Savannah River Site near Augusta studying controversial proposal to reprocess fuel

The federal government is looking at ways to dispose of spent nuclear fuel from commercial nuclear reactors.

One idea under consideration is to reprocess it and use it again.

The Savannah River Site near Augusta, a federal site which processes nuclear materials, is one of 11 sites studying the feasibility of reprocessing. It's also one the sites in the running for the reprocessing plant, if approved by the federal government.

More than 100 commercial reactors produce about 2000 metric tons of spent nuclear fuel each year and then store it at their sites. That's because the U.S. has no permanent disposal site.

Officials are again looking into expanding nuclear power in the coming years as demand for electricity increases. The federal government says the reprocessed fuel could be re-used in nuclear reactors.

Officials say the process would reduce the hazards of radiotoxicity, as well as the risk of dangerous proliferation, where hostile countries get hold of the fuel and develop nuclear weapons.

The idea is highly controversial, though. At a recent public hearing near Augusta, the plan drew a hefty amount of both support and opposition.

"You will eliminate things that people worry about for thousands of years," says Nick Kuehn, a retired nuclear engineer. "You'll burn them in the reactors. You'll get some power out of them so you will not be putting them in the ground and so you won't be asking the question, 'Will it be safe hundreds of thousands of years from now.' "

But opponents worry that a reprocessing plant would require massive amounts of federal money. They also worry that the Savannah River Site would become a temporary dumping ground for the nation's spent nuclear fuel. The site already stores spent nuclear fuel from the U.S. Department of Energy.

"I believe the whole reason they're doing this whole re-processing scam is just to get the waste into interim storage and get it somewhere, because the utilities are screaming we want it somewhere and this is the path of least resistance," says Leslie Minerd, who opposes the idea.

Federal officials say they're unsure how much a reprocessing plant would cost, and don't yet have a timeline for the process, if approved.