Decades of U.S. nuclear weapons production have exacted a heavy environmental toll. The Department of Energy estimates that cleaning up waste and contamination resulting from production activities will cost over $150 billion. Yet even once that money is spent, these sites will need long-term attention to assure protection of human health and the environment. In the authors' words, stewardship refers to 'institutions, information, and strategies needed to ensure protection of people and the environment, both in the short and the long term.' Probst and McGovern make a compelling case for establishing a formal program of long-term stewardship for contaminated sites. Their report details the requirements of a successful stewardship program and discusses the daunting technical and political challenges facing such efforts, including the designation of an institutional home for key stewardship functions. The legacy of environmental damage is considerable; hazardous waste disposal, radioactive waste, and contaminated facilities are among the problems that will remain after DOE cleanup efforts are complete. Stewardship planning, according to Probst and McGovern, must start now.
Decades of U.S. nuclear weapons production have exacted a heavy environmental toll. The Department of Energy estimates that cleaning up waste and contamination resulting from production activities will cost over $150 billion. Yet even once that money is spent, these sites will need long-term attention to assure protection of human health and the environment. In the authors' words, stewardship refers to 'institutions, information, and strategies needed to ensure protection of people and the environment, both in the short and the long term.' Probst and McGovern make a compelling case for establishing a formal program of long-term stewardship for contaminated sites. Their report details the requirements of a successful stewardship program and discusses the daunting technical and political challenges facing such efforts, including the designation of an institutional home for key stewardship functions. The legacy of environmental damage is considerable; hazardous waste disposal, radioactive waste, and contaminated facilities are among the problems that will remain after DOE cleanup efforts are complete. Stewardship planning, according to Probst and McGovern, must start now.
Although the Cold War is commonly considered 'over,' the legacies of that conflict continue to unfold throughout the globe. One site of post-Cold War controversy involves the consequences of U.S. nuclear weapons production for worker safety, public health, and the environment. Over the past two decades, citizens, organizations, and governments have passionately debated the nature of these consequences, and how they should be managed. This volume clarifies the role of communication in creating, maintaining, and transforming the relationships between these parties, and in shaping the outcomes of related organizational and political deliberations. Providing various perspectives on nuclear culture and discourse, this anthology serves as a model of interdisciplinary communication scholarship that cuts across the subfields of political, environmental, and organizational communication studies, and rhetoric.
Within the Dept. of Energy (DoE), the National Nuclear Security Administration's Office of Defense Programs is responsible for the national nuclear weapons stockpile. This report addresses DoE's management of its National Nuclear Security Administration's Stockpile Stewardship Program. Specifically, it discusses the Administration's approach to the program's (1) planning, (2) new budget structure, and (3) organizational and leadership structure. In addition, it assesses the program's experience with extending the life of nuclear weapons in the stockpile and the management processes used for overseeing life extensions.
It is now becoming clear that relatively few U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) waste sites will be cleaned up to the point where they can be released for unrestricted use. "Long-term stewardship" (activities to protect human health and the environment from hazards that may remain at its sites after cessation of remediation) will be required for over 100 of the 144 waste sites under DOE control (U.S. Department of Energy, 1999). After stabilizing wastes that remain on site and containing them as well as is feasible, DOE intends to rely on stewardship for as long as hazards persistâ€"in many cases, indefinitely. Physical containment barriers, the management systems upon which their long-term reliability depends, and institutional controls intended to prevent exposure of people and the environment to the remaining site hazards, will have to be maintained at some DOE sites for an indefinite period of time. The Committee on Remediation of Buried and Tank Wastes finds that much regarding DOE's intended reliance on long-term stewardship is at this point problematic. The details of long-term stewardship planning are yet to be specified, the adequacy of funding is not assured, and there is no convincing evidence that institutional controls and other stewardship measures are reliable over the long term. Scientific understanding of the factors that govern the long-term behavior of residual contaminants in the environment is not adequate. Yet, the likelihood that institutional management measures will fail at some point is relatively high, underscoring the need to assure that decisions made in the near term are based on the best available science. Improving institutional capabilities can be expected to be every bit as difficult as improving scientific and technical ones, but without improved understanding of why and how institutions succeed and fail, the follow-through necessary to assure that long-term stewardship remains effective cannot reliably be counted on to occur. Long-Term Institutional Management of U.S. Department of Energy Legacy Waste Sites examines the capabilities and limitations of the scientific, technical, and human and institutional systems that compose the measures that DOE expects to put into place at potentially hazardous, residually contaminated sites.
By the end of the Cold War, 45 years of weapons production and nuclear research had generated a sobering legacy: an astounding 1.7 trillion gallons of contaminated groundwater; 40 million cubic meters of tainted soil and debris; over 2,000 tons of intensely radioactive spent nuclear fuel; more than 160,000 cubic meters of radioactive and hazardous waste; and over 100 million gallons of liquid, high-level radioactive waste. After more than a decade of assessment, the Environmental Management Program estimated that it would need as much as $212 billion and 70 years to clean up the nuclear waste and contamination at 113 sites across the United States. By 2006, the Department of Energy had expended about $90 billion and greatly reduced risks from catastrophic accidents to both the public and its workers. Management of critical nuclear materials had become more efficient, secure, and accountable. Cleanup was complete at three relatively large and complex weapons productions sites, as well as many smaller ones. Yet many problems remain. Long-lived radioactive isotopes discharged into the soil will persist in slow migration, contaminating nearby groundwater. And while their potential for disastrous explosions has been virtually eliminated, storage tanks containing high-level waste will continue to deteriorate, posing further environmental risks. Long-term nuclear repositories will require unremitting management to protect future generations, and additional facilities still need to be developed. As in the past, public participation will be crucial. Lisa Crawford thought she lived across the road from an agricultural feed company--until one day in 1984, the Feed Materials Production Center inFernald, Ohio, released a toxic dust cloud. A year later, Lisa's well tested positive for excess uranium. She and several neighbors formed Fernald Residents for Environmental Safety and Health, or FRESH. We worked with people in the community and with our elected officials. When the government was ready to make legally binding cleanup decisions, FRESH members were involved. It took 22 years, but the work at Fernald was completed in the fall of 2006. In America's Nuclear Wastelands, Max S. Power uses non-technical language to present a brief overview of nuclear weapons history and contamination issues, as well as a description of the institutional and political environment. He provides a background for understanding the major value conflicts and associated political dynamics, and makes recommendations for navigating long-term stewardship, but his key purpose is to demonstrate the critical role of public participation, and in so doing, encourage citizens to take action regarding local and national policies related to nuclear production and waste disposal.
