Perhaps, not surprisingly, the French energy mix is also absolutely unique among its peers. During the oil crisis of the 1970’s many countries were forced to rethink their energy policies and move away from foreign oil consumption. But unlike its neighbors who moved to a mix of nuclear, coal and gas thinking that energy diversity was the best solution- France doubled down on the most sophisticated energy source, ensuring their energy independence and ultimately setting them up to become a nuclear technology exporter. This decision has served them very well.

In addition to generating approximately 80% of their electricity with nuclear energy, there is another aspect to nuclear technology that the French do like no one else: spent nuclear fuel reprocessing. Instead of just pulling spent nuclear fuel out of reactors and storing like we do in the U.S., the French recycle that material and reuse it in the form of Mixed Oxide Fuel and Enriched Uranium Fuel. Reprocessing reduces the amount of waste by a factor of 5 and reduces toxicity by a factor of 10.

This is achieved through a chemical process that involves dissolving the spent nuclear fuel and then separating out the different materials it contains- 96% of which are reusable. The remaining 4%, the small amount of true waste, is mixed into glass, which stabilizes the materials for storage. Additionally the French reprocess spent nuclear fuel for many other countries including: Japan, Germany, Belgium, Italy, Spain, Switzerland and the Netherlands. Although reprocessing technology was originally developed in the U.S., the French have embraced this process and are now involved in helping the U.S. build a reprocessing facility as a part of a nonproliferation treaty with Russia, and China just announced it is also investing in a reprocessing facility in collaboration with AREVA.

For the final site visit of the European leg of Diary of a Nuclear Tourist I got to visit AREVA’s La Hague, the facility where spent fuel starts its journey to becoming usable fuel again. I was accompanied by the epically fun David Hess from the World Nuclear Association and our gracious host, AREVA’s Katherine Berezowskyj. Like David and myself, Katherine became interested in nuclear energy after realizing that misperceptions of these technologies were inhibiting our collective ability to respond to major challenges like climate change and energy poverty. An American living in Paris, Katherine has really been my sprit guide for navigating much of this trip, so getting to meet her in person was wonderful. I’m guessing the three of us are in the running for most excited tour group to ever enter the facility.

Katherine, David and Suzy- the most excited tour group ever.

David wore a special t-shirt for the occasion.

Our journey started at the most beautiful visitor’s center I’ve ever seen, overlooking the Normandy coast. AREVA’s Philippe Mundreuil and Caroline Jourdain greeted us with coffee, cookies and a presentation about the La Hague. Philippe is a Public Relations Officer and helps manage the visitor’s center, and Caroline is the Director of Programs and Customer Relations (got to love seeing women in leadership positions in the nuclear sector!). David and I had lots and lots of questions- about the technology, local politics, and community relations- that Caroline patiently answered one by one. Perhaps the most interesting thing I learned in this presentation is that AREVA has identified a potential cancer treatment, which is currently under going clinical trials. Basically, nuclear reprocessing experts at La Hague “developed an innovative processes to extract²¹²Pb from nuclear materials used in AREVA’s activities.” Let me repeat that: nuclear materials are a potential cancer cure. I just find this to be absolutely astounding! What a shift in the cultural narrative about “nuclear waste”!

After a beautiful lunch, we left the visitor’s center and all headed into the actual reprocessing facility. It’s a really interesting series of building, painted all different colors, which I appreciated! I also really appreciated that they had raised an American flag for me- like I said- the French do not forget the details!! The facility sees about 10,000 visitors per year with participants ranging from politians to school children. After getting through multiple security clearances we arrived at our first stop: a newly received casks of spent nuclear fuel. La Hague receives approximately one of these casks each day. We were able to touch the outside of the cask with our bare hands, which was pretty amazing!

You mean we can touch it?!

We followed the fuel, so to speak, into the facility where we got to see the hotbox where it is unloaded. At this point David and I kind of lost our minds because it was the first time we had each seen real spent nuclear fuel. When you spend most of your waking hours trying to figure out how to better communicate about nuclear energy, getting to see the material in person is a pretty monumental experience!

OMG! Real spent fuel!

Our next stop was the spent fuel pool, where the fuel is stored for anywhere from a few days to a few years before going through chemical reprocessing. The pool is really quite beautiful and peaceful. It’s incredible to think that water is all you need as a protectant from radiation. No special gear- our dosimeters just sat at zero.

