US wants to build Idaho facility for warships' nuclear waste

October 3, 2016 by Keith Ridler

The Navy and U.S. Department of Energy want to build a $1.6 billion facility at a nuclear site in eastern Idaho that would handle fuel waste from the nation's fleet of nuclear-powered warships through at least 2060.

The new facility is needed to keep nuclear-powered aircraft carriers and submarines deployed, according to a final environmental impact statement made public Friday. It would be built at the Energy Department's 890-square-mile site, which includes the Idaho National Laboratory, considered the primary lab for nuclear research.

The government also looked at two alternatives: continuing to use outdated facilities at the site or overhauling them. Officials concluded in the document that the effect to the environment would be small for all three options.

Idaho officials support the new building.

"We would prefer to see a state-of-the-art facility if they're going to continue to bring in spent fuel," said Susan Burke, Idaho National Laboratory oversight coordinator for the state Department of Environmental Quality.

The Naval Nuclear Propulsion Program, a joint Navy and Energy Department organization, has been sending spent Navy fuel to the Idaho site since 1957, the document said. It's transported by rail from shipyards.

Program officials didn't immediately have comment for The Associated Press on Monday.

Officials decided a new facility to handle the spent fuel from warships is the strategy that would best allow the Navy to serve its mission.

"The facility would be designed with the flexibility to integrate future identified mission needs," the statement says.

It notes that a new facility is needed to handle a new type of spent-fuel shipping container, which is not possible at the current facility. The Gerald R. Ford aircraft carrier, when it becomes operational, will use the new container, as will nuclear-powered submarines under construction, officials said.

Explore further: Feds cancel research shipment of spent nuclear fuel to Idaho

Related Stories

Recommended for you

EPA adviser is promoting harmful ideas, scientists say

March 22, 2019

The Trump administration's reliance on industry-funded environmental specialists is again coming under fire, this time by researchers who say that Louis Anthony "Tony" Cox Jr., who leads a key Environmental Protection Agency ...

Coffee-based colloids for direct solar absorption

March 22, 2019

Solar energy is one of the most promising resources to help reduce fossil fuel consumption and mitigate greenhouse gas emissions to power a sustainable future. Devices presently in use to convert solar energy into thermal ...


Adjust slider to filter visible comments by rank

Display comments: newest first

1 / 5 (7) Oct 05, 2016
And how are they going to hold it there?

How many centuries will it need to have armed guards?

What will that cost? Who will pay for 200,000 years of armed guards?
4.3 / 5 (6) Oct 05, 2016
Why not research your question instead of asking it?
Why would it need armed guards if it is stored securely?
Read first to answer your question. Think first before asking more stupid ones.
1 / 5 (6) Oct 05, 2016
Those questions are pertinent. I'd like to see their idea of a repository, since they have not yet shown they can build one which can remain stable and secure for extended periods.

And since the materials are both toxic and radioactive, and exothermic as well, keeping them secure from nasty folk and that nasty stuff away from us good folk is not easy, especially for the tens of thousands of generations it requires.

Show us their plans. We are paying for it.

If'n I remember right, the pyramids all got looted.
1 / 5 (6) Oct 05, 2016
Do conservatives like nuclear technology because they think it is neat, or because it requires a police state to use and guard it, essentially forever, in Human terms?
4.2 / 5 (6) Oct 06, 2016
Those questions are pertinent. I'd like to see their idea of a repository, since they have not yet shown they can build one which can remain stable and secure for extended periods
Oh come on. You'd take one look at it and declare that, since you are george kamburoff the nuke expert (because you once stood in a control room, and because you once validated a single subsystem offsite as a job shopper, and because you read fringe websites written by Japanese expat hypochondriacs living in Romanian basements), you can declare said repository insufficient.

And as always everybody would laugh at you because you have thoroughly trashed the name george kamburoff here because of all the lying and fact-fabricating you've done.

So why bother? I know, it's fun to pretend and you're so very good at it. At least from your perspective. But that's the only one that matters to lying cheating psychopaths, am I right?

Please sign in to add a comment. Registration is free, and takes less than a minute. Read more

Click here to reset your password.
Sign in to get notified via email when new comments are made.