Haruko Wainwright, an MIT energy professor, argues that expanding nuclear power can benefit the environment even though the U.S. still lacks a proven permanent waste solution.
She notes that chemical contaminants pose a greater public‑health threat than radioactive waste because radiation hazards were identified early and standards were set, while spent fuel is solid, compact, and relatively easy to isolate. In contrast, substances such as hexavalent chromium and PFAS were recognized as dangerous only after widespread release, and they are often disposed of shallowly without long‑term assessments.
To improve spent‑fuel storage, Wainwright promotes a “design‑from‑waste” approach: integrate storage capacity into plant designs, run transparent monitoring, and focus on radionuclide transport pathways and geochemical barriers. The low solubility and strong soil affinity of most radionuclides enable passive safety features.
The U.S. permanent‑disposal effort has been hampered by politics, exemplified by the “Screw Nevada” amendment that forced a single, politically chosen site—Yucca Mountain—making scientific validation difficult. Europe and Canada, however, used transparent multi‑site evaluations, decades of public engagement, and professional risk communication to gain community acceptance and advance deep geological repositories, such as Finland’s upcoming facility.
Achieving safe, permanent disposal hinges on selecting a geologically sound site and communicating the science in clear, everyday language.
Review