CargoAdmin, Bureaucrats, Moderators (CommentStreams), fileuploaders, Interface administrators, newuser, Push subscription managers, Suppressors, Administrators
5,230
edits
Yucca Mountain nuclear waste repository: Difference between revisions
Yucca Mountain nuclear waste repository (view source)
Revision as of 23:12, 14 March 2025
, 14 MarchText replacement - "The Guardian" to "The Guardian"
(Reverted UNSOURCED, good faith WP:GF edits. Wikipedia does not allow Original Research. Please see: WP:OR. All statements must be sourced from Reliable Sources WP:RS) |
m (Text replacement - "The Guardian" to "The Guardian") |
||
| (6 intermediate revisions by 2 users not shown) | |||
| Line 1: | Line 1: | ||
{{Short description|Unused deep geological repository facility in Nevada, US}} | {{Short description|Unused deep geological repository facility in Nevada, US}} | ||
{{ | {{Organization | ||
|OrganizationName=Yucca Mountain nuclear waste repository | |||
|OrganizationType=Government Corporations (Sub-organization) | |||
|Mission=The Yucca Mountain nuclear waste repository was intended to serve as the United States' first deep geological repository for the permanent disposal of spent nuclear fuel and high-level radioactive waste, aiming to safely and securely isolate this waste from the environment for thousands of years. | |||
|OrganizationExecutive=Project Director (position no longer active) | |||
|Employees=Project staff numbers fluctuated; no current employees as the project is inactive. | |||
|Budget=Funding ceased; previously allocated millions annually, with a total of nearly $15 billion spent over the project's lifetime. | |||
|Website=No active official site; historical information at https://www.energy.gov/ne/articles/yucca-mountain-project | |||
|Services=Proposed long-term storage of nuclear waste; geological characterization; environmental impact assessments | |||
|ParentOrganization=Department of Energy | |||
|TopOrganization=Department of Energy | |||
|CreationLegislation=Nuclear Waste Policy Act of 1982, amended in 1987 to focus on Yucca Mountain | |||
|Regulations=Proposed regulations included EPA radiation standards; NRC licensing requirements | |||
|HeadquartersLocation=36.875000, -116.550000 | |||
|HeadquartersAddress=Yucca Mountain, Nye County, NV, USA | |||
}} | }} | ||
The '''Yucca Mountain Nuclear Waste Repository''', as designated by the [[Nuclear Waste Policy Act]] amendments of 1987,<ref name=usa /> is a proposed [[deep geological repository]] storage facility within [[Yucca Mountain]] for [[spent nuclear fuel]] and other [[high-level radioactive waste]] in the United States. The site is on federal land adjacent to the [[Nevada Test Site]] in [[Nye County, Nevada]], about {{convert|80|mi|abbr=on}} northwest of the [[Las Vegas Valley]]. | The '''Yucca Mountain Nuclear Waste Repository''', as designated by the [[Nuclear Waste Policy Act]] amendments of 1987,<ref name=usa /> is a proposed [[deep geological repository]] storage facility within [[Yucca Mountain]] for [[spent nuclear fuel]] and other [[high-level radioactive waste]] in the United States. The site is on federal land adjacent to the [[Nevada Test Site]] in [[Nye County, Nevada]], about {{convert|80|mi|abbr=on}} northwest of the [[Las Vegas Valley]]. | ||
The project was approved in 2002 by the [[107th United States Congress]], but the [[112th United States Congress|112th Congress]] ended federal funding for the site via amendment to the [[continuing resolution|Department of Defense and Full-Year Continuing Appropriations Act]], passed on April 14, 2011, during the [[Obama administration]].<ref>{{cite web|url=https://www.congress.gov/112/plaws/publ10/PLAW-112publ10.pdf |title=Publication |publisher=www.congress.gov |date= |access-date=2021-09-10}}</ref> The project has encountered many difficulties and was highly contested by the public, the [[Western Shoshone]] peoples, and many politicians.