[Page: S2826]

The Senate continued with the consideration of the motion to proceed.

The PRESIDING OFFICER. Who yields time?

Mr. REID. Mr. President, I yield myself 25 minutes.

The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator may proceed.

Mr. REID. Mr. President, first of all, let me respond to a number of things brought up by my friend, the manager of this bill.

First of all, he is right about nuclear power. It produces a lot of electricity in the United States. But everyone recognizes those days are numbered. The average life expectancy of nuclear power in the United States is 15 years. After that it is going to be gone.

As I indicated yesterday, it might be 25 years with one of the reactors and it may 5 years with another. But nuclear power is all through in this country. It simply is too dangerous, and everyone knows that.

I will also speak to the question of what to do with spent fuel. That question has been raised. Senator Bryan and I continually answer the question. It is very easy. We should leave it where it is--capsulated in the spent fuel rods kept in dry cask containers.

As Senator Bryan mentioned today and I mentioned yesterday, there would be no fire that would damage the dry cask storage containers as would happen in a diesel truck or train. There would be no accident that would occur driving at speeds that would rupture the casks. It is safe and it is cheap. That is what should be done with nuclear waste for the foreseeable future.

I will also state, Mr. President, that the question still has never been answered: What about the environmental groups? Hundreds of them oppose this legislation--not two or three, not 20 or a couple score, but hundreds that are now a part of the record.

No question has ever been answered as to why these environmental groups oppose the legislation. They oppose the legislation because it is dangerous for the environment. It would be different if there was an equal balance, half of them supported it and half of them did not. Every one of them--it is exclusive--all environmental groups oppose this legislation.

Let me also say, Mr. President, one of the things being lost in this debate is the fact that as we speak hundreds of millions of dollars are being spent in characterizing the repository at Yucca Mountain to determine if in fact that site is going to be scientifically safe for storage of nuclear waste . I repeat, this past year hundreds of millions of dollars have been spent. Next year the same--hundreds of millions of dollars will be spent characterizing that site.

Let us not lose sight of the fact that this legislation is a way to avoid the permanent repository. The very powerful, greedy nuclear industry that is promulgated by the utilities, basically what they want to do is short-circuit the present system. They do not want to take their chances at Yucca Mountain in having a safe, scientifically characterized site. They want to circumvent the system. They want to do away with environmental laws. They want to void the present law that says you cannot have temporary storage in the same State where a permanent site is being considered.

Why have we not heard anything about Yucca Mountain? That used to be the big debate. Because the nuclear industry wants to avoid Yucca Mountain. They want to do it the cheap way.

We have heard raised continually the fact that Nevada used to be a place where they set off bombs, atmospheric tests and underground tests, and more than 900, almost 1,000 of those tests have been detonated.

As I stated, the State of Nevada has sacrificed significantly for that. We did it because there were hundreds, thousands, tens of thousands of nuclear warheads pointed at the State of Nevada and the United States. Conversely, the United States of America pointed their weapons at the Soviet Union. The cold war has terminated. I repeat, this ended a dangerous era. It was a time of national crisis. We were all called upon to do what was necessary to protect this country. The State of Nevada did its share. We did what was right at a time of crisis.