For the most part, I'm pro nuclear power generation. It's mostly clean and can, when implemented correctly, be pretty darn safe compared to the hilariously bad for the planet fossil fuel power generation industry. That stuff is killing all of us, as well as poisoning our waters and air with pollution.
Yet, with the Department of Defense's (nee War) new nuclear reactor arriving in my home state of Utah, and subsequently being readied to be tested only two hours from Moab, as well as only a half hour from one of the most pristine elk, deer, and bear habitats in the state, I'm filled with concern over its implementation. Not because of the whole "Not in My Back Yard" (NIMBY), but because of the folks in charge of the test itself, and their complete lack of basic safety practices, past issues with Operational Security, and their general lack of seriousness.
The big kahuna of this whole mess being Secretary of Defense Pete Hegseth, a man who's been shown repeatedly to be unsuited for the top job governing our nation's military. Yeah, he's not who I want running a nuclear test right near some of my favorite off-road trails and hunting grounds.
According to the Air Force, "At March Air Reserve Base, California, Feb. 15, a next-generation nuclear reactor was loaded aboard a C-17 Globemaster III aircraft for transport to Hill Air Force Base, Utah. The reactor will eventually head to the Utah San Rafael Energy Lab for testing and evaluation. The Ward 250 is a 5-megawatt nuclear reactor that fits into the back of a C-17 aircraft could theoretically power about 5,000 homes."
Utah San Rafael Energy Lab is about two hours west of Moab, and right on the outer edge of a host of off-road trails itself. Likewise, the research lab sits only a few minutes east off the Manti-La Sal mountains, one of the best ungulate ranges in the state, and where I harvested my bull elk last season. Indeed, the lab basically sits in between some of the most prized recreational centers of all of Utah, and an accident there would have catastrophic effects felt far and wide.
Now, again, that's not to say I want this test to happen anywhere else, and Utah San Rafael Energy Lab has a spotless record in terms of mitigating potential accidents. Likewise, there hasn't been a publicly acknowledged nuclear accident in decades. But the way that the Department of Defense, and indeed the entire administration, has acted in recent months, as well as the push to deregulate the EPA, deregulate safety systems put in place, such as those within the railroad industry, and Hegseth's own actions in regard to Operational Security both with the strikes in Yemen during the Signalgate controversy, and his actions with Venezuela, should give those cause for concern.
Especially, when the test of said new nuclear reactor is so close to our favorite recreational areas.
And here's where Hegseth's own Under Secretary of War for Acquisition and Sustainment, Michael P. Duffey, states that the Department is indeed moving at breakneck speeds. "Powering next generation warfare will require us to move faster than our adversaries, to build a system that doesn't just equip our warfighters to fight, but equips them to win at extraordinary speed," said Duffey, adding, "Today is a monumental step toward building that system. By supporting the industrial base and its capacity to innovate, we accelerate the delivery of resilient power to where it's needed." That push for "extraordinary speed," is what's cause for concern, as everything this administration, and any administration before it, has done with that type of expeditious push has gone sideways.
Now, according to the Utah San Rafael Energy Lab, exposure risk, meltdown risk, and other risks are low. According to the lab, "The likelihood [of a reactor meltdown is] very low, the reactor design and fuel are chosen to avoid leaks even in accidents. If a leak somehow did occur, the limited fuel used by microreactors and robust fuel forms (TRISO) make even the theoretical maximum release tiny. Even if a leak did happen (for example, a crack in the containment), the expected exposure to the public would be low enough that long-term health effects would be extremely unlikely. Industry data emphasizes that the overall risk of any serious nuclear accident is “low and declining”. Emergency plans exist to dose-model the release and protect the public. In practice, the worst-case studies for modern reactor exposures show very low off-site doses (comparable to a chest CT scan or less). So while any leak is taken very seriously, a “mini-reactor” leak would be little cause for panic."
Still, the methodology being implemented here is very Silicon Valley "Move Fast, Break Things," and I'm not confident in those involved at the highest levels. That said, there are likely many amazing and dedicated scientists and energy researchers with hopefully more than a modicum of power to limit the variables of disaster.
Yet, I'm concerned the testing of said reactor is so close to these areas of interest to RideApart's readers, as well as my fellow Utahns. If you'd like to speak your piece, you can contact your state representatives here, as well as the governor here.
