Catching the Nuclear Waste Hot Potato

Co-Founder and former Co-Coordinator of the Nuclear Free Project, Pam Kingfisher is a Cherokee activist focused on breaking nuclear silences. In this article she breaks open U.S. President Trump's “nuclear renaissance” and how the Governor of her state of Oklahoma, Governor John Kevin Stitt announced its selection as one of five finalists being considered by the U.S. Department of Energy to host a first-of-its-kind Nuclear Lifecycle Innovation Campus.

How does it feel to wake up and read that your Governor has volunteered your state to house all the US nuclear reactor waste - to be buried one mile down in novel, new, risky, bore-hole canisters? As Guinea Pigs, or Canaries in the Mine? Yes, And! As nuclear test subjects for untested products from start up companies seeking lucrative government contracts. - that’s how.

Referred to as the “back end” of nuclear energy - the dirty end of the toxic leftovers- is the piece of the nuclear potato that no one wants. This problem has not been solved at Yucca Mountain, nor at Carlsbad WIPP Caverns, nor by brilliant scientific minds in over 80 years of bomb building.

But this proposal is not just for high level nuclear waste - if three states want to participate in a proposed $50 billion dollar nuclear “small modular reactor” (SMR) explosive expansion, they must also accept the waste.

Nuclear Lifecycle Innovation Campuses are a new effort to modernize the United State’s “full” nuclear fuel cycle by clustering functions like fuel fabrication, enrichment, reprocessing used nuclear fuel, and permanent disposition of waste.

The US wants to brand itself as the “global leadership in nuclear energy”, with economic resilience, energy independence, national defense, and technological leadership. To create the momentum, Trump signed four executive orders on May 23, 2025, investing federal dollars and support.

In preparation for this “nuclear renaissance”, U.S. President Trump significantly weakened the Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC), which is responsible for ensuring the safe development of nuclear power, by pushing for faster approvals and reducing safety and oversight regulations. This shift raises many concerns about public and worker safety, public participation and environmental standards. The independence of the NRC is in danger from political influence. Many of the NRC permitting activities are now shared with the Department of Energy.

The push for “advanced small modular nuclear reactors” (SMR’s) are the second wave of this nuclear “renaissance”, which will follow as the hungry beasts require so much new energy. It’s a carrot and stick situation for each state selected as a “Nuclear Lifecycle Innovation Campus’ as they are promised billions of dollars in funding and jobs, but are forced to accept the nation's waste.

This summer, the U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) selected Utah, Tennessee, Oklahoma, Louisiana, and Idaho as potential host states for Nuclear Lifecycle Innovation Campuses, a new effort to strengthen and modernize the nation’s full nuclear fuel cycle. The campuses are touted to “attract significant investment, expand domestic manufacturing, and create thousands of new high-paying jobs in their respective regions”.

Chris Wright, the United States Secretary of Energy, stated:

“I’m pleased to announce that from 26 states, the Energy Department has selected five initial contenders to further explore building Nuclear Lifecycle Innovation Campuses.

 

These campuses will be massive generators of economic growth, create thousands of high-paying jobs, and be crucial to unleashing America’s nuclear renaissance. The innovative concept is a direct result of President Trump’s leadership and ambitious directives to restore the domestic nuclear fuel cycle and get America’s nuclear industry growing again.”after reviewing 28 applications

The 1982 Nuclear Waste Policy Act that was signed into law in 1983, established a national framework to address spent fuel disposal including the lack of a permanent disposal solution, state vs. federal responsibilities and funding construction costs. The law was amended in 1987 and set the Yucca Mountain site in Nevada as the permanent and sole U.S. repository for deep underground disposal of high-level radioactive materials and spent fuel.

Yucca Mountain remains abandoned, with strong opposition continuing from a number of stakeholder groups. Nevada senators, Jacky Rosen and Catherine Cortez-Masto, introduced legislation in August 2026 to permanently block any future consideration of Yucca Mountain as the U.S nuclear waste repository, but Congress must clear up past legislation and future permitting to move forward with permanent disposal at Nuclear Innovation Campuses.

Currently, in the US there are 90,000 metric tons of nuclear waste held on-site at over 70 temporary storage sites spread across roughly 39 states. There are 2,000 tons per year created. This will create a transportation nightmare and health exposure for everyday Oklahomans.

The lack of progress on permanent nuclear waste disposal has harmed communities who host nuclear fuel and utility customers who have paid for a failed disposal program. But, let’s not rush to experiment on another state who has no nuclear power, weapons or adequate oversight and policy infrastructure, such as Oklahoma.

Three Tennessee lawmakers from both parties are raising questions about nuclear waste storage. State Rep. Ed Butler said:

“We are a state of innovation and advanced technology, not a dump site,” … “With the innovation and beauty of Tennessee, there are no economic benefits that will outweigh the potential environmental risks associated with the Nuclear Lifecycle Innovation Campus.”

Later in the summer, West Virginia was mysteriously added to the short list of now six states. However, state officials declare they will not host a federal Nuclear Lifecycle Innovation Campus. As West Virginia Governor, Patrick Morrisey states:

"No matter how "innovative" or "advanced" the front end is, we will always have nuclear waste. Reprocessing and pyroprocessing do NOT solve the need for a permanent repository.”

Here in Oklahoma, citizens are already burdened with two nuclear production superfund sites, still in clean up fifty years after closure. Oklahoma failed miserably at oversight and regulation. Now our citizens are facing a forever nuclear future with NO PUBLIC INPUT, no public comment period or advance notice by a lame-duck (terming out) governor.

The proposed solution is EXPERIMENTAL, UNPROVEN, SPECULATIVE from a start up company with no previous nuclear waste operations. Stay tuned, as three state proposals will be selected by the end of the calendar year.