<ref>{{cite web |last=Ryan |first=Cy |date=2012-03-16 |title=Nye County, Sandoval clash over future of Yucca – Las Vegas Sun Newspaper |url=https://lasvegassun.com/news/2012/mar/16/nye-county-sandoval-clash-over-future-yucca/ |access-date=2020-02-19 |website=lasvegassun.com |language=en-us}}</ref> The project also faces strong state and regional opposition.<ref>{{cite web |url=https://www.reviewjournal.com/local/local-nevada/yucca-mountain-opposition-to-be-focus-at-las-vegas-conference/ |title=Yucca Mountain opposition to be focus at Las Vegas conference|date=2017-09-05|website=Las Vegas Review-Journal|language=en-US|access-date=2020-02-19}}</ref> The [[Government Accountability Office]] stated that the closure was for political, not technical or safety reasons.<ref name="GAO">{{cite news|title=GAO: Death of Yucca Mountain Caused by Political Maneuvering |url=https://www.nytimes.com/gwire/2011/05/10/10greenwire-gao-death-of-yucca-mountain-caused-by-politica-36298.html?pagewanted=all|newspaper=The New York Times|date=May 9, 2011}}</ref> | The project was approved in 2002 by the [[107th United States Congress]], but the [[112th United States Congress|112th Congress]] ended federal funding for the site via amendment to the [[continuing resolution|Department of Defense and Full-Year Continuing Appropriations Act]], passed on April 14, 2011, during the [[Obama administration]].<ref>{{cite web|url=https://www.congress.gov/112/plaws/publ10/PLAW-112publ10.pdf |title=Publication |publisher=www.congress.gov |date= |access-date=2021-09-10}}</ref> The project has encountered many difficulties and was highly contested by the public, the [[Western Shoshone]] peoples, and many politicians.<ref>{{cite web |last=Ryan |first=Cy |date=2012-03-16 |title=Nye County, Sandoval clash over future of Yucca – Las Vegas Sun Newspaper |url=https://lasvegassun.com/news/2012/mar/16/nye-county-sandoval-clash-over-future-yucca/ |access-date=2020-02-19 |website=lasvegassun.com |language=en-us}}</ref> The project also faces strong state and regional opposition.<ref>{{cite web |url=https://www.reviewjournal.com/local/local-nevada/yucca-mountain-opposition-to-be-focus-at-las-vegas-conference/ |title=Yucca Mountain opposition to be focus at Las Vegas conference|date=2017-09-05|website=Las Vegas Review-Journal|language=en-US|access-date=2020-02-19}}</ref> The [[Government Accountability Office]] stated that the closure was for political, not technical or safety reasons.<ref name="GAO">{{cite news|title=GAO: Death of Yucca Mountain Caused by Political Maneuvering |url=https://www.nytimes.com/gwire/2011/05/10/10greenwire-gao-death-of-yucca-mountain-caused-by-politica-36298.html?pagewanted=all|newspaper=The New York Times|date=May 9, 2011}}</ref> | ||
This leaves the United States government (which disposes of its [[Transuranium element|transuranic]] waste from nuclear weapons production {{convert|2150|ft|m}} below the surface at the [[Waste Isolation Pilot Plant]] in New Mexico)<ref>{{cite web |title=Archived copy |url=http://www.wipp.energy.gov/fctshts/Why_WIPP.pdf |url-status=dead |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20110930145651/http://www.wipp.energy.gov/fctshts/Why_WIPP.pdf |archive-date=September 30, 2011 |access-date=2011-11-16 |website=wipp.energy.gov}}</ref> and American [[Nuclear power in the United States|nuclear power plants]] without any designated long-term storage for their high-level radioactive waste (spent fuel) stored on-site in steel and concrete casks ([[dry cask storage]]) at 76 reactor sites in 34 states.<ref name=Guard_2021-08-24 >{{cite news |url=https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2021/aug/24/san-onofre-nuclear-power-plant-radioactive-waste-unsafe | title='A combination of failures:' why 3.6m pounds of nuclear waste is buried on a popular California beach |last=Mishkin |first=Kate |newspaper= | This leaves the United States government (which disposes of its [[Transuranium element|transuranic]] waste from nuclear weapons production {{convert|2150|ft|m}} below the surface at the [[Waste Isolation Pilot Plant]] in New Mexico)<ref>{{cite web |title=Archived copy |url=http://www.wipp.energy.gov/fctshts/Why_WIPP.pdf |url-status=dead |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20110930145651/http://www.wipp.energy.gov/fctshts/Why_WIPP.pdf |archive-date=September 30, 2011 |access-date=2011-11-16 |website=wipp.energy.gov}}</ref> and American [[Nuclear power in the United States|nuclear power plants]] without any designated long-term storage for their high-level radioactive waste (spent fuel) stored on-site in steel and concrete casks ([[dry cask storage]]) at 76 reactor sites in 34 states.