More

Featuring fresh takes and real-time analysis from HuffPost's signature lineup of contributors
Bob Ostertag

Bob Ostertag

GET UPDATES FROM Bob Ostertag
 

What's a Million Years?

Posted: 03/27/11 10:43 PM ET

With a nuclear crisis ongoing it Japan, it may comfort you to know that our government has plans to keep America's nuclear waste safe for a million years.

What a relief! Good to know that, unlike in Japan, America's rulers have thought this stuff through.

Yes, the Energy Department says that it can keep all the waste from the nation's 104 nuclear power plans, plus all the waste from nuclear weapons, safely stored under Yucca Mountain, Nevada, for one million years. Within that window, they have it broken down into two parts. For the first 10,000 years, the dose limit to "the public" from the stored waste is not supposed to exceed 15 millirem per year of radiation. Then from 10,000 to a million years out, the dose to "the public" can go up to 100 millirem per year. And they have an 8,600 page plan that purports to take into account all the earthquakes, volcanic activity, and climate change that might happen the next million years.

These are hard time scales for the human mind to comprehend, so let's try out some thinking aids to help us get the whole picture. We all know that Jesus Christ is thought to have been born 2000 years ago, but that only gets us one fifth of the way to the 10,000 year mark. So how about this: the earliest human agriculture is thought to have originated about 10,000 years ago.

Now isn't that a happy thought? The Department of Energy has figured out how to keep "the public's" exposure to radiation from nuclear waste at Yucca Mountain down to 15 millirem per year for a period as far into the future as the moment humans started planting seeds in the ground is removed in the past. Hooray!

After 10,00 years, the dose for the next million years can go up to 100 millirem per year. A million years into the future is, of course, harder to imagine than a pitifully small time period like 10,000 years. Fortunately, a recent news article provides a useful tool to help visualize this.

Recent genetic evidence reveals that we nearly went extinct a million years ago, at which time there was a world population of at most 55,000 of us. Though "us" is a slippery notion here. Anatomically modern humans are thought to have first evolved originated in Africa just 200,000 years ago. This small band of our evolutionary ancestors who kept us from extinction a million years ago were our evolutionary ancestors: Homo erectus, H. ergaster and archaic H. sapiens. Scientific American has provided a nice illustration what these forebears looked like.

A million years into the future, if humans and their descendants have not gone extinct, new species will have evolved that will look at images of us with the same curiosity and amazement we feel when we look at the image above. Presumably these more highly evolved creatures will be less susceptible to health problems from radiation than we are, since the Department of Energy is planning for them to receive higher doses of radiation from our stored waste than we mere humans will have to endure. And they will no doubt be most grateful to us for having taken such precautions concerning the radiation they will be exposed to as the result of our need to make bombs, illuminate billboards, and power flatscreen TV's.

Except -- ooops. The whole Yucca Mountain plan is on hold. Not because any of the hundreds of adults who were paid high professional salaries to develop their 8,600-page million year plan had a sudden outbreak of common sense, but simply because the current Senate Majority Leader lives in Nevada and he says so. And Barack Obama needs his support so he says so too. So actually, we have nowhere to put our nuclear waste. Not for the next million years or the next five minutes.

Correction: The length of the application for Yucca Mountain was originally listed as 86,000 pages, a number taken from the NY Times and multiple other sources around the web. Thanks to commenter Blorg Blorg for pointing out the error. It is easy to think that errors such as that are peculiar to the internet, but keep in mind that before the internet, writers like myself used paper copies of sources like the New York Times, and our readers could not contact us as easily to point out mistakes. Fortunately, the number of pages in the application was a trivial part of the story, the thousands and millions of years are the point. Research always builds on other research, and mistakes are thus amplified. Yet another reason why thinking humans can make reliable million-year plans is absurd.

 
With a nuclear crisis ongoing it Japan, it may comfort you to know that our government has plans to keep America's nuclear waste safe for a million years. What a relief! Good to know that, unlike in ...
With a nuclear crisis ongoing it Japan, it may comfort you to know that our government has plans to keep America's nuclear waste safe for a million years. What a relief! Good to know that, unlike in ...
 
 
  • Comments
  • 15
  • Pending Comments
  • 0
  • View FAQ
Comments are closed for this entry
View All
Recency  | 
Popularity
02:22 PM on 03/29/2011
Actually, even the US government admits that the dry casks that now store old nuclear waste are safe for a century. (Newer, hotter waste has to stay underwater.)

