Author
Listed:
- Michael R. Greenberg
(Edward J. Bloustein School, Rutgers University and Vanderbilt University, 228 Lawrence Avenue, Highland Park, NJ 08904, USA)
- Henry J. Mayer
(Department of Civil and Environmental Engineering, Vanderbilt University, Nashville, TN 37235, USA)
- Megan Harkema
(Department of Civil and Environmental Engineering, Vanderbilt University, PMB 351831, 2301 Vanderbilt Place, Nashville, TN 37235, USA)
- Steven Krahn
(Practice of Nuclear Environmental Engineering, Vanderbilt University, PMB 351831, 2301 Vanderbilt Place, Nashville, TN 37235, USA)
Abstract
We examine the U.S. Department of Energy (DOE)’s collaborative process to locate, build, and operate one or more federal consolidated interim storage facilities (FCISFs) for commercial U.S. spent nuclear fuel—instead of continuing to store the material at over 70 nuclear reactor sites. Technocratic siting of nuclear facilities in the U.S., most of which did not involve meaningful public participation, was not successful. We consider increasing pressure to find at least one FCISF site, as well as the critical role of trust in engaging communities and reaching agreement—leading some observers to assert that DOE is in the “trust building business”, not the siting business. We present case studies with the following: (1) illustrating community engagement that led to a more satisfactory outcome than had been anticipated (Fernald); (2) a planned voluntary process that failed to produce an operating CISF (Office of the Nuclear Waste Negotiator); and (3) a site that demonstrates the ongoing need for negotiations to keep a site open and operational (Waste Isolation Pilot Plant). The essay concludes with the observation that a collaboration-based siting effort can succeed in the U.S., but that five main challenges—related to trust and requiring patience—will need to be addressed.
Suggested Citation
Michael R. Greenberg & Henry J. Mayer & Megan Harkema & Steven Krahn, 2025.
"Can Collaboration Succeed in Siting a Spent Nuclear Fuel Facility in the United States?—A Challenge in Political Sustainability,"
Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 17(11), pages 1-21, May.
Handle:
RePEc:gam:jsusta:v:17:y:2025:i:11:p:4906-:d:1665233
Download full text from publisher
Corrections
All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:gam:jsusta:v:17:y:2025:i:11:p:4906-:d:1665233. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.
If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.
We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .
If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.
For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: MDPI Indexing Manager (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.mdpi.com .
Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through
the various RePEc services.