<ref name=Guard_2021-08-24 >{{cite news |url=https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2021/aug/24/san-onofre-nuclear-power-plant-radioactive-waste-unsafe | title='A combination of failures:' why 3.6m pounds of nuclear waste is buried on a popular California beach |last=Mishkin |first=Kate |newspaper=The Guardian |date=2021-08-24 |quote=Under the US Nuclear Waste Policy Act of 1982, the federal government was to move waste into a centralized, remote federal facility starting in 1998. In 2002, George W Bush approved Yucca Mountain, a site about 100 miles from Las Vegas, as a permanent underground nuclear waste repository. But in 2010, the Obama administration scrapped the controversial plan. ... Spent fuel is stored at 76 reactor sites in 34 states, according to the Department of Energy.}}</ref><ref name=DOE_FF-SNF >{{cite web |url=https://www.energy.gov/ne/articles/5-fast-facts-about-spent-nuclear-fuel |title=5 Fast Facts about Spent Nuclear Fuel |work=[[United States Department of Energy]] |date=2020-03-30}}</ref><ref name=WSJ_2021-05-14 >{{cite news |url=https://www.wsj.com/articles/escape-from-yucca-mountain-biden-administration-promises-progress-on-nuclear-waste-11620984602 |title=Escape From Yucca Mountain: Biden Administration Promises Progress on Nuclear Waste |last=Rubin |first=Gabriel |newspaper=[[Wall Street Journal]] |date=2021-05-14 |quote=The only federally designated long-term disposal site for waste from the nuclear power industry is at Yucca Mountain in Nevada (there is also a site near Carlsbad, N.M., for waste generated by the government’s nuclear weapons program).}}</ref><ref name="nrc.gov">{{cite web |url=https://www.nrc.gov/waste/spent-fuel-storage/locations.html |title=NRC: Locations of Independent Spent Fuel Storage Installations |date=October 15, 2009 |publisher=[[U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission]] |access-date=2010-07-13 |url-status=dead |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20100527192312/http://www.nrc.gov/waste/spent-fuel-storage/locations.html |archive-date=May 27, 2010}}</ref> | ||
Under President [[Barack Obama]], the U.S. [[United States Department of Energy|Department of Energy]] (DOE) reviewed options other than Yucca Mountain for a [[High-level radioactive waste management|high-level waste repository]]. The [[Blue Ribbon Commission on America's Nuclear Future]], established by the [[United States Secretary of Energy|Secretary of Energy]], released its final report in January 2012. It detailed an urgent need to find a site suitable for constructing a consolidated geological repository, stating that any future facility should be developed by a new independent organization with direct access to the [[Nuclear Waste Fund]], which is not subject to political and financial control as the [[Cabinet (government)|Cabinet]]-level DOE is.<ref>{{Cite news |author=Hamilton |first=Lee H. |last2=Scowcroft |first2=Brent |date=January 2012 |title=Blue Ribbon Commission on America's Nuclear Future Final Report |url=http://brc.gov/sites/default/files/documents/brc_finalreport_jan2012.pdf |url-status=dead |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20120807061024/http://brc.gov/sites/default/files/documents/brc_finalreport_jan2012.pdf |archive-date=August 7, 2012 |access-date=2012-10-25}}</ref> But the site met with strong opposition in Nevada, including from then-Senate leader [[Harry Reid]].