FALL 1997 - ISSUE NUMBER 38
Safety questions relating to the Big Rock Point Nuclear Power Plant were the impetus that brought the Northern Michigan Environmental Action Council (NMEAC) into existence back in 1980. At that time, the Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) was conducting hearings on whether or not to grant a request by Consumers Power to increase the capacity of the waste fuel storage tanks by allowing the rods to be stored closer together than previously allowed. A group of us formed NMEAC so that we could sponsor a fundraiser to help with the cost of hiring an independent expert to review this proposal and make a recommendation. Ultimately, the NRC approved the request and the plant has continued to operate until August 29, 1997, when it was officially shut down.
The news of the proposed shut down was released in mid-summer. And while it brought some sense of relief to anti-nuclear activists to have the plant closing, we are aware that the problems of decommissioning the plant and, even more serious, the waste storage safety issues will be with us for a long time (240,000 years or so). Indeed, long-term storage of radioactive waste continues to be one of our most critical and difficult national and international environmental problems, with no viable solution in sight.
Because of the magnitude of this problem, and due to my long-time interest in this issue, I decided it was important for me personally to witness the plant closing. So, along with my husband, Bob, and two other long-time activists, Tom Shea and Clarence Kroupa, I made the trip once again to the gates of Big Rock Point. Unlike my other visits, in which security guards blocked the entrance, this time we were welcomed in with open arms. A big tour bus shuttled us into the grounds from a distant parking field. As I stepped off the Great Northwest Tour & Travel bus, I felt as if I'd been transported into a Michael Moore film. A huge tent with colorful streamers and balloons had been erected, a jazz band was playing, T-shirts were on sale, and a festive atmosphere prevailed. My companions and I were dumbfounded at the display. After all our years of protest and concern, we were enveloped in a joyous celebration with no hint of any problems or possible threats to the health of the Earth. I guess it was the magnitude of the celebration, the large crowd, and the great sense of accomplishment that caught me off guard.
There were no signs of the Don't Waste Michigan protesters, so we numbly followed the crowd&emdash;past the display with an early photo of Ronald Reagan doing an ad for Consumers Power, past the 3-foot long cake in the shape of the plant, past all the closed-circuit TV's--and found seats at one of the many tables. I found the bag-pipe processional into the tent particularly disturbing to my psyche. How dare they use this moving, spiritual sound to celebrate nuclear power? The ensuing speeches extolled the safety record and reliability of the plant. There was no mention of waste storage, contaminated soil, health risks, or even the economic liability of nuclear power. Nothing was said about the immense diversion of money away from renewable energy generation, and the huge amount of government sudsidies, or corporate welfare, to the nuclear power industry. All around us were men in bright green shirts with the words Restoration Team embroidered across the chest.
We watched a simulation of the shut-down and then the real thing, live, on closed-circuit TV's placed around the tent. In spite of the hype, the actual procedure seemed quite ordinary and anti-climactic. As the onlookers jumped up for a standing ovation, we knew it was time for us to go.
We left the cheering crowd and walked down the long driveway to the entrance where we found a small band of dedicated protesters--all 6 of them--passing out sunflower seeds to anyone who happened by. Apparently, there is some belief that sunflowers remove radiation from the environment. I expected the crowd to be small, even though there had been a statewide call for the protest, and we had sent a notice out to 250 local people. Ever since we started NMEAC, I have wondered why nuclear issues don't seem to draw a crowd. I think it's because most people are in denial about the serious danger of radioactive material, which, coupled with its long half life, is so overwhleming. They just don't want to know about it. It's too scary. And maybe folks figured since the plant was closing, we didn't need to protest. But the contrast between the two groups--one inside, the other outside--was stunning.
Many questions remain regarding the dismantling of the plant and the storage of the waste. It is a complicated dilemma with no simple solutions. Currently, there is no place designated for storage of high level radioactive waste. The government is trying to establish a high-level waste storage site at Yucca Mountain, Nevada, about 80 miles from Las Vegas. However, there is opposition from the people of Nevada, including the Western Shosone Nation, who currently own the land. The conflict may eventually be decided in the Supreme Court. Even if the site is ultimately approved, people may find the risk of transporting high-level radioactive waste across the country unacceptable (I wonder if the People have any say in the matter.) In the meantime, the waste will have to be stored on site at Big Rock, perched on the edge of Lake Michigan. The plan currently is to store the rods in the spent fuel storage pool for a number of years--the most optimistic of which is perhaps five--and then move them to dry casks that sit outdoors. There have been problems with dry cask storage at other reactors and dry casks for Big Rock have not been manufactured yet. At present, the Nuclear Regulatory Commission even lacks sufficient authority and responsibility to thoroughly investigate and regulate this potentially dangerous method of storage. The estimated life of the dry casks is 100 years. The high level waste, which includes the spent fuel rods, will be radioactive for 240,000 years. The magnitude of planning safe storage for a highly lethal substance for thousands and thousands of years is difficult to fathom. No wonder most citizens are in denial, and the nuclear industry indulges in misinformation and phony celebrations.
"Don't Waste Michigan, Northern Michigan Chapter" hired a nuclear physicist, Marvin Resnikoff, who now directs the Nuclear Waste Transport and Storage Project, to evaluate the decommissioning plan developed by Consumers Power. In his report, he recommends using the long-term SAFSTOR option of leaving the plant intact for 50 years to allow exposure levels within the plant to decline, limiting the risk to the plant workers. In addition, this plan would reduce the volume of waste that would have to be sent to a low-level waste facility. However, it doesn't appear that Consumers Power is following this advice. They are anxious to begin the dismantling process to ship the low-level waste down to Barnwell, South Carolina before its waste facility closes.
The economics of nuclear power are equally disastrous. I am not an economist, but if the costs of handling, storage and monitoring of the waste for the next 240,000 years is figured into the equation, the "too cheap to meter" method of producing energy becomes a huge liability--for generations to come.These funds could be better used to help implement a way of life that conserves energy and relies on safe and clean renewable energy.