"The most toxic and dangerous type of radioactive waste created by the nuclear industry"
This is waste generated by nuclear power plants called 'high-level radioactive waste' (HLW), also known as 'spent' or 'irradiated' fuel. This waste contains plutonium, uranium, strontium, and cesium; and will be radioactive for millions of years.
It is not like the waste currently stored at the Waste Isolation Pilot Project (WIPP) or any other waste site that exists today in the U.S.: it is far worse.
Two companies are proposing to build waste facilities near Carlsbad and Hobbs for the most toxic and dangerous type of radioactive waste created by the nuclear industry.
Holtec International is working with the Eddy-Lea Energy Alliance, LLC (ELEA) to apply for a license to build a Consolidated Interim Storage (CIS) facility approximately halfway between Carlsbad and Hobbs, and 16 miles north of WIPP.
The Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) has declared the Holtec/ELEA application complete, NRC initiated a public comment period with 60 days for public comment. Note that transport of this waste poses risks to the environment and all life located near transportation routes.
Holtec proposal:
New CIS facility to store 100,000 metric tons of HLRW, with the potential to increase to 120,000 metric tons for 120 years
Shallow sub-surface burial system
New Mexicans and Texans are fighting the attempted licensing of these two proposed CIS facilities - Waste Control Specialists near Andrews, Texas and Eddy Lee/Holtec International east of Carlsbad, New Mexico.
These sites and any transport to these sites are not only dangerous but environmentally unjust. These sites present clear examples of environmental racism.
New Mexico's demographic is largely Latino. There are many communities of color, especially in the southern part of the state where the sites are being proposed. People of color would be disproportionately affected if the Eddy Lee/Holtec CIS site were licensed and constructed.
New Mexico and Texas do not consent to either proposed CIS facility and are fighting to avoid the environmental injustice and the unnecessary shipment of irradiated high-level nuclear waste through their communities.
Hardened On-Site Storage (HOSS) is a community-based concept that aims to protect the public from the threats posed by the current vulnerable storage of commercial irradiated fuel.
History
For decades, high level radioactive waste has accumulated at reactor sites and continues to do so as nuclear reactors generate more waste. Without a credible plan to permanently isolate it, storage pools, where irradiated nuclear waste is currently stored until it becomes less hot, have been tightly packed and re-racked to accommodate all the waste.
Unfortunately, the pools and dry casks have no robust containment. If the cooling pumps stopped operating or the water in the pools drained out, temperatures would quickly increase, as happened in Fukushima Japan, and could result in a similar disaster.
Current dry cask storage at reactor sites (pictured above) is extremely vulnerable. There is often nothing more than a chain-link fence and a short distance that separates the highly radioactive waste containers and public access.
Establishing interim hardened on-site storage (HOSS) is a top priority. Hardened on-site storage allows waste generators to store high level waste as close to the site of generation as possible, thereby exposing fewer people to radiation, as safely as possible.
Rather than storing dozens of vulnerable dry-casks next to each other in the open air, the HOSS Principles established by concerned citizens mandate:
Irradiated fuel must be stored as safely as possible as close to the site of generation as possible;
HOSS facilities must not be regarded as a permanent waste solution, and thus should not be constructed underground and the waste must be retrievable;
The facility must have real-time radiation and heat monitoring for early detection of problems with containers;
The overall objective of HOSS should be that the amount of releases projected in even severe attacks should be low enough that the storage system would be unattractive as a terrorist target;
Placement of individual canisters that makes detection difficult from outside the site boundary.
Hardened On-Site Storage (HOSS) is supported by organizations in all 50 states. The Principles of Securing Nuclear Waste at Nuclear Reactor Sites are posted here. It would provide better security at reactor sites with robust dry storage and community oversight, including real-time monitoring of heat and radiation. HOSS is rooted in values of community protection and environmental justice and will provide increased protection from human or natural disasters, like terrorist attacks and earthquakes
HOSS facilities are not permanent waste solutions, and therefore should not be constructed deep underground as the waste must be retrievable. However, they are a workable solution that will allow us to explore scientifically sound, and socially and environmentally just long-term management systems.