<ref name=usa /> | Under President [[Barack Obama]], the U.S. [[United States Department of Energy|Department of Energy]] (DOE) reviewed options other than Yucca Mountain for a [[High-level radioactive waste management|high-level waste repository]]. The [[Blue Ribbon Commission on America's Nuclear Future]], established by the [[United States Secretary of Energy|Secretary of Energy]], released its final report in January 2012. It detailed an urgent need to find a site suitable for constructing a consolidated geological repository, stating that any future facility should be developed by a new independent organization with direct access to the [[Nuclear Waste Fund]], which is not subject to political and financial control as the [[Cabinet (government)|Cabinet]]-level DOE is.<ref>{{Cite news |author=Hamilton |first=Lee H. |last2=Scowcroft |first2=Brent |date=January 2012 |title=Blue Ribbon Commission on America's Nuclear Future Final Report |url=http://brc.gov/sites/default/files/documents/brc_finalreport_jan2012.pdf |url-status=dead |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20120807061024/http://brc.gov/sites/default/files/documents/brc_finalreport_jan2012.pdf |archive-date=August 7, 2012 |access-date=2012-10-25}}</ref> But the site met with strong opposition in Nevada, including from then-Senate leader [[Harry Reid]].<ref name=usa /> | ||
| Line 269: | Line 272: | ||
In 2008, the U.S. Senate Committee on Environmental and Public Works found that failure to perform to contractual requirements could cost taxpayers up to $11 billion by 2020.<ref>{{Cite news |author=Hylko |first=James M. |last2=Peltier |first2=Robert |name-list-style=and |date=May 1, 2010 |title=The U.S. Spent Nuclear Fuel Policy: Road to Nowhere |url=http://www.powermag.com/nuclear/The-U-S-Spent-Nuclear-Fuel-Policy-Road-to-Nowhere_2651.html |work=Power}}</ref> In 2013, this estimate of taxpayer liability was raised to $21 billion.<ref>{{cite press release|url=https://www.globenewswire.com/news-release/2013/07/30/563278/24300/en/Fertel-Tells-Congress-to-Act-Now-on-Used-Nuclear-Fuel-Legislation.html|title=Fertel Tells Congress to Act Now on Used Nuclear Fuel Legislation|first=Nuclear Energy|last=Institute|date=July 30, 2013|website=GlobeNewswire News Room}}</ref> In July 2009, the House of Representatives voted 388 to 30 on amendments to HHR3183 ({{USHRollCall|2009|591}}) to not defund the Yucca Mountain repository in the FY2010 budget.<ref name="2010funding"/><ref>{{cite web|url=http://www.opencongress.org/bill/111-h3183/show |title=H.R.3183 – Energy and Water Development and Related Agencies Appropriations Act, 2010 |access-date=2010-06-09 |url-status=dead |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20090724070455/http://www.opencongress.org/bill/111-h3183/show |archive-date=July 24, 2009}}</ref> In 2013, the House of Representatives voted twice during the 2014 Energy and Water Appropriations debate by over 80% majority to reject elimination of Yucca Mountain as the nation's only nuclear waste solution.<ref>{{cite web|url=https://www.reviewjournal.com/|title=Las Vegas News | Breaking News & Headlines|website=Las Vegas Review-Journal}}</ref> | In 2008, the U.S. Senate Committee on Environmental and Public Works found that failure to perform to contractual requirements could cost taxpayers up to $11 billion by 2020.<ref>{{Cite news |author=Hylko |first=James M. |last2=Peltier |first2=Robert |name-list-style=and |date=May 1, 2010 |title=The U.S. Spent Nuclear Fuel Policy: Road to Nowhere |url=http://www.powermag.com/nuclear/The-U-S-Spent-Nuclear-Fuel-Policy-Road-to-Nowhere_2651.html |work=Power}}</ref> In 2013, this estimate of taxpayer liability was raised to $21 billion.<ref>{{cite press release|url=https://www.globenewswire.com/news-release/2013/07/30/563278/24300/en/Fertel-Tells-Congress-to-Act-Now-on-Used-Nuclear-Fuel-Legislation.html|title=Fertel Tells Congress to Act Now on Used Nuclear Fuel Legislation|first=Nuclear Energy|last=Institute|date=July 30, 2013|website=GlobeNewswire News Room}}</ref> In July 2009, the House of Representatives voted 388 to 30 on amendments to HHR3183 ({{USHRollCall|2009|591}}) to not defund the Yucca Mountain repository in the FY2010 budget.