Public Attitudes Toward Siting a High‐Level Nuclear Waste Repository in Nevada

This paper examines the sources of public opposition to a high†level nuclear waste repository among samples of 1001 residents of Nevada and a national sample of 1201 residents. Two models of choice are contrasted: A benefit†cost model and a risk†perception model of individual choice. The data suggest that the willingness of Nevada residents to accept a repository at Yucca Mountain depends upon subjective risk factors, especially the perceived seriousness of risk to future generations. Perceived risk depends in part on level of trust placed in the Department of Energy to manage a repository safely. Opposition to a local repository did not decrease significantly if compensation in the form of annual rebates, either ($1000, $3000, or $5000 per year for 20 years) were offered to residents. The public needs to be convinced before compensation is considered, that the repository will possess minimal risks to themselves as well as to future generations, and that the site currently targeted is suitable. One way to do this is through adoption of mitigation and control procedures such as strict federal standards and local control over the operation of the repository. The federal government should also consider returning to the fair procedure for selection between candidate sites specified in the initial Nuclear Waste Policy Act of 1982.

[1]  E. W. Colglazier,et al.  Policy Conflicts in the Process for Siting Nuclear Waste Repositories , 1988 .

[2]  W. Freudenburg Perceived risk, real risk: social science and the art of probabilistic risk assessment. , 1988, Science.

[3]  E. Peelle The MRS (Monitored Retrievable Storage) task force: Economic and non-economic incentives for local public acceptance of a proposed nuclear waste packaging and storage facility , 1987 .

[4]  E. Erikson Childhood and Society , 1965 .

[5]  R L Keeney,et al.  An analysis of the portfolio of sites to characterize for selecting a nuclear repository. , 1987, Risk analysis : an official publication of the Society for Risk Analysis.

[6]  Richard H. Bryan,et al.  The Politics and Promises of Nuclear Waste Disposal: The View from Nevada , 1987 .

[7]  P. Slovic Perception of risk. , 1987, Science.

[8]  William R. Ahern,et al.  CALIFORNIA MEETS THE LNG TERMINAL , 1980 .

[9]  Colin Camerer,et al.  Decision processes for low probability events: Policy implications , 1989 .

[10]  Luther J. Carter,et al.  Siting the Nuclear Waste Repository: Last Stand at Yucca Mountain , 1987 .

[11]  D. Easterling,et al.  Public Attitudes Toward a High-Level Nuclear Repository: Implications on the Prospects of Successful Siting , 1990 .

[12]  R L Keeney,et al.  A multiattribute utility analysis of alternative sites for the disposal of nuclear waste. , 1987, Risk analysis : an official publication of the Society for Risk Analysis.

[13]  D. Morell,et al.  Siting hazardous-waste facilities: local opposition and the myth of preemption , 1984 .

[14]  Howard Kunreuther,et al.  Nevada's Predicament Public Perceptions of Risk from the Proposed Nuclear Waste Repository , 1988 .

[15]  T. Yoshikawa,et al.  Modeling the Dispersal and Deposition of Radionuclides , 1988 .