The million-year criterion is foolish. It is like saying the Titanic's saltshakers must be made reliable for a million years, lest they leak their salt and make the ocean undrinkable.
photo
christopherflynn
The wreligious wright is always rong...
04:20 PM on 03/28/2011
a million years is a pittance to the origin and destiny of the earth......
01:33 PM on 03/28/2011
Well, Yucca Mountain *is* a sacred site to the local Indians. Kinda like Russia coming over here and saying "We're gonna bury our nuclear waste under Arlington Cemetery and you can't stop us."
03:25 PM on 03/28/2011
All of Earth is sacred to native Americans and others. It ought to be sacred to us invaders too. Yucca Mountain was not more sacred than many other places in Nevada and elsewhere, no one is buried there and a thorough survey of Native American artefacts was made. Comparing the federal government to a foreign invader with designs to molest the land is interesting, but since no one is buried in Yucca Mountain the Arlington analogy is off the mark. If you are not a Native American, you are part of an invasive species and perhaps ought to set a good example and uproot yourself and donate your land-holding, or just your living space, back to its rightful owners.
10:15 PM on 04/11/2011
I'm not sure if I understand you. Are you saying that all of Earth is sacred? I agree. It is not who respects it, but that it is respected that matters. If you are suggesting that all non-native peoples should leave, that seems to contradict the first concept. If I hold the earth sacred and I was born here, can I not live at least as respectfully as a "native american?" I propose we not desecrate our grandmother at all, anywhere, but live everywhere in harmony with her and with the utmost respect for her giving us life.
01:14 PM on 03/28/2011
I'm not sure what "plan" you're purporting to write about. If it is the Yucca Mountain License Application, the document is approximately 8,600 pages not 86,000 pages. It is available for review at http://www.nrc.gov/waste/hlw-disposal/yucca-lic-app.html

This document is supported by more than 25 years of studies and thousands of scientific reports. The work has been reviewed by the National Academy of Sciences, the presidentially appointed Nuclear Waste Technical Review Board, and many other scientific bodies. The License Application is currently being evaluated by the Nuclear Regulatory Commission.
photo
HUFFPOST BLOGGER
Bob Ostertag
02:27 PM on 03/28/2011
The New York Times, in all its articles on Yucca Mountain, refer to the application as being 86,000 pages. See for example here: http://www.nytimes.com/2010/06/30/science/earth/30nuke.html?ref=yuccamountain and also here: http://topics.nytimes.com/top/news/national/usstatesterritoriesandpossessions/nevada/yucca-mountain/index.html?scp=1-spot&sq=yucca%20mountain&st=cse, as well as many other places. If you can show me otherwise I would correct my blog. Thanks.
07:54 PM on 03/28/2011
I previously included a link for the actual License Application. I guess it is too much to expect you to actually examine it if you are going to blog about it. It is much easier to just cite the New York times. After all, they are NEVER wrong.

But, if it is web links you want that demonstrate 8,600 pages, I'll list a few. This does not say much for fact checking at HuffPo and the New York Times.

http://www.energy.gov/news/archives/6310.htm
http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=91121903
http://www.aps.org/units/fps/newsletters/200904/bodansky.cfm
http://www.bespacific.com/mt/archives/018502.html
http://www.innovation-america.org/what-you-should-know-about-yucca-mountain
http://www.powermag.com/POWERnews/2837.html
https://newsline.llnl.gov/articles/2008/jun/06.06.08_yucca.php
http://institute.lanl.gov/esc/_docs/YuccaMountainFinal_8_15.pdf
http://articles.latimes.com/2010/dec/12/nation/la-na-yucca-mountain-20101212
http://www.greenenvironmentnews.com/Environment/Radiation%2FNuclear/D.O.E.+Marks+Milestone+in+Submitting+Yucca+Mountain+License+Application
08:09 PM on 03/28/2011
I think this is fascinating, that the nation's premier newspaper would make an error of an order of magnitude and repeat it over and over, causing others to repeat it as well. The license application, much of which I read over a long period of time in various draft forms, is approximately 8,600 pages. It is supported by documents stretching back decades that add up, no doubt to that larger number and likely much more. I have the entire license application at my office on a CD-ROM disk. I am not about to do a word count on it. But here is a link to someone who has it right: http://www.innovation-america.org/what-you-should-know-about-yucca-mountain
06:03 AM on 03/28/2011
A million years here. A million years there. Pretty soon you're talking about a long time.
Waaay back in ancient times, in the 1960s "My Weekly Reader" used to tell us how the genius of modern science would solve the anoying problem of decontaminating all that nasty nuclear waste in a decade or so. There just had to be a solution because the nuclear scientists said so and they were producing the stuff like crazy and they wouldn't do that if they didn't know what to do with it 'cause they were smart and good and americans. Those guys are all dead now (some no doubt from cancers caused by the nukes they were playing with) but not to worry 'cause there are lots of smart and good and american scientists who KNOW there is a solution to getting rid of that nasty nuclear waste and they will come up with it in the next decade or so. In the meantime it's interesting work and the pay is good.
photo
Sandgnat
Embrace the Lunacy
02:25 PM on 03/28/2011
You paid a lot more attention to Weekly Reader than I did...
photo
Steve41
Never insult anyone by accident. R.A.H.
03:28 PM on 03/28/2011
Actually those guys in the 60's were pretty accurate. Many proven designs of nuclear reactors can safely "burn" what was considered waste 50 years ago. We just have to build the reactors and the waste of yesterday/today becomes the energy of tommorow.