Could the United States become the nuclear trash bin for the world? That’s the possible concern among critics of a proposed shipping of nuclear waste from Italy to a storage site in Utah, according to a Feb. 28 article in the Christian Science Monitor.

If the agreement is approved, the Utah company Energy Solutions would bring in 20,000 tons of metal piping, sludge, wood, contaminated clothing and other mildly radioactive material from Italian nuclear power plants, according to the article. Environmentalists and politicians are concerned this deal will create a precedent for other countries to use the United States as its nuclear dumping ground.

Obviously, no one wants to have nuclear materials of any kind next to where they live. There is a fear of what this radioactive waste could do to the population in the surrounding area even though they are set off far away from the storage site. The effects of living within proximity of these nuclear storage facilities is largely unknown, adding to the apprehension people have when discussing the handling of these materials.

But what is the alternative? Do we just tell smaller countries such as Italy to deal with nuclear waste storage themselves even though they don’t have the space for it? This could be more dangerous as they live close to the Mediterranean Sea; an accident involving radioactive waste in this area would be more devastating than if it were to occur in the middle of nowhere in Utah.

Nuclear power, whether people agree with it or not, is a reality. Waste becomes a byproduct of the energy it produces, and someone somewhere must handle that waste. The United States is the most capable country in both technology and size in storing radioactive materials, so whether we like it or not, it has become our duty to safely take care of nuclear waste.