Can Collaboration Succeed in Siting a Spent Nuclear Fuel Facility in the United States?—A Challenge in Political Sustainability

Michael R. Greenberg (), Henry J. Mayer, Megan Harkema and Steven Krahn
Additional contact information
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

Sustainability, 2025, vol. 17, issue 11, 1-21

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.

Keywords: collaboration; collaboration-based siting; spent nuclear fuel; interim storage; trust; United States; risk communication (search for similar items in EconPapers)
JEL-codes: O13 Q Q0 Q2 Q3 Q5 Q56 (search for similar items in EconPapers)
Date: 2025
References: View references in EconPapers View complete reference list from CitEc
Citations:

Downloads: (external link)
https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/17/11/4906/pdf (application/pdf)
https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/17/11/4906/ (text/html)

Related works:
This item may be available elsewhere in EconPapers: Search for items with the same title.

Export reference: BibTeX RIS (EndNote, ProCite, RefMan) HTML/Text

Persistent link: https://EconPapers.repec.org/RePEc:gam:jsusta:v:17:y:2025:i:11:p:4906-:d:1665233

Access Statistics for this article

Sustainability is currently edited by Ms. Alexandra Wu

More articles in Sustainability from MDPI
Bibliographic data for series maintained by MDPI Indexing Manager ().