Nuclear Power Has No Place in a Green Energy Future
Because of: Time Delay, Success of Renewables, Huge Costs, Dangers, Weapons Connection, and Wastes
from Yahoo News, 21 Oct 21, ”…….Practical concerns also temper enthusiasm for a nuclear future. The next generation of reactors, heralded as a game changer by supporters, still haven’t been proven in the real world. Even if those technologies are as revolutionary as advertised, skeptics say it could take decades before they make a real difference in the global energy grid — too long if the worst outcomes of climate change are to be avoided.
Renewable energy technologies can be enough on their own
“The drawbacks to nuclear are compounded by the burgeoning success of renewables — both solar and wind are getting cheaper and more efficient, year after year. There is also a growing realisation that a combination of renewables, smart storage, energy efficiency and more flexible grids can now be delivered at scale and at speed — anywhere in the world.” — Jonathon Porritt, Guardian
The world doesn’t have time to wait for next-gen nuclear
“When it comes to averting the imminent effects of climate change, even the cutting edge of nuclear technology will prove to be too little, too late. Put simply, given the economic trends in existing plants and those under construction, nuclear power cannot positively impact climate change in the next ten years or more.” — Allison Macfarlane, Foreign Affairs
A major ramp-up in nuclear technologies isn’t economically feasible
“While nuclear power may have once been cheaper than wind or solar, the economics have since changed dramatically. Nuclear power plants are very expensive to build and the economics of nuclear power are getting steadily worse. By contrast, renewables continue to come down in price.” — Ian Lowe, Conversation
There’s no way to guarantee that nuclear plants will be safe
“People around the world have witnessed the Three Mile Island, Chernobyl and Fukushima accidents. It is more than enough to believe that a safe nuclear power plant is nothing but a myth.” — Jang Daul, Korea Times
More nuclear power could lead to more nuclear weapons
“Some nations — India and Pakistan, and in all probability Israel — became nuclear powers after originally seeking nuclear technology for research or to develop nuclear power. … This is important: The technology used to turn on lights or charge mobile phones shouldn’t need to involve national or international defence apparatus.” — Editorial, Nature
Nuclear waste is still a major problem
“Nuclear waste lasts for hundreds of thousands of years before they are half-decayed. Our United States government — perhaps the longest continuous government in the world — is only 232 years old. Who will be around to manage uranium wastes?” — David Ross, Courier-Journal
LANL’s Central Mission: Los Alamos Lab officials have recently claimed that LANL has moved away from primarily nuclear weapons to “national security”, but what truly remains as the Labs central mission? Here’s the answer from one of its own documents:
LANL’s “Central Mission”- Presented at: RPI Nuclear Data 2011 Symposium for Criticality Safety and Reactor Applications (PDF) 4/27/11
• Trump wants a Continuing Resolution (CR) for the rest of the year, rather than doing an omnibus appropriation bill or partially shutting down the federal government on March 15. That means the federal government would run on FY 2024 budget levels through September 30, 2025. However, there are “anomalies”, one being a $185 million increase for nuclear weapons programs paid for by a corresponding cut to nonproliferation programs. This also means no individual or “omnibus” appropriations bills for FY 2025. It will be the first time that the government runs on a Continuing Resolution for an entire fiscal year.
• House and Senate approved their respective budget resolutions but still have to reconcile them. Both have $4 trillion in tax cuts for the rich paid for in part by $2 trillion in cuts in domestic programs, with Medicaid being the single biggest target. They also have an additional $300 billion toward new military and border security spending. The budget resolution is not legally binding so it’s not completely clear how it gets implemented should there be a Continuing Resolution (CR) for the entire FY 2025.
Nuclear Weapons Update:
Trump has been making noises about cutting nuclear weapons:
1. From Frank Chen, Rethink Media:
Addressing WEF in Davos, 1/23/25: “We’d like to see denuclearization. In fact, with President Putin…we were talking about denuclearization of our two countries, and China would have come along. China has a — a much smaller, right now, nuclear armament than us or field than us, but they’re — they’re going to be catching it at some point over the next four or five years.
And I will tell you that President Putin really liked the idea of — of cutting way back on nuclear. And I think the rest of the world, we would have gotten them to follow. And China would have come along too. China also liked it.
