BOISE, Idaho -- The public can weigh in this week on an experimental nuclear reactor which could be coming to the Idaho National Laboratory.

The U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) has released a draft Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) for a new design known as a "versatile nuclear reactor."

The DOE said it will be used to test nuclear-energy innovations, helping to push the sector forward.

Edwin Lyman, director of nuclear power safety for the Union of Concerned Scientists, believes its construction would pose risks for eastern Idaho.

"People should ask questions about whether the DOE has really done the accident analysis that it needs to, and is being honest with the people about the potential consequences of accidents at that reactor," Lyman contended.

The versatile nuclear reactor is cooled by liquid sodium, which Lyman noted is highly potent. Reactors currently in operation in the U.S. are cooled by water.

The public hearings on the EIS will be held online Wednesday and Thursday.

Lyman added there is another concern with the fuel the reactor would use.

"Unlike the fuels that are used for light-water reactors, which is called low-enriched uranium fuel, that fuel is not directly usable in a nuclear weapon," Lyman explained. "But plutonium is directly usable."

Lyman argued it raises questions about the potential for nuclear proliferation.

The DOE estimated the project will cost between $2.6 and $5.8 billion dollars. Lyman cautioned that's a lot of money for an experimental project.

"The DOE needs to reconsider this whole project, and whether they can spend that money more wisely in helping to improve the safety of existing technologies," Lyman concluded.


get more stories like this via email

Radioactive soil in Australia is being excavated and shipped to a waste disposal facility in Idaho.

The soil was polluted from a carbolic acid plant and uranium refinery that operated a century ago and is located in a suburb of Sydney.

The low-level radioactive waste will go to US Ecology's Grand View site in southwest Idaho. The news has been a relief for Australian residents living on the soil, but has raised a concern among some in the Gem State.

Tami Thatcher is a nuclear safety consultant for Environmental Defense Institute and former nuclear safety analyst at Idaho National Laboratory.

"Whenever you become aware of how radioactive waste is shipped from around the country and from around the world to Idaho, it's kind of alarming," said Thatcher.

Excavation of the contaminated soil began in September and is expected to take 18 to 24 months. It totals about 1,900 tons.

A spokesperson for US Ecology says the soil and debris are contaminated with a very low level of naturally occurring radioactive material but fall well below the established criteria in the company's Idaho permit.

Thatcher said there have been concerns about US Ecology's Grand View operations. In 2018, an explosion at the site killed one person and injured three others.

"They've never admitted where the waste came from," said Thatcher. "What type of waste it was and why it is - when they mixed their magnesium oxide to neutralize the waste - it blew sky high."

An investigation into the explosion found there was "non-conforming waste" included in material that was not supposed to be part of the waste stream.

US Ecology is the only commercial hazardous waste landfill operating to Idaho. According to the Idaho Department of Environmental Quality, the facility received nearly 110,000 tons of waste in 2020, 96% of which came from outside the state or country.

To modernize the industry, nuclear power is making the transition toward smaller reactors. But a report from Taxpayers for Common Sense claims federal subsidies to help the industry along are a losing bet.

According to the group, the Department of Energy has spent more than $1.2 billion on small modular reactors, and could spend another $5.5 billion over the next decade to develop and demonstrate the new design.

Michael Maragos, senior policy analyst of energy and natural resources with Taxpayers for Common Sense, said there are a slew of supports for the nuclear industry up and down the supply chain.

"But the nuclear power industry is, by and large, struggling," said Maragos. "So there's this large dichotomy between what policymakers have hoped would happen through all of the various costly incentives and what is actually happening on the ground."

Part of the push to develop new technology in the nuclear industry is an effort to decarbonize power grids. Nuclear power is seen as a key source of clean energy in this transition.

The company NuScale Power is developing its small modular reactor technology at Idaho National Laboratory and has received federal investments. The Department of Energy did not respond to a request for comment before the deadline for this story.

The Idaho National Laboratory will be the site of the Utah Associated Municipal Power Systems's Carbon Free Power Project. Current plans for the project consist of 12 small reactors that supply power to cities in six states, including Idaho.

However, Maragos noted that appetite could be waning for this project, which is targeting 2029 to go operational. Salmon River Electric in Challis has pulled out of the project and Idaho Falls has halved its commitment.

"We already see a number of towns that are supposedly going to be the ones benefiting from this brand-spanking new type of nuclear reactor shying away from the project," said Maragos. "And the reason is simple. It's going to cost a lot, probably more than we're expecting now, and ratepayers are going to be on the hook."

Maragos said the rate of federal subsidies for nuclear is unsustainable, noting money to transition the country to a cleaner economy would be better spent on technology such as solar and wind, which are cheaper to deploy.

"Nuclear power may provide some benefits in a world where we're trying to limit emissions from our power sector," said Maragos. "But those benefits are not worth the tremendous cost and risk that policymakers are asking ratepayers and taxpayers to bear."

BOISE, Idaho -- Hundreds of groups have signed a letter opposing nuclear subsidies in Congress's infrastructure and budget reconciliation bills.

The letter pointed to more than $50 billion in investments in nuclear power, including propping up aging plants.

Leigh Ford, executive director of the Snake River Alliance in Boise, said it would take away from movements toward climate, economic and environmental justice.

"Our concern is the amount of money that goes to nuclear research, development and old reactors when a lot of that money could go to renewable," Ford argued. "It's faster and cheaper, and bailing out old corrupt industries is not in our best interest right now."

Ford said subsidies are only predicted to go toward eight companies in as many states. Part of the money for research will likely go to small reactor technology being studied at the Idaho National Laboratory.

Supporters say nuclear power is an emissions-free technology integral to the transition toward cleaner energy sources.

Ford countered money for nuclear energy would be better spent on the installation of renewables such as solar.

"Solar is really fast, as opposed to nuclear," Ford contended. "It takes decades for nuclear. And another bad thing about nuclear is that one generation can use the power, while several generations have to guard and store and treat the waste."

Some of the more than 240 organizations that signed the letter include Food and Water Watch, Indigenous Environmental Network, the League of Women Voters and Physicians for Social Responsibility.