Lawmakers table nuclear waste storage but idea isn’t dead - Flurry of nuclear activity in Wyoming and elsewhere

by Wyoming Liberty Group

Far from our borders, in an announcement that seemed distant from Wyoming, a major nuclear power company recently announced in New York and Washington, D.C., that it had been awarded a whopping $1 billion in U.S. government contracts.

Why should we care about such matters in the Cowboy State?

Well, for at least one good reason: After decades of slumber, inertia and a lack of political and business will, nuclear is back in a big way. And even though Wyoming lawmakers recently tabled a measure contemplating a centralized interim storage facility for spent nuclear waste, the issue isn't dead. Far from it. The idea of storing spent nuclear fuel waste is expected to return at some point. There is also simmering talk about possibly bringing two small modular nuclear reactor manufacturing companies to Wyoming, while utility companies are eyeing other nuclear projects similar to what's unfolding in the Kemmerer area.

Bottom line: We need to pay attention—and make sure we understand what's happening.

But first, a bit about the announcement: Constellation Energy, the biggest operator of nuclear power plants in the nation, said it will use its nuclear power to provide electricity to over a dozen federal agencies over the following decade. That includes the Army Corps of Engineers, the Department of Transportation and the Federal Reserve Board of Governors.

The deal, scheduled to start in April, was touted as the largest acquisition of energy by the U.S. General Services Administration in its history. It will provide electricity that is tantamount to what would be used by over a million houses in a given year.

"This agreement is another powerful example of how things have changed," said Joe Dominguez, the chief executive officer of Constellation, in a statement.

Indeed. Things have certainly changed—not just nationally but for us in Wyoming.

For one, as we know, a $4 billion nuclear power plant is being built in the Kemmerer area by billionaire Bill Gates—he of Microsoft fame—with the cooperation of the federal government. Gates' massive project is estimated to begin operations in about five years, pending NRC approvals.

Gates and his compatriots tout the nuclear plant as a way to meet the burgeoning demand for electricity in the United States; much of that demand, by the way, is being fueled by Big Tech and its push into AI—artificial intelligence, which gobbles up huge amounts of energy.

Then, of course, there has been the push by various members of the Wyoming legislature and various Wyoming government agencies. They have talked about Wyoming becoming a place to store nuclear waste in part because they said it could result in more than $4 billion a year in revenue for the state. They also believe it could help create a major industry for the Cowboy State as coal and other sources of energy are on the wane.

The flurry of nuclear activity goes even beyond that. There's been talk lately about reprocessing spent nuclear fuel, which isn't being done in the United States yet. And there's also talk about bringing microreactors to Wyoming, and those who support the idea say that they're cheaper and safer.

But, as they say, hold your horses.

The promise of big revenue, of new jobs, of the creation of an industry has to be tempered by some other facts.

Nuclear waste is a nettlesome problem, to say the least. It is so dangerous to human life that it can take hundreds of thousands of years before the nuclear material is no longer toxic. The solution, experts say, is to essentially dig a big hole and bury the nuclear waste. But is that really the most viable, long-term solution? Future generations depend on that answer. Indeed, it goes without saying that what is a threat to human life also poses danger to our waterways and our lands, the very food that we bring to the table.

But advocates of nuclear energy say the risks are overstated, that safeguards have been put in place that make nuclear a safe source of energy at a time when growing demand necessitates it. But if history is any guide, there is nothing that is perfectly safe. That was witnessed in the 1970s with the partial nuclear meltdown at Three Mile Island Nuclear Generating Station in Pennsylvania. It was experienced again with the Chernobyl disaster in the 1980s in Ukraine. And the problem with nuclear was proven again with the meltdown in Fukushima, Japan, in 2011.

One of the lessons from such nuclear accidents: That accidents happen. That people are fallible. And that doesn't even address when the problem isn't an accident but rather an intentional problem, such as those posed by terrorists who would want to get their hands on the nuclear material or even attack nuclear plants.

Now, more than ever, we need to pay attention and consider carefully the consequences of the rise of nuclear power. It's in vogue in a way that we haven't seen in decades, in part because Big Tech wants nuclear to fuel its move into AI. But is that what we want for Wyoming?