is clear: what you can't see can hurt you.
What people are saying - Write a review
We haven't found any reviews in the usual places.
2 Understanding the Origins of the Problem
3 Reliance on Value Judgments in Repository Risk Assessment
4 Subjective Estimates of Repository Risks
5 Subjective Evaluations of Repository Risks
6 Problematic Inferences in Assessing Repository Risks
An Obstacle to Geological Disposal
Other editions - View all
acceptable accident Agency Analysis appear argue arguments assessors associated cause chapter claim compensation conclusions consent costs decision discussion effects Energy Environmental equal equity error estimates et al ethical Evaluation example facilities flow fracture fuel future future persons geological disposal given grounds groundwater hazards Hence high-level human ignorance important impossible inference Item least less limits logic Maxey Flats means ment methodological value judgments models Moreover natural Nevada NMRS Nuclear Waste occur Office permanent geological permanent repository persons Plan Policy possible Power precise predictions present probability problems Program Project proposed questionable Radioactive Waste radionuclides radwaste reactors reason regarding regulations Report Representatives Research result Review Risk Assessment safety scientific scientists Shrader-Frechette social spent storage studies suitability thousand tion U.S. Congress U.S. DOE uncertainties United Washington Waste Disposal Waste Management Yucca Mountain
Page xiv - For books are not absolutely dead things, but do contain a potency of life in them to be as active as that soul was whose progeny they are...
Page 320 - Onsite solar devices could be made competitive in markets representing over 40 percent of US energy demand by the mid-1980's." The OTA staff goes on to say that lowtemperature solar uses, which comprise 40 percent of total US energy needs, are currently competitive economically with existing alternatives (pp. 13-14), even in cities such as Boston, Albuquerque, and Omaha, where heating needs are often significant (pp. 3 Iff.). 5 1 . Inhaber, "Risk with Energy,