In my third year of university, I went through a phase where I was quite interested in the concept of nuclear waste. I had the opportunity to meet with the Chief Nuclear Officer of Ontario Power Generation in an effort to write this article. I love nuclear energy, but no one talks about the problem we have with nuclear waste. Despite the straightforward solutions available, the world does nothing due to the need to please hearts and minds.

Nuclear waste storage will possibly outlive the entire human race hundreds of thousands of years into the future. Sounds freaky… and makes me a little skeptical…

This is the opinion of Sandia National Laboratories, a U.S. government nuclear laboratory. Nuclear energy waste can remain dangerous for 10,000 to 100,000 years. Truthfully, these are scientists' best guesses as we don’t know much about the length of time required for nuclear waste to no longer be a danger.

That’s a long time. To put that in perspective, human civilization as we know it has only existed for 6,000 years. Imagine the Aztecs leaving behind their garbage bags but instructing us to never open them for several thousand more years. That is precisely what the world is doing today.

Nuclear waste

For starters, nuclear energy is one of the cleanest and most efficient energy sources available on earth. Sadly, nuclear often gets a bad reputation for its worst-case outcome possibilities. From explosions to meltdowns, to abandoned cities… it’s horrifying. The most dangerous aspect of nuclear energy is the handling of nuclear waste.

In a nuclear reactor, fuel rods made up of uranium are used for energy production. These fuel rods are unimaginably hot and radioactive. Every 6-8 years, the fuel rods need to be replaced. As a result, the old fuel rods are removed from the reactor.

We can’t simply put the old fuel rods on the driveway for garbage pickup every Tuesday – that would be a public health disaster. Exposed fuel rods are so radioactive that they can cause immediate death or result in long-term health effects such as cancer and cardiovascular disease.

The nuclear plant will then insert the retired fuel rods into a cooling pool for 5 to 10 years. This is called ‘temporary storage’ in ‘spent-fuel pools’. After the 5 to 10 years is up, the fuel rods remain radioactive and hot, but less than when first removed. They are then transported to what is referred to as ‘dry cask storage’, which is pretty much a giant concrete casing that protects radiation. And… that’s it! Nothing left to it.

But, there is a significant issue.

Not temporary

No nuclear waste anywhere in the world (since the inception of nuclear energy!) is currently in what is considered ‘long-term storage’. Instead, every bit of nuclear waste is currently in what is considered ‘temporary storage’. Compared to the time required to store nuclear waste (at least 10,000 years), storing the waste in a system designed for only a few decades will eventually cause a severe headache for governments worldwide.

The most considerable near-term risk of nuclear waste storage is water running through the sealed dry casks and carrying nuclear particles out of storage. The dry-cask storage is only a temporary fix to a far more significant problem, as governments worldwide work on brainstorming a new solution. Fortunately for them, they have plenty of time. The current dry casks are designed to last for several decades.

This storage method is indeed safe, but it requires resources and ongoing maintenance that must always be committed. Suppose resources such as security, maintenance, and operational support are removed. In that case, the chances for radioactive exposure become increasingly high year-over-year.

Dig

Longer-term, as in 10,000 years longer-term, storage might be possible underground. The idea is simple – lock the nuclear waste underground, protecting it from natural disasters, terrorists, and shield radioactive material. Oh, and one last thing… design it to be locked away for 100,000 years. Therefore, there is no need for maintenance, supervision, or security – the government wants to simply lock the door and throw away the keys.

Methods to store nuclear waste

This is not a new concept, however, as the idea has been around for decades. Yet, no one has done it. Why?

For four decades, Yucca Mountain, 100 miles from Las Vegas, Nevada, was on track to become the leading site for storing the U.S.’s accumulated nuclear waste. Of course, after 4 decades of political debate, the project went through multiple flip-flops. The biggest reason for the slow project success is the high level of controversy surrounding nuclear. Very few people, if anyone, would be okay with the entire nation’s unsafe and radioactive nuclear junk within any proximity to them. Even 100 miles is far too close for the worst-case scenario, sadly. People fear nuclear, so nuclear waste storage is a no-go.

While the U.S. has spent the last four years fighting over a single site, Finland has quietly selected and begun construction on a nuclear waste disposal facility. Once completed, Finland will be the first country to create a long-term storage facility.

Junk

Nuclear power creates about 20% of the electricity in the United States and Canada. Given the green characteristics of nuclear, it could be pivotal towards reducing the world’s greenhouse gas emissions. However, suppose nuclear power has any chance of being the future energy source for the world. In that case, waste storage is the most significant piece of the puzzle.