Tremendous amounts of money are being spent on nuclear, and the destructive capability is something that we don’t even want to talk about today, because you don’t want to hear it. It’s too depressing.
So, we want to see if we can denuclearize, and I think that’s very possible. And I can tell you that President Putin wanted to do it. He and I wanted to do it. We had a good conversation with China. They would have been involved, and that would have been an unbelievable thing for the planet.”
2. Joint press conference with Indian PM Modi, 2/13/25, “You know, the power of weaponry today is — and not only nuclear, but nuclear, in particular — the power of weaponry is very important. I said before that I had very constructive talks in my first term with President Putin about the denuclearization of the two countries. And then we were going to go to China after we worked some kind of a deal, and we had the confines of a deal…he really wanted to do it and so did I — denuclearize. And it’s such a beautiful term, when you think about it. In other words, to bring it down, because the power of those weapons is too great.
And I did speak to President Xi about that, and I was getting also a very good response. He’s building a very strong nuclear power. He’s not very close to Russia or the United States right now, but he will be soon. I mean, he’ll catch up over the period of four or five years, they say.
…But after I put out the fires, I’m going to meet with China, and I’m going to meet with Russia, and we’re going to see if we can de-escalate, if we can bring it down — military — especially as it pertains to nuclear.”
3. Speaking to reporters in the Oval Office, 2/13/25, “At some point, when things settle down, I’m gonna meet with China, and I’m gonna meet with Russia…we were talking about ‘de-nuking’, denuclearize. President Putin and I agreed we were gonna do it, in a very big way.
There’s no reason for us to be building brand new nuclear weapons, we already have so many. You could destroy the world 50 times over, 100 times over. And here we are building new nuclear weapons, and they’re building nuclear weapons, and China is building new nuclear weapons.
Hopefully there will never be a time when we need those weapons. If there is ever a time when we need nuclear weapons, like the kind of weapons that we are building, and that Russia has, and that China has––to a lesser extent, but will have––that’s gonna be a very sad day; that’s gonna be probably oblivion.
…We’re all spending a lot of money that we could be spending on other things that are actually, hopefully much more productive.”
Accelerating Arms Race
• New Strategic Arms Reduction Treaty (START) expires in February 2026. If not renewed it will be the first time the world is without any arms control treaty since the mid-1970s.
• Given Trump’s apparent siding with Putin over Ukraine, Europe is talking more about its own nuclear “deterrent”, particularly through the French. Through the United Kingdom is unlikely given that its nuclear weapons programs are so closely intertwined with the U.S.’ But relying upon either the French or UK has the strong advantage of not technically violating the 1970 NonProliferation Treaty. There is increasing noise in South Korea and Japan for their own nukes as well.
Click the image to view and download this large printable map of DOE sites, commercial reactors, nuclear waste dumps, nuclear transportation routes, surface waters near sites and transport routes, and underlying aquifers. This map was prepared by Deborah Reade for the Alliance for Nuclear Accountability.
Nuclear Watch Interactive Map – U.S. Nuclear Weapons Complex
Waste Lands: America’s Forgotten Nuclear Legacy
The Wall St. Journal has compiled a searchable database of contaminated sites across the US. (view)
Related WSJ report: https://www.wsj.com
• Trump wants a Continuing Resolution (CR) for the rest of the year, rather than doing an omnibus appropriation bill or partially shutting down the federal government on March 15. That means the federal government would run on FY 2024 budget levels through September 30, 2025. However, there are “anomalies”, one being a $185 million increase for nuclear weapons programs paid for by a corresponding cut to nonproliferation programs. This also means no individual or “omnibus” appropriations bills for FY 2025. It will be the first time that the government runs on a Continuing Resolution for an entire fiscal year.
• House and Senate approved their respective budget resolutions but still have to reconcile them. Both have $4 trillion in tax cuts for the rich paid for in part by $2 trillion in cuts in domestic programs, with Medicaid being the single biggest target. They also have an additional $300 billion toward new military and border security spending. The budget resolution is not legally binding so it’s not completely clear how it gets implemented should there be a Continuing Resolution (CR) for the entire FY 2025.
