Highly radioactive waste will likely accumulate in Minnesota for decades longer than expected because of a new energy policy taking shape in Washington. President Obama is closing the door on Yucca Mountain, a remote site in Nevada that for more than 20 years has been the nation's only candidate for permanent burial of nuclear waste. That leaves the waste containers collecting at nuclear plants near Monticello and in Red Wing, with nowhere to go. "President Obama has been emphatic that storage at Yucca Mountain is not an option, period," said Stephanie Mueller, spokesperson for the U.S. Department of Energy. "His budget reflects that, and funding for the project will be reduced and restricted." Nuclear utilities including Xcel Energy hoped to ship wastes to Nevada beginning around 2020, but they have seen the opening date postponed many times. The project has encountered high costs, environmental concerns and steadfast opposition from Nevadans, including Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid. Terry Pickens, director of nuclear regulatory policy for Xcel, said he's not surprised that the administration wants to drop Yucca Mountain, since Obama promised to do so when he campaigned in Nevada. However, there may be a fight ahead. "The administration can't do anything that it wants," Pickens said, noting that Congress endorsed Yucca in 2002. "To undo that, it will take some conscious effort," Pickens said. Xcel has a large, stainless steel-lined indoor pool and 24 outdoor casks full of radioactive wastes at its Prairie Island plant in Red Wing. The utility can fill five more containers and is seeking state approval for 35 more casks if it gets the OK to extend Prairie Island's license for another 20 years. Xcel also has a waste storage pool at its Monticello plant northwest of the Twin Cities and has loaded 10 of the 30 outdoor canisters permitted there.

Pickens said a change in direction about Yucca Mountain will not cause the utility to shut down its plants or reduce the amount of power they generate. Wastes can be stored safely and securely for several decades if necessary, he said. Rejecting Yucca Mountain may raise uncertainty about nuclear power just as the industry is promoting its superiority to coal and other fuels that produce global warming emissions. Nuclear trade association leaders suggested an independent panel or commission to reevaluate the waste problem. The Yucca move should make Minnesota think twice about repealing a moratorium on new nuclear plants that the Legislature passed in 1994, said Steve Morse, executive director of Minnesota Environmental Partnership. Legislators have proposed to lift the prohibition and may discuss the issue later this month. Morse was a state senator in 1994, when the controversy of additional radioactive waste storage at Prairie Island boiled over at the Legislature. Utility officials assured lawmakers then that the storage would be temporary and that wastes would eventually be shipped to Nevada. "Those projections have always been fantasies," Morse said. Diane Jensen, one of the environmental leaders active in that debate, said that in some respects, nothing has changed in 15 years. "There's a saying that nuclear waste tends to stay where you first put it," Jensen said. "It will never be moved because the dangers politically and environmentally are far greater than leaving it where it is." The Department of Energy has spent more than $10 billion boring a nearly 5-mile tunnel through Yucca Mountain, drilling niches for testing, and it had been conducting hundreds of studies to determine whether wastes can be stored there safely for thousands of years. Last year DOE submitted an application for a construction and operating license for Yucca to the Nuclear Regulatory Commission.