A new public opinion poll indicates that two-thirds of the U.S. population opposes the Congressional “Mobile Chernobyl” bill, which would allow the shipment of high-level nuclear waste through 43 states to a “temporary” storage site in Nevada. And a full 75% of those opposed to the radioactive waste shipments are “strongly” opposed to the concept, according to the poll, which was conducted by the University of Maryland between July and November 1997. Remaining respondents were evenly split, 17% responded positively, while 17% said they did not know.
“This new poll proves what we’ve said all along,” said Michael Mariotte, executive director of the Nuclear Information and Resource Service (NIRS), a Washington-based nuclear watchdog group. “The American people simply don’t want radioactive waste traveling through their neighborhoods.”
“The nuclear power industry is spending millions of dollars trying to convince Congress and the public that moving nuclear waste through cities and across America’s farmlands is a good idea, but the public just isn’t buying it,” said Judy Treichel, director of Nevada’s Nuclear Waste Task Force.
NIRS estimates that nuclear power industry groups have spent $50 million or more over the past three years on advertising, lobbying and other measures designed to force passage of the Mobile Chernobyl bills (S 104 and HR 1270). While the bills have passed both houses of Congress, President Clinton has pledged on numerous occasions to veto the legislation if it reaches his desk. Currently, the bills are bottled up in House-Senate procedural issues.
Among other key conclusions, the University of Maryland poll found that nearly 2/3 of the public (63.6%) believe property values will fall along main nuclear waste transportation routes; 70% believe terrorists could effectively attack radioactive waste shipments; nearly 82% do not want to live near waste transport routes.
Unsurprisingly, given a virtual media blackout, only 35.3% of the public were familiar with the issue. Few newspapers have run more than two stories on the issue over the past two years, and the TV and cable networks have ignored it. “The fact,” said Mariotte, “that even one-third of the American people know about the issue is testament to the hard work by a relatively small group of national, regional and local environmental organizations. Despite media disinterest, these activists are succeeding in explaining the issues and making their case.”
In other countries, radioactive waste transportation is an enormous issue. A March 1997 shipment of nuclear waste casks in Germany, for example, was accompanied by 30,000 police confronting 20,000 protestors, was broadcast live on national TV, and was on the front page of every newspaper.
“It would be a shame to wait until we have protestors facing police in cities and country lanes before this issue achieves the attention it deserves,” said Mariotte, who was an observer at the German shipments.
“Once the issue was described to them in objective terms,” said Wenonah Hauter, Director of the Critical Mass Energy Project at Public Citizen, “the American people instinctively opposed the concept, despite their uncertainty about whether it is safe to leave the waste at reactor sites.” On this question, the public was evenly divided: about 40% believe the waste is safe !QW! it is and 40% believe it is not safe, while nearly 20% had no opinion. This directly contradicts nuclear industry claims that “most Americans” want waste moved.
“This poll shows that the public is not fooled by the radioactive lobby,” said Anna Aurilio a staff scientist for the U.S. Public Interest Research Group (U.S. PIRG) “When it comes to making decisions about some of the most dangerous stuff on earth, Congress should protect the public health, not the nuclear industry’s pocketbooks,” she added.
“The only possible conclusion is that Congressmembers who vote to override President Clinton’s veto of the Mobile Chernobyl legislation do so at their own peril,” said Mary Olson, of NIRS’ Radioactive Waste Project. “The public has spoken clearly. What we need now is a new approach to our ineffectual and dangerous nuclear waste policies. The Mobile Chernobyl bills do nothing to solve this long-term problem. We could solve 60% of that problem by stopping the production of this waste now. At the least, we need to provide incentives that will end radioactive waste generation as quickly as possible.”
Additional Contacts:
Anna Aurilio, U.S. Public Interest Research Group, (212)349-6460 or (202)546-9707 Robin Caiola, 20/20 Vision (202)833-2020 Wenonah Hauter, Public Citizen (202)546-4996 Kimberly Robson, Women’s Action for New Directions (202) 543-8505