Nuclear Weapons Update:
Trump has been making noises about cutting nuclear weapons:
1. From Frank Chen, Rethink Media:
Addressing WEF in Davos, 1/23/25: “We’d like to see denuclearization. In fact, with President Putin…we were talking about denuclearization of our two countries, and China would have come along. China has a — a much smaller, right now, nuclear armament than us or field than us, but they’re — they’re going to be catching it at some point over the next four or five years.
And I will tell you that President Putin really liked the idea of — of cutting way back on nuclear. And I think the rest of the world, we would have gotten them to follow. And China would have come along too. China also liked it.
Tremendous amounts of money are being spent on nuclear, and the destructive capability is something that we don’t even want to talk about today, because you don’t want to hear it. It’s too depressing.
So, we want to see if we can denuclearize, and I think that’s very possible. And I can tell you that President Putin wanted to do it. He and I wanted to do it. We had a good conversation with China. They would have been involved, and that would have been an unbelievable thing for the planet.”
2. Joint press conference with Indian PM Modi, 2/13/25, “You know, the power of weaponry today is — and not only nuclear, but nuclear, in particular — the power of weaponry is very important. I said before that I had very constructive talks in my first term with President Putin about the denuclearization of the two countries. And then we were going to go to China after we worked some kind of a deal, and we had the confines of a deal…he really wanted to do it and so did I — denuclearize. And it’s such a beautiful term, when you think about it. In other words, to bring it down, because the power of those weapons is too great.
And I did speak to President Xi about that, and I was getting also a very good response. He’s building a very strong nuclear power. He’s not very close to Russia or the United States right now, but he will be soon. I mean, he’ll catch up over the period of four or five years, they say.
…But after I put out the fires, I’m going to meet with China, and I’m going to meet with Russia, and we’re going to see if we can de-escalate, if we can bring it down — military — especially as it pertains to nuclear.”
3. Speaking to reporters in the Oval Office, 2/13/25, “At some point, when things settle down, I’m gonna meet with China, and I’m gonna meet with Russia…we were talking about ‘de-nuking’, denuclearize. President Putin and I agreed we were gonna do it, in a very big way.
There’s no reason for us to be building brand new nuclear weapons, we already have so many. You could destroy the world 50 times over, 100 times over. And here we are building new nuclear weapons, and they’re building nuclear weapons, and China is building new nuclear weapons.
Hopefully there will never be a time when we need those weapons. If there is ever a time when we need nuclear weapons, like the kind of weapons that we are building, and that Russia has, and that China has––to a lesser extent, but will have––that’s gonna be a very sad day; that’s gonna be probably oblivion.
…We’re all spending a lot of money that we could be spending on other things that are actually, hopefully much more productive.”
Accelerating Arms Race
• New Strategic Arms Reduction Treaty (START) expires in February 2026. If not renewed it will be the first time the world is without any arms control treaty since the mid-1970s.
• Given Trump’s apparent siding with Putin over Ukraine, Europe is talking more about its own nuclear “deterrent”, particularly through the French. Through the United Kingdom is unlikely given that its nuclear weapons programs are so closely intertwined with the U.S.’ But relying upon either the French or UK has the strong advantage of not technically violating the 1970 NonProliferation Treaty. There is increasing noise in South Korea and Japan for their own nukes as well.
Important Documents & Articles Related to Nuclear Energy Production
Most Recent
Nothing Found
It seems we can’t find what you’re looking for. Perhaps searching can help.
See Also
Nuclear Watch Interactive Map – U.S. Nuclear Weapons Complex
Waste Lands: America’s Forgotten Nuclear Legacy
The Wall St. Journal has compiled a searchable database of contaminated sites across the US. (view)
Related WSJ report: https://www.wsj.com
LANL’s Central Mission: Los Alamos Lab officials have recently claimed that LANL has moved away from primarily nuclear weapons to “national security”, but what truly remains as the Labs central mission? Here’s the answer from one of its own documents:
LANL’s “Central Mission”- Presented at: RPI Nuclear Data 2011 Symposium for Criticality Safety and Reactor Applications (PDF) 4/27/11