<ref name="2010funding"/><ref>{{cite web|url=http://www.opencongress.org/bill/111-h3183/show |title=H.R.3183 – Energy and Water Development and Related Agencies Appropriations Act, 2010 |access-date=2010-06-09 |url-status=dead |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20090724070455/http://www.opencongress.org/bill/111-h3183/show |archive-date=July 24, 2009}}</ref> In 2013, the House of Representatives voted twice during the 2014 Energy and Water Appropriations debate by over 80% majority to reject elimination of Yucca Mountain as the nation's only nuclear waste solution.<ref>{{cite web|url=https://www.reviewjournal.com/|title=Las Vegas News | Breaking News & Headlines|website=Las Vegas Review-Journal}}</ref> | ||
On April 13, 2010, [[Washington (state)|the state of Washington]] filed suit to prevent the closing of Yucca Mountain, since this would slow efforts to clean up the [[Hanford Nuclear Reservation]].<ref>{{Cite news |author=Dininny |first=Shannon |date=April 14, 2010 |title=Washington sues to keep Yucca alive |url=http://www.spokesman.com/stories/2010/apr/14/washington-sues-to-keep-yucca-alive/ |access-date=2012-03-14 |work=[[The Spokesman-Review]] |agency= | On April 13, 2010, [[Washington (state)|the state of Washington]] filed suit to prevent the closing of Yucca Mountain, since this would slow efforts to clean up the [[Hanford Nuclear Reservation]].<ref>{{Cite news |author=Dininny |first=Shannon |date=April 14, 2010 |title=Washington sues to keep Yucca alive |url=http://www.spokesman.com/stories/2010/apr/14/washington-sues-to-keep-yucca-alive/ |access-date=2012-03-14 |work=[[The Spokesman-Review]] |agency=Associated Press}}</ref> [[South Carolina]], [[Aiken County, South Carolina|Aiken County]] (the location of the Savannah River site) and others joined Washington state in the suit.<ref>{{Cite news|url=http://www.world-nuclear-news.org/WR-Appeals_court_rejects_Yucca_Mountain_lawsuit-0407115.html |title=Appeals court rejects Yucca Mountain lawsuit |work=[[World Nuclear News]] |date=April 7, 2011 |access-date=2012-03-14}}</ref> The [[United States Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit]] dismissed the suit in July 2011, saying the Nuclear Regulatory Commission had not ruled on the withdrawal of the license application.<ref>{{Cite news |author=Mills |first=Chad |date=July 2, 2011 |title=Aiken County still optimistic after Yucca Mountain lawsuit dismissed in federal court |url=http://www.tri-cityherald.com/2011/07/02/1552655/court-rules-against-washington.html |url-status=dead |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20130618035624/http://www.tri-cityherald.com/2011/07/02/1552655/court-rules-against-washington.html |archive-date=June 18, 2013 |access-date=2012-03-14 |work=[[Tri-City Herald]]}}</ref> Washington and South Carolina filed another lawsuit on July 29.<ref>{{Cite news|url=http://chronicle.augusta.com/news/metro/2011-07-30/washington-state-sc-file-suit-yucca-plans |title=Washington state, S.C. file suit on Yucca plans |agency=Associated Press |work=[[Augusta Chronicle]] |date=July 30, 2011 |access-date=2012-03-14}}</ref> | ||
With $32 billion received from power companies to fund the project, and $12 billion spent to study and build it, the federal government had $27 billion left, including [[interest]]. In March 2012, [[United States Senate|Senator]] [[Lindsey Graham]] introduced a bill requiring three-fourths of that money to be given back to customers, and the remainder to the companies for storage improvements.<ref>{{Cite news |author=Rosen |first=James |date=March 13, 2012 |title=Graham wants Yucca fees repaid in rebates to electricity customers in S.C. |url=http://www.myrtlebeachonline.com/2012/03/13/2714903/graham-wants-yucca-fees-repaid.html |url-status=dead |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20120319163712/http://www.myrtlebeachonline.com/2012/03/13/2714903/graham-wants-yucca-fees-repaid.html |archive-date=March 19, 2012 |access-date=2012-03-14 |work=[[The Sun News]]}}</