Hi, Good morning. My name is Dr. Tom English. I was the program manager for the high-level nuclear waste team from the Jet Propulsion Laboratory, Caltech, and Scripps Institution of Oceanography. We conducted studies for the President's Office of Science and Technology Policy, the government of Sweden, the California Energy Commission, and NASA. So I have a bit of background in this area. I'm here to comment on three aspects of the SONGS high-level nuclear waste plans.
We learned from the melt-downs at Fukushima that it is essential to remove the high-level nuclear waste from the spent fuel pools. It just doesn't make sense to keep them there forever. However, when you make a move like that, the waste must not be moved to a site where the overall risk is far greater. I think that is a reasonable condition. It's hard to imagine a worse choice for "interim dry storage" than the current site. It's very close to the ocean, and it will be stored a few inches above water. Furthermore, the risk of terrorist attack at the approved site is much greater than leaving the waste in the current spent fuel pool. When we make a decision, we should make a decision that makes things better, as opposed to worse, and especially, far worse. Please reconsider your decision. Thanks for your attention, and if you have any questions, I will be available.
- The move to dry storage.
- The environmental conditions at the new site.
- Something that does not get a lot of press -- that is the terrorism aspects.
|Title||California Coastal Commission Meeting in San Diego|
|Publisher||California Coastal Commission|
|Note||Features Dr Tom English, Torgen Johnson|
|Keywords||Stop Nuke Dump|
|Related Keywords||Nuclear Energy, Nuclear Waste, Shut San Onofre|
|Media Type||Video, Meeting|
|Author Name Sortable|