Highly radioactive nuclear waste? It’s calling from inside the house, Colorado.
The question for the ages looming over the revival of nuclear power interest in the state is the same conundrum about nuclear power worldwide: If you build more nuclear power, what do you do with deadly radioactive waste that’s dangerous for hundreds of years, and no one wants?
Surprise, Colorado: We’ve already got tons of it, quietly shedding alpha particles somewhere between the Happy Tails Dog Ranch and the Platteville Community Center 4 miles east of Interstate 25. Few people want to talk about the 33,069 pounds of spent nuclear fuel rods at Fort St. Vrain left after Colorado’s sole nuclear power plant stopped generating in 1989.
But it’s ours to keep.
So why do we have tons of nuclear waste decaying just outside the Denver metro area, and what’s going to happen to it? Xcel and some legislators want to explore a new, smaller reactor for Colorado, and the Department of Defense has commissioned small reactors that might someday come to Aurora’s Buckley Space Force Base. Yet neither idea comes with a long-term waste storage plan.
Here are some basics about Colorado’s nuclear power history:
When did Colorado have nuclear power?
Xcel Energy, then Public Service Co. of Colorado, finished the Fort St. Vrain helium-cooled nuclear plant in 1972, and commercial power was sent out on the grid beginning in 1979. The gas-cooled plant was designed to operate more efficiently and reliably than water-cooled plants. But frequent breakdowns from corrosion and electrical problems meant Fort St. Vrain generated commercial power only about 15% of the time it was open, according to a study by New York state utility officials.
After another breakdown in 1989, Public Service began decommissioning Fort St. Vrain and searching for a resting place for the tons of spent fuel rods onsite.
How much radioactive waste was left over?
From 1980 to 1986, the Department of Energy shipped spent fuel and associated waste from Fort St. Vrain to DOE’s Idaho National Laboratory, which also holds spent fuel from other commercial reactors and naval ship reactors. About 8 metric tons of Fort St. Vrain spent fuel was shipped to Idaho. Political opposition finally built toward Idaho rejecting any more waste in 1991. That left about 15 metric tons or 33,000 pounds of fuel rods at Fort St. Vrain.
Isn’t there a national underground storage site for highly radioactive nuclear waste?
Yucca Mountain in Nevada was designated the permanent nuclear repository by Congress, but has never come close to being finished or opened after decades of vehement political opposition.
So whose waste is it that sits near Platteville?
Dating to agreements in the 1960s, the U.S. Department of Energy is responsible for handling or paying others to handle nuclear power waste. With Idaho and Yucca Mountain out of the question, Public Service/Xcel started building a massive reinforced concrete storage building at Fort St. Vrain in 1989, with the blessing of DOE.
What form is the waste in?
The highly enriched uranium in Fort St. Vrain’s fuel was blended with graphite and shaped into rods the size of a roll of quarters. About 3,000 of those rods were then packed into a fuel “element” about 31 inches tall and 14 inches in diameter, with empty spaces for cooling helium to pass through. After their useful life in the reactor, up to six of those elements were then stacked in a long-term storage container.
Is the storage building safe?
The concrete box is 143 feet long, 72 feet wide and 80 feet tall. The DOE and its waste contractors say the “Independent Spent Fuel Storage Installation” is one of only four sites in the entire U.S. specifically built to handle the DOE’s highly dangerous spent fuel; the others are at Idaho, the Hanford site in Washington state, and at Savannah River in South Carolina.
The spent nuclear fuel containment building for Fort St. Vrain’s used uranium/graphite rods. (U.S. Department of Energy fact sheet)Fort St. Vrain’s building “is designed to withstand tornado wind speeds of 360 mph, flooding up to 6 feet deep and earthquakes. The structure is intended to last at least 40 years — and probably longer with monitoring and maintenance,” a DOE fact sheet says.
Are the building and the storage scheme super high tech?
They are not. Six separate vaults inside the building feature a total of 244 deep, concrete-surrounded holes for those storage containers to drop into. A crane overhead rolls back and forth to place or adjust the containers in their holes.
A cross section of the Fort St. Vrain spent fuel vault shows the flow of cooling air from the bottom, across the stored waste, and up through roof vents. (U.S. Department of Energy)The uranium is kept inert by its graphite mixture. The dry-storage building is cooled by fans drawing outside air in (see government graphic), through the vaults, and out through the high chimney structure.
Can anyone else put their nuclear waste at Fort St. Vrain’s building?
That would be tempting, since it’s one of only four designated spent-fuel structures in the nation. But the building is full.
It’s a hard “no” from DOE director of communications in environmental management Justin Doil, responding to email questions: “The facility does not have the capacity for additional used nuclear fuel. It was designed for the unique fuel that powered the Fort Saint Vrain Nuclear Generating Station. The facility was designed and sized for the fuel that remained in Colorado.”
The building’s current 20-year license from the Nuclear Regulatory Commission runs to 2031, and Doil said current agreements allow for one more 20-year license after that.
Who runs the building now?
DOE took over in the 1990s, and neither Xcel nor the Colorado Department of Public Health’s hazardous waste division has any role in supervising Fort St. Vrain. Doil said the building is currently handled by contractors “the Idaho Environmental Coalition, LLC and Protection Strategies Inc.”
DOE says a written agreement with Colorado requires DOE to ship Fort St. Vrain’s spent fuel out of state by Jan. 1, 2035. Insert reminder here that there have been many “agreements” on a Yucca Mountain permanent storage site, and yet . . .
Still needing reliable supplies of electrical power for its Colorado operations, Xcel started building an array of natural gas-fired turbines at Fort St. Vrain. Those continue running and putting power onto the grid, with multiple expansions.
Does anyone think all this is a bad idea?
Absolutely. The Rocky Mountain Peace and Justice Center has been a convenor of nuclear critics, ranging from former investigators of the Rocky Flats nuclear weapons plant disasters, to environmental groups, to physicians. They sharply criticize commercial and political interests who are exploring new nuclear power for Colorado when the waste from the last commercial power experiment sits at Platteville with no permanent solution.
A legislative bill passed in 2025 “officially classifies nuclear energy as a ‘clean energy resource,’ and that defies logic,” said Jon Lipsky, a retired FBI agent who helped lead the government raids probing Rocky Flats. “Nuclear energy will generate nuclear waste without a plan to store or dispose of such nuclear waste.”
Hence then, the article about why does colorado have 33 000 pounds of nuclear waste decaying outside of denver and other nuclear power questions answered was published today ( ) and is available on Colorado Sun ( Middle East ) The editorial team at PressBee has edited and verified it, and it may have been modified, fully republished, or quoted. You can read and follow the updates of this news or article from its original source.
Read More Details
Finally We wish PressBee provided you with enough information of ( Why does Colorado have 33,000 pounds of nuclear waste decaying outside of Denver? And other nuclear power questions, answered. )
Also on site :