Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member Latest Breaking News Editorials & Other Articles General Discussion The DU Lounge All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search

Latest Breaking News

DougBee

(2 posts)

15. The cost of the nuclear waste is billions

Reply to BumRushDaShow (Original post)

Mon Feb 16, 2026, 06:25 PM

Feb 16

According to the 2024 US GAO
“The U.S. Government Accountability Office projected the 100-year Net Present Value (NPV, i.e., the 100-year cost discounted by the cost of funds) for interim storage at $109,341 to $211,393 per MTHM (Metric Tons of Heavy Metal) for centralized storage and $94,762 to $318,651 per MTHM for reactor-site storage.

This would imply that 100 years of interim storage for existing spent fuel in the US would cost $20-27 billion, with an additional liability of $200-600M created each year.

Add that to your electrical bill plus overhead from your power provider since it will maintain the monopoly they have over the rate payers.

Edit history

Please sign in to view edit histories.

Recommendations

0 members have recommended this reply (displayed in chronological order):

20 replies

= new reply since forum marked as read

Highlight:

US conducts first air transport of nuclear microreactor in bid to show technology's viability [View all] BumRushDaShow Feb 16 OP

It says a C-17 was used. I am curious if other planes-maybe the military also flew along side riversedge Feb 16 #1

It says in the OP "without nuclear fuel" muriel_volestrangler Feb 16 #4

Thanks. I did not read carefully -- riversedge Feb 16 #5

From the first paragraph: discntnt_irny_srcsm Feb 16 #6

"I do not have access to the article. Sorry." - Sometimes I can find the msn repost of Reuters articles at post time BumRushDaShow Feb 16 #9

What could go wrong? orangecrush Feb 16 #2

There is no business case for microreactors, --- Yes there is.. LiberalArkie Feb 16 #3

Good idea if someone could show facts as to it being cheaper energy Bengus81 Feb 16 #16

There is one other very strong use case.... reACTIONary Feb 16 #17

Looks like the AI bros want to make a wasteland of scattered RTGs and ADRs like the Soviets did. Hugin Feb 16 #7

This is not a radioisotope thermoelectric generator. hunter Feb 16 #10

A few hundred years... Hugin Feb 16 #11

Any of our great grandchildren who survive will be cursing us for our addiction to fossil fuels. hunter Feb 16 #13

I am not tremendously confident in this administration to test the viability of this energy solution... EarthFirst Feb 16 #8

Dear leader has been reading comics again and wants a nuclear air force pecosbob Feb 16 #12

Bell Laboratories demonstrated the first practical photovoltaic cell in 1954. hunter Feb 16 #14

The cost of the nuclear waste is billions DougBee Feb 16 #15

Places with aggressive renewable energy programs have the most expensive electricity. hunter Feb 16 #19

Every one of our nuclear submarines .... reACTIONary Feb 16 #18

These "meltdown proof" little reactors are cool, but... LudwigPastorius Tuesday #20