Forum highlights pressing questions about nuclear waste after Indian Point shuts down

When it comes to Indian Point, many have likely assumed that when the plant stops operating, the threat of some sort of nuclear accident goes away. But the Lower Hudson Valley is only beginning to learn about what happens after a nuclear plant closes — and there is much to learn about the nuclear waste that could remain in Buchanan for a long, long time.

We may be entering an "age of nuclear waste," as Gordon Edwards, a Canadian expert on nuclear issues, said at a recent forum in Garrison called "When Nuclear Plants Close." That's because a generation of plants are closing or will cease operations before long. The same questions and concerns will be raised again and again about the handling of radioactive waste and the uncertain future of former plant sites.

There are currently no real solutions for the disposal of this waste.

LATEST: Sparse turnout for fed hearing on Indian Point

ENTERGY: Owner's post-Indian Point plans

NRC: On decommissioning Indian Point

Al Hill is the mayor Zion, Illinois, where a nuclear plant closed in 1998, leaving behind 1,000 tons of nuclear waste. He offered some sobering warnings at the forum. Indian Point's neighbors should not expect the federal Nuclear Regulatory Commission or the plant's owner, Entergy, to focus on what's best for the region. And, Hill said, they are the only parties that really have any say about what happens. "No one cares about the local community," he said.

Hill plans to create a coalition of communities that once hosted nuclear plants to lobby Congress to reimburse those communities for their lost tax bases and other damaging economic effects. Officials from the Village of Buchanan, the Town of Cortlandt,  Hendrick Hudson school district and New York State should be in Hill's contact lists.

The Journal News/lohud co-sponsored the forum with Hudson River Sloop Clearwater, Inc. and the National Resources Defense Council. The co-sponsors plan to hold at least two more forums on challenges arising from the planned closing of Indian Point by 2021, namely: the loss of jobs and tax revenue; and New York's plans to replace the energy.

Our forum featured many longtime opponents of nuclear power. They also happen to be experts on the challenges posed to communities, and the nation, when plants close. The Journal News/lohud is posting four videos that show the entire forum. You will learn a lot if you watch any segments, and can reach your own conclusions about the risks.

Nuclear plants produce spent fuel rods — nuclear waste that is still radioactive. When Indian Point's two reactors shut down, the remaining fuel rods will be moved into cooling pools. Then Entergy, or whoever owns the site in the future, has up to 60 years to decide what happens next (although things will probably move faster). 

The fuel rods will eventually be moved in concrete canisters, or casks. At that point, the plant itself can be taken down and sent to a waste site, probably in Texas. But the casks will remain — in the end taking up space about the size of two football fields. The casks will need around-the-clock security, as the material inside will remain radioactive.

It's long been assumed that spent fuel rods from nuclear plants would be sent to a federal repository for burial. Plans for a repository at Yucca Mountain on federally owned land in Nevada have stalled. Even if the plan is revived, it would take decades to implement. Plus, the idea of moving nuclear waste across the country, largely by rail and barge, raises legitimate fears about accidents, terrorism and who know what else. 

What if the waste remains at Indian Point and other plants? Experts at the forum explained that the casks now used were never meant for long term, let alone permanent, storage. "There is no data on how long waste can stay in dry storage," said Bob Alvarez of the Institute for Policy Studies in Washington, D.C., who served as senior policy adviser to the U.S. Energy Department during the 1990s.

Some experts advocate for the transfer of nuclear waste to more secure "hardened" storage at reactor sites, at least as an interim measure. But the costs involved could be great. Would the feds pay? It's important to note that the industry has little experience removing waste from casks. 

These are huge issues for the communities around Indian Point, which want to see at least part of the riverfront property redeveloped. Buchanan Mayor Theresa Knickerbocker attended the forum, saying she needs to explore all possibilities. 

One speaker, Deb Katz, is a founding member of the Citizens Awareness Network, an organization that intervened in the decommissionings of two New England nuclear reactors. She said that communities have to be vigilant about demanding information and a voice in the process. But she described a tough slog, regardless. "All communities are in the terrible situation of having to choose between terrible solutions," she said.

The federal government has been gradually deregulating the decommissioning process for nuclear plants, Geoffrey H. Fettus, a senior attorney with the Natural Resources Defense Council, said at the forum. The NRC is now updating its regulations for decommissioning, and Fettus is hopeful that the urgency of having so much nuclear waste will spur Congress to push for better oversight. "When something happens in their state, they learn a lot fast," he said.