Spent fuel pool

We continued to follow the fuel, but had to learn about the chemical and verification processes using models, since these areas are all operated remotely- as in it’s all done with ROBOTS! We did get to see two operators working with one of the remote handling arms and it is such an interesting and specialized skill!

ROBOTS!!! This is someone’s real job- moving radioactive stuff around with robotic arms- how cool!

We wrapped up the tour with a walk through of the control room, which is reminiscent of the legendary open office layouts of Pixar and Facebook- except this facility was built decades before. Oh yeah- I haven’t mentioned that AREVA has been reprocessing spent nuclear fuel for more than thirty years- literally since before I was born. So they really have the transport, the process and all of the other potential challenges worked out. Additionally, they are saving their spent MOX fuel as a strategic resource for advanced nuclear reactors- so they are thinking about the future as well.

This visit was a perfect close to a truly life-changing journey. I feel that I have a much better understanding of the global nuclear industry and the ways we can start to solve some of the big challenges facing our modern world. A major “thank you” to Katherine, Philippe and Caroline for providing this incredible site tour!! And thanks to David for being an awesome, super fun travel companion- and to the World Nuclear Association for letting him out of the office for a few days for this adventure! And finally another huge “thank you” to AREVA and Fuel Cycle Week and American Crane for supporting my creative vision and providing the resources I needed to execute this project. I am so grateful for this experience and grateful for having sponsors that value and support this type of innovative personal and professional development! Thanks for caring about the details.

So here I am three years later actually doing my dream job (!) and tomorrow, on Earth Day, I will be touring AREVA’s La Hague facility in France. Not only that, but AREVA provided both financial and logistical support for the “Diary of a Nuclear Tourist” project- which has been one of the most valuable experiences of my professional life so far. When I thought up this new approach to nuclear education, AREVA offered another huge gesture of support showing that they care about the arts, communication and education. And looking at the numbers now, I am again amazed at how successful this project has been!

It is tough to express the full extent of my gratitude, but here it goes: To the people of AREVA- thank you so much for appreciating and supporting my creative vision. And for all of the excellent education and outreach that you do every day. Your company is truly a leader in innovative and effective corporate social responsibility.

So, tomorrow is Day 72- and the last stop on the European leg of the “Diary of a Nuclear Tourist” project. To me it seems fitting and even symbolic to spend Earth Day at a facility dedicated to reprocessing nuclear fuel! More to come shortly…

The last time we tried this was back in the early 1980’s with the Nuclear Waste Policy Act, which failed to take a transparent, consensus-based approach. Due to this fact there is an abundance of urban mythology in communities from Georgia to all the way out to Washington State about how “our town was almost turned into a nuclear waste dump.” For 5 years I lived in one of these towns- Asheville, NC- which like dozens of other locations was surveyed and quickly rejected based on inappropriate geology.

The story goes that the community didn’t get so much as a briefing and after a few locals spoke to the surveyors, rumors abounded that the federal government was planning to store waste there. There is still an active narrative, ‘that a small group of community members defeated the powerful nuclear lobby in their attempt to destroy our town,’ which has served as the lead in to just about every article on nuclear energy in the local papers ever since. Fighting nuclear projects is practically a local pastime.

Many involved in “fighting” this particular repository site (which, again, was only surveyed and never actually up for serious consideration) then made careers out of fighting all nuclear projects (locally and nationally), some are still at it today. Leaving people out of the dialogue is a big reason the nuclear industry has a bad rap. People hate feeling left out. This time we’ve got to do a better job at proactive inclusion.

Nuclear waste storage is perhaps the one thing that nuclear supporter, opponents, nonproliferation experts, politicians and everyday folks all agree on!! Everyone thinks we need a solution to the waste problem, like, yesterday. Three cheers for consensus!

And, thankfully, the industry has learned important lessons from the past and is working from a much better starting point:

Unlike the first go round; we already have 2 deep geological repositories. Neither is currently open to receiving commercial nuclear waste for political reasons- but they exist- and that’s half the battle. In fact, it’s got to be more like 4/5ths of the battle!

First, the Waste Isolation Pilot Plant (WIPP) is a fully functional repository in an underground salt bed in New Mexico, which currently accepts only government nuclear waste. The site has overwhelming community support and would like to open it’s doors to commercial waste as well- it’s really a matter of getting the proper policy in place. This is the most common sense solution- and I think that the group tasked with implementing the recommendations of the BRC will agree.

Additionally, although Yucca Mountain is currently shuttered, as leadership changes over time there is a possibility that it could be revisited. Since nuclear projects run on decades long time scales, while elections run on 2 and 4-year cycles, there is a strange history of nuclear projects being defunded, refunded, or suffering other budget fluxes for political reasons. It drives nuclear professionals absolutely crazy- and is a big part of why so many government contracted projects have trouble staying on time and on budget, and some never get finished- but it is a reality of the current industry. This dynamic makes it hard to rule Yucca out completely in the long run. That said, certainly WIPP seems the much smarter starting point than Yucca or beginning from scratch.

Which leaves us with siting and building one or more interim nuclear storage facilities. Unlike a geologic repository, there is not a need for a certain type of rock bed, so the options are far more open ended in terms of potential hosts. Location will play a role, but more in terms of accessibility and centrality to other sites that will be sending their waste to the site. As I found out last week while visiting the Netherlands, there are a lot of community benefits to hosting one of these facilities- and with the right people directing the effort, it can even be done with style.

I met Hans Codee at the PIME Conference in Switzerland earlier in my trip and was invited to attend an art exhibit at COVRA, the interim storage facility he directs in the Netherlands. Yes, you read that correctly- an art exhibit at a nuclear waste facility. In addition to quarterly art shows, on the days when nuclear materials aren’t being moved about the facility is open to the public and receives visitors regularly (more than 100 days per year). This is possible due to purposeful design in every aspect of the site, which Codee has overseen since the planning stages.

Hans Codee, left, with the local Mayor- a strong supporter of the COVRA facility.

Hans explained to me that since everyone in the Netherlands is responsible for producing this waste though the consumption of energy, it was important that everyone has access to it- to understand the risks and benefits of nuclear energy. Additionally, he wanted the space to contribute to the community by offering both educational and cultural opportunities.

It difficult for me to describe just how effective this framework for managing an interim nuclear waste facility really is, so I will offer these images. Make sure to read the captions as you scroll over each image, or click on any image to start a slideshow:

My suggestion as we move forward with the BRC recommendation for an interim waste storage facility: build on the COVRA model. So much hangs in the balance in building public trust in nuclear waste management- we really need to create a U.S. interim site purposefully, beautifully and with style. Thankfully, we have a great example for how to do just that. A huge thank you to Hans Codee and the COVRA team- your facility exceeded my wildest expectations!

Jeremy Gordon at the WNA Offices in London

“The World Nuclear Association is the international organization that promotes nuclear energy and supports the many companies that comprise the global nuclear industry.” It achieves this mission through offering up to date public information on the global nuclear industry, conferences, training and represents the nuclear sector ”in key world forums that shape the nuclear industry’s regulatory and policy environment.”

While WNA acts on the global stage, NIA is “the trade association and representative voice of the UK’s civil nuclear industry. [They] represent over 60,000 UK nuclear workers across more than 260 member companies.”

In addition to the wonderful art collection in the office (check out the gallery below), I was also pleased to see women in leadership positions at each of the organizations and a considerable number of young people working at the office (relative to nuclear industry averages). In my opinion, increasing diversity of the workforce is a critical factor in helping the nuclear industry improve it’s reputation and connect with wider audiences. Additionally these organizations each have a strong social media presence and well designed, easy to navigate websites- including a gorgeous revamp of the World Nuclear Association site in recent weeks. Not to pick on my American compatriots, but let’s just say that one of our most prominent nuclear organizations still uses a free blogger template from  the mid-2000′s…not exactly cutting edge in the internet age!

Luckily for me, the timing of my visit coincided with the approval of two new nuclear units at Hinkley Point as a part of a carefully outlined plan to create 40,000 new jobs and move towards decarbonation of electricity sources in the UK. There have been a number of note worthy advances in the past months leading up to the UK government’s formal declaration including an agreement between renewable, carbon-capture & storage and nuclear proponents to cooperate in prioritizing low-carbon energy sources in the UK.

After touring the WNA offices I headed to dinner with Jeremy and Kirsty Alexander, the Director of Communications for NIA. I was impressed to learn that Kirsty, as well as noted writer and environmentalist Mark Lynas, who I’d met earlier in the week, were both critical in organizing the above mentioned agreement between the three groups- who do not always see eye to eye on energy issues. Something I’ve been advocating for lately is interest based bargaining- essentially problem solving that identities shared interest of all parties involved and uses them as a platform for cooperation and collaboration.

Putting the shared goal of reducing carbon emissions first allowed these three groups, which have been traditionally at odds with one another, to make big strides towards their common interest. This is the kind of innovative problem solving necessary to move nuclear and other low carbon technologies forward- as we are now seeing in the UK.

A big thanks to Jeremy and Kirsty for talking with me about your organizations’ respective educational and outreach efforts in the UK and worldwide. Keep up the great work!

When I pushed the publish button I braced myself for backlash – but instead of backlash something completely different happened. Tweets of support from friends and strangers, sweet emails from other young women referring to me as “role model”- which was a first. And then in a closed forum of nuclear communicators- one of the single most constructive dialogues about gender in STEM careers I’ve ever participated in, complete with thoughts on how to empower women in the workforce, better develop our own voices as communicators and support each other’s unique perspectives. To top it off, it is the most read and shared article of the “Nuclear Tourist” series to date.

So of course this got me wondering- what is it about getting personal that appeals to readers. And then I remembered a class on gender and equality that I took in college and realized the answer- Personal Agency. For whatever reason, we humans tend to connect more with personal anecdotes than facts. The power of the anti-nuclear movement is grounded in this reality. We know that many members of the public prioritize personal testimony over meta-studies, stories over data. Sometimes speaking as a parent or a patient is more impactful than speaking as scientist or an educator. As it turns out when I spoke as a 20-something woman, who has been through interventional radiology and is slightly obsessed with popular culture and internet memes- more people tuned in to hear my thoughts. Who knew that nonprofit manager, educator and world traveler was less compelling by comparison!?

So, in the spirit of Joseph Campbell, I am going to brush up on my story telling skills and continue to develop a unique style of communications, using my own experiences as a spring board. This experience also confirms that taking the time to visit all of these nuclear sites, so I can speak about them with first hand knowledge, is very valuable. I’d also like to open up our “Honorary Nuclear All Star” blog for submissions of personal stories about other people’s experiences with nuclear technologies- how have they positively impacted your life? Have they saved the life of a love one? Prevented pollution in your community? Provided you with your dream job and the ability to support your family? Please share your story: Suzy@nuclearliteracy.org

Thanks for the support!!

Lastly, to everyone who reached out- I want to say thanks for all of the support, dialogue and thoughtful commentary- I am incredibly grateful for the feedback.

So, when an acquaintance forwarded me a newsletter from an anti-nuclear group and suggested that I needed to “check my sources” and implied that supporting nuclear energy by default means supporting nuclear weapons, I was livid. I wrote a strongly worded email and let this person know, that yes, I was getting my information from the best possible sources and yes, one can support nuclear energy and oppose nuclear weapons. I also explained that that making assumptions about my experiences and beliefs was offensive and insulting. But here’s the kicker- this person was completely shocked that I was angry.

How is it that some groups have co-opted anger? As a nuclear energy supporter, why am I disallowed to feel moral outrage?

In my opinion it is ethically wrong to distribute mis-information about radiation, which is exactly what the newsletter forwarded to me contained (which was eloquently titled “Mobile Chernobyl”). It is ultimately damaging to society to promote fear instead of understanding in general. As my mother-in-law rightly pointed out to me it probably would have been more effective to respond with a personal anecdote rather than angry email, but that ship has sailed. So, instead I will share a personal anecdote here that might help explain why I feel my anger regarding this situation is justified and fits squarely into the category of moral outrage.

In addition to dedicating my career to improving public understanding of nuclear energy and radiation, I am also an Interventional Radiology patient. I was born with a rare vascular disorder where some of the cells that make up my veins didn’t come with an off switch. So basically my body creates extra veins, but they don’t connect back up with the rest of my vascular system. Instead they take up real estate normally reserved for muscles, nerves and tendons. As you might imagine it hurts a lot.

The inside of my left forearm. Crazy, right?

At this point my only known lesion (also known as a vascular malformation) is in my left forearm slowly causing me to lose the full range of motion in my hand. My symptoms get worse with hormonal changes and even with strong emotions (like anger- so be nice to me, please). My vascular disorder is also the reason I have so many typos in my writing, I can’t properly roll a kayak, do a handstand or most yoga poses. I am at an increased risk of blood clots and I’ve been advised not to have children. So while this disorder is not immediately life threatening, it is incredibly inconvenient.

Because my disorder is so rare, despite having symptoms since childhood, I was not properly diagnosed until I was 26 (after about a half a dozen misdiagnosis over a 10 year period). I was diagnosed using Magnetic Resonance Imaging, a common diagnostic tool that utilizes nuclear technologies to peer into the nuclei of our atoms. This technology has changed the game in terms of diagnostics and saved countless lives.

Despite the fact that there is not a cure for my disorder I cannot explain in words the epic relief I felt upon having a name and explanation for the “my weird arm thing” that has plagued me my whole life. Learning this information about myself was cathartic- it was like suddenly all of the dots were connected and a clear picture emerged.

After I was diagnosed I was shuffled from specialist to specialist, all of whom refused to treat me because they had never seen this particular problem in this particular place. Surgeries for similar cases had poor outcomes. As it turns out the narrow nerve and tendon filled corridor that is the forearm carries high risks in terms of long term damage to hand function. Eventually one of the top vascular hospitals in the country agreed to treat me using a relatively new technique called interventional radiology. Basically, I paid a large amount of money for materials to be irradiated in a nuclear reactor, shipped to a hospital and injected into my body- all for my health’s sake. Thousands upon thousands of times a day other people do the same thing (mostly to be carefully exposed to radiation, rather than injected, but you get the idea).

So, that is what I wish I had written in response to the “Mobile Chernobyl” newsletter forwarder. I also wish I’d said  that is unethical to disseminate misinformation about radiation that is meant to create anger and fear. I don’t accept the premise that because I support safely using certain nuclear technologies that I automatically support nuclear weapons. That’s like saying that putting fertilizer in my garden means I support chemical weapons. And I do understand the risks and benefits of nuclear technologies because I am an interventional radiology patient. We as a society know so much about radiation that we are able to use it to diagnose and cure diseases including cancer. In fact we safely and successfully transport nuclear materials over 54,000 times PER DAY on average- that’s more than 20,000,000 times per year. So, no, I’m not too worried about a “Mobile Chernobyl.” We’ve got the whole transport thing pretty well figured out and have for a while now.

Which brings me to my second battle of the week. Mansplaining. This controversial internet meme emerged as a way to “describe condescending and inaccurate explanations that are given under the assumption that the audience is entirely ignorant on the subject matter or topic.” Although the word “man” is in the name, it is actually not a gendered term (just as many men are feminists, which just means they actively support equal treatment of women and men). In fact “Mobile Chernobyl” newsletter lady is exhibit A for a woman successfully engaging in mansplaining- emailing an interventional radiology patient to try and plant seeds of fear about radiation- c’mon, that’s just wrong.

Although some dislike the word mansplaining, I actually love it because it’s meaning perfectly describes something that I have oft experienced and really needed a word for. Words are powerful and being able to describe your thoughts and experiences accurately is critical to successful communication. I don’t use the term mansplaining often, but when I do it tends to make a big impact. That said, I would like to make the argument that most of the anti-nuclear movement is one giant mansplanation- it’s a group of people who don’t actually understand the risks and benefits of nuclear technologies giving false explanations to both the public and the people who do understand the risks and benefits of nuclear technologies. Worse still, is that leaders of the anti-nuclear movement often intentionally inflate risks as a means to justify their organizational and lobbying activities and attract donations. How outrageous!

In close, I think that my anger was justified (even if unbecoming) and I think that nuclear supporters have the right to moral outrage about all of the misinformation being spread about nuclear technologies.The next time I hear someone say that all nuclear materials should be banned I might just drag them to my next doctor’s appointment. I’m sick of people mansplaining things to me and if you support nuclear energy, I’m guessing you probably are too- it’s just amazing the number of nuclear experts these days! The thing is I absolutely have the right to feel moral outrage when someone tells me that what I know to be true through hard wrought experience is somehow wrong- and so do you.

Interview With Mark Lynas

A major thanks to Mark for taking the time to speak with me and for all of your good work.

Mark Lynas

Interview With Wade Allison

A huge thank you to Wade Allison and the lovely folks at Oxford for a wonderful and educational visit.

Wade Allison

Ludwik Dobrzynski, my gracious host at Swierk.

Poland is highly reliant on coal, but in 2005 decided to build 2 nuclear plants to reduce their reliance on fossil fuels as well as their carbon emissions. The plants are scheduled to go into operation in 2025. As you might imagine, the folks at the Swierk Centre are quite excited. For me, it was a nice change of pace to visit a country that is moving forward with nuclear technology rather than backwards.

As Poland begins construction and management of their first commercial nuclear reactors, this facility and it’s people will undoubtedly play a major role. The government run Swierk Research Centre has an exceptional educational outreach center as well as a research reactor and medical isotope facility. As Ludwik ensured me, there will not be a workforce shortage when it comes to the new facility. In no small part due to the Sweirk Centre, Poland is ready for it’s first commercial nuclear plant.

I have three big takeaways from this visit that I want to share:

1)   As a member of the UNSCEAR committee, Ludwik expressed his interest in improving the communications efforts regarding radiation. A notoriously difficult subject, it is nonetheless extremely important that the most recent science is considered in both regulation and public discourse. The discrepancies between the regulatory model of Linear No Threshold (LNT) and the observed public heath impacts of radiation exposure suggest there may be better ways to align the science and regulation. If low doses of radiation are significantly less harmful than LNT suggests, there is a risk of using limited resources irresponsibly- for instance spending somewhere in the ballpark of $2 billion to prevent a theoretical single death from radiation vs. using that funding to provide thousands of people with critical medical care and clean water. This is a subject that I tend to leave to the experts, but I was glad to hear about Ludwik’s effort to improve communications on the subject of radiation.

2)   I was surprised to find such an exemplary public education center in a country without a commercial nuclear reactor (yet)! The Marie Curie Research Reactor on the campus is a frequent field trip destination and therefore the educational center next-door hosts between 6,000 and 7,000 students annually. You know that a display is effective when it makes sense, despite not being able to read the language!! Specifically I was very impressed with the displays about waste management (see slideshow for visuals). Seeing the containers and graphics about storage really demystifies the whole waste management process.

The Marie Curie Research Reactor, used to make life saving medical isotopes.

3)   Lastly, I toured the Polatom medical isotope lab on the Sweirk campus. It was my first time visiting a medical isotope facility and I was blown away!  The Marie Curie research reactor is utilized to make approximately 70 different medical isotopes, and they have the technical capacity to grow that number considerably. Seeing this facility really drove home just how effective we humans are at utilizing the beneficial aspects of the atom- as well as how excellent we are at safely transporting nuclear materials. Day in and day out this facility delivers life saving diagnostic tools and medicine to the citizens of Poland as well as surrounding countries. There are only a very few facilities capable of making these important isotopes and fission plays a central role in that process.

The incredibly hi-tech radio-isotope lab.

Having worked in a children’s oncology unit during the 2009 medical isotope shortage, visiting this facility was incredibly meaningful, although I fear I may have embarrassed some of the workers with my vocal praise of their work. I am quite sure that most all people, at least in the developed world, have personally benefited from nuclear medicine many times over. In terms of educational outreach I cannot over-stress that these technologies are not possible without nuclear fission.

Please take a moment to click through the slideshow to see some of the great displays and facilities at Swierk. To Ludwik and the staff of the Centre- thank you all so much for hosting me! I absolutely loved seeing my family’s homeland (and the homeland of Marie Curie) and learning about Poland’s ambitious nuclear plans!

A question from Diane- How do we manage the waste?

Last week I didn’t get to do a site visit because I was taking care of my very sick husband. The man never gets sick, so when he ran a fever for two straight days we headed over to the doctor. He was diagnosed with bronchitis and missed an entire week of work. It was pretty rough.

Interestingly the day we visited the doc was the same day the multiple reports came out about the poor air quality in Europe, and subsequent respiratory disease and premature deaths caused by the pollution. I look at these sorts of statistics all the time, but it somehow felt more personal and upsetting considering the circumstances.

Here’s the thing: energy is really good and has lots of benefits, but all energy sources are resource intensive and produce waste. Understanding the risks and benefits of all energy sources is the best way to determine the optimal energy mix moving forward. I’ll save the spiel on the rare earth metals that have to be mined to create solar PVs and the huge amount of concrete it takes to build a single wind turbine for another post…because it’s fossil fuels really take the cake in terms of waste.

The big issue with fossil fuel waste is that it is released into the environment, and that is where it stays. Heavy metals like arsenic and mercury from fossil plants never decay away. We all know that the large-scale release of carbon dioxide has also created some major environmental challenges like ocean acidification and climate change.

Despite the promise of abundant, carbon-free nuclear energy, a lot of people feel nervous about the challenge of safely containing and storing nuclear waste. However, it’s actually not an insurmountable challenge. Especially considering that the waste is relatively small and contained to begin with (unlike fossil waste), and rapidly becoming less radioactive over time. It has even proven quite useful! So, without further ado, here are five things to do with our nuclear waste. Some of them might surprise you:

5) Use it for space travel! Did you know the Mars Rover is powered by a Plutonium heat source? Well now you do! All of the cool new information we are gathering from our neighboring planet is possible because of nuclear waste! Something you might notice throughout this list, is that “waste” may not be the best word for it after all…

4) Use it to save lives! Yes, you read that correctly. We have been using nuclear materials to diagnose and cure diseases for more than 100 years. X-rays, CT scans and Radiation treatment for cancer all use nuclear materials. Many of the materials used in these processes are byproducts (“waste”) of nuclear fission. Additionally sterilization, the use of radiation to clean medical instruments, has revolutionized modern medicine, making it exponentially safer and more effective.

3) Use it to make food safer and more abundant. This is one of the coolest things I learned at the IAEA a few weeks ago- nuclear technologies (including some that use byproducts of fission- ie: waste) are central to responding to world hunger. From controlling insect populations that are destroying crops to irradiating food so it has a longer shelf life and reduces potential for food poisoning, nuclear technologies have many uses in modern agriculture. As we cope with a changing climate, these technologies will become increasingly important in responding to agricultural challenges.

2) Reprocess it and reuse it! Currently the U.S. is in the process of fulfilling an important nonproliferation agreement with Russia to reduce our respective stockpiles of nuclear weapons. We are building a Mixed Oxide Fuel Fabrication Facility in South Carolina. This facility will allow us to turn weapons and waste into new fuel to power our 104 nuclear reactors. Additionally, as we move forward with advanced nuclear reactor technologies (aka Generation IV), many designs can use nuclear “waste” directly as fuel.

1) Put it back where we found it. In the U.S. we currently cannot license any new technologies until we have a plan for a permanent geological (underground) waste repository, so even though new technologies stand to greatly reduce to the amount of nuclear waste by reusing it, we still need a repository for both legal and technical reasons (some waste cannot be reused). The good news is we already have a permanent nuclear waste repository! No, not Yucca Mountain- The Waste Isolation Pilot Plant. Google it. So let’s plan to use the repository that we already have for commercial waste (by all means, email your representatives) so we can get on with doing all of the other excellent things listed above.

To more directly answer the question at that inspired this post, the best way to protect future generations from waste are 1) reduce the amount of fossil fuel waste we are putting out into our environment- that is the stuff that’s really difficult to manage (and it’s making us sick),  and 2) be sure to understand the risks and benefits of nuclear waste and continue to responsibly use it as a resource. This is a challenge that we are well on our way to solving. At this point most of the work that needs to be done is in the realm of education, policy- people stuff- rather than technical stuff.

While the hubs was recovering last week we watched about a-bazillion episodes of the show Heros. I know we are about 5 years late to the party, but I kept thinking of the parallels of nuclear technologies and the struggles of the super-heros in the show. Basically, we have nuclear materials. They are naturally occurring all over our planet and there is no way to make them go away, or un-know what we know about them. So, we can and should use these materials and technologies for the greater good, and that is actually what we have been doing for quite some time. Pat on the back to all the folks solving these problems and moving towards solutions to our “waste” problem. You are the real life heroes, saving our air and our lungs in more ways than one! Keep up the great work.