RICHLAND, Wash. – After almost a decade and $85 million, the U.S. Department of Energy has released its report on cleanup plans for the Hanford nuclear site in southeastern Washington.
Critics say the massive document sidesteps a major question. By law, the feds are supposed to choose a "preferred alternative" for radioactive waste disposal in the Environmental Impact Statement. But for some of the waste, they didn't.
Tom Carpenter, founder and executive director of the watchdog group Hanford Challenge, says that makes the plan inadequate – and maybe even illegal.
"All future cleanup actions depend on what's in this document. It's a 10,000-page study that lays out the alternatives, and the government is supposed to pick the cleanup paths, making sure that the future is protected from Hanford's radioactive and chemical products."
The Washington Department of Ecology also calls the report "incomplete," although it says the document is technically sound and includes a lot of good information about how to proceed with the Hanford cleanup.
The Ecology Department and the Hanford Challenge both back a method called vitrification, encasing the nuclear waste in glass at a plant on-site – a plant that's had its own problems. And Carpenter says there's too much waste for the plant to handle, and there's nothing in the report on what to do with the rest.
"Is there some other attempt that's going to be made to use glass for that waste? Or are they simply going to leave it at the Hanford site in the tanks, or in grout or concrete, or something like that, which is not going to hold the waste for very long. So, we're objecting to this. We think it's an unacceptable shortcut."
Carpenter says cleanup progress is being made at Hanford, which is a major economic driver in the Tri-Cities. But he adds it will take decades and tens of billions of dollars to complete.
"None of the high-level nuclear waste at Hanford has been cleaned up. It's all still in those underground tanks, a third of which have already leaked. And it certainly adds a lot of pressure on the whole cleanup – but yeah, we've got a long way to go before Hanford is cleaned up."
get more stories like this via email
Environmental groups are seeking greater input as California puts the finishing touches on its application to become a hub for hydrogen fuel production. This is billed as a big step toward a zero-carbon emission future. The project is being managed by a public-private partnership called the Alliance for Renewable Clean Hydrogen Energy Systems, known as ARCHES.
Monica Embrey, energy director for the California Sierra Club, called this a good opportunity to advance climate progress but only if certain guardrails are put in place.
"If they use existing pipelines, they would have to really upgrade them quite a lot. And we want to make sure that those have safety mechanisms in place so that communities get to say whether or not a pipeline near them actually gets used for hydrogen. We want leakage monitoring, we want really strict standards," she said.
Hydrogen is extremely explosive and is a major greenhouse-gas pollutant if it leaks or is burned and will not be used for homes or commercial buildings, but instead will be targeted to medium and heavy-duty vehicles, ports and power plants, which are especially difficult to decarbonize, ARCHES said.
In addition, ARCHES said hydrogen will be produced using renewable power and will not be blended with natural gas within pipelines.
SoCal Gas and Chevron have been consulting on the application. The ARCHES website calls for meaningful engagement with community groups and environmental justice advocates.
Bahram Fazeli, director of research and policy with the nonprofit Communities for a Better Environment, said the planning process has been vague to date.
"They have done a very poor job of prioritizing environmental justice or public health in their process. They're not open to California's open-meeting laws and public participation. They only have one environmental-justice representative on the 11-member board, " Fazeli said.
The application to the Department of Energy is due April 7th. New hydrogen hubs could bring more than $1-billion in federal investment to California, supporters said.
Disclosure: National Association of Community Health Centers contributes to our fund for reporting on Budget Policy & Priorities, Health Issues. If you would like to help support news in the public interest,
click here.
get more stories like this via email
A bill designed to fight price-gouging at the gas pump is expected to pass the California State Assembly today and be signed by Gov. Gavin Newsom soon after.
Senate Bill X1-2 would create a watchdog at the California Energy Commission empowered to set a "reasonable" profit margin for gasoline and assess penalties for price-gouging.
Meghan Sahli-Wells, former mayor of Culver City and California director of the group Elected Officials to Protect America, said oil companies must be held accountable.
"What we've seen is behind these price hikes aren't the external forces that the big oil companies have blamed for the humongous price spikes," Sahli-Wells asserted. "What we've seen are refineries that have doubled their profits."
The Western States Petroleum Association has slammed the bill, blaming high gas prices on a supply shortage linked to a lack of investment in refining capacity and necessary infrastructure.
Gas prices last summer and fall hit an average of $6.42 per gallon in California, more than $2.50 higher than the national average.
The oil and gas industry is behind a ballot measure to roll back a California law passed last year requiring new drilling permits to include setbacks from homes and schools. Sahli-Wells argued the state needs to cut air pollution from burning fossil fuels, adding she does not like recent mailers blaming higher gas prices on state regulation.
"The industry itself is going hot and heavy on propaganda to scare people into dialing back environmental protection," Sahli-Wells contended. "It does feel somewhat like an 'oil war' is happening in California. But we know that if we are to win, that oil must lose."
The new watchdog would also have the power to subpoena business records in order to root out price manipulation.
Disclosure: Elected Officials to Protect America contributes to our fund for reporting on Climate Change/Air Quality, Energy Policy, and Public Lands/Wilderness. If you would like to help support news in the public interest,
click here.
get more stories like this via email
California lawmakers hold a hearing in Sacramento today on a bill to hold oil companies and gasoline refiners accountable for alleged price gouging.
According to the Office of Gov. Gavin Newsom, gas prices in California hit an average of $6.42 per gallon last fall, which was $2.61 more than the national average. And it happened even as crude oil prices dropped and state taxes and fees remained unchanged.
Farrah Khan, mayor of Irvine, said she supports Senate Bill 2, which would establish an independent watchdog within the California Energy Commission.
"It's going to establish a new division to provide independent oversight and analysis of the market," Khan explained. "This new division would have the power to subpoena information deemed necessary to root out and address any of the abuses of market power."
The Western States Petroleum Association said in a statement, "This new windfall penalty in this proposal is actually worse than the original bill. The Legislature would be giving away all its authority to a group of unelected bureaucrats who will have the power to set gasoline prices and impact fuels markets. [This] will likely lead to the same unintended consequences as his initial proposal - less investment, less supply, and higher gasoline prices for Californians."
Steven Hernandez, mayor of Coachella, said it is a matter of fairness to the families who live paycheck to paycheck.
"People struggle to afford gas and rent, and to pay medical expenses," Hernandez pointed out. "When we're mindful of the working class, I think we're better off as a society."
The California Energy Commission watchdog would analyze data to look for patterns of misconduct or price manipulation. The bill would also start a rule-making process at the Commission, to set a reasonable profit margin and impose a penalty for price-gouging above the margin. Any fines would be returned to taxpayers.
get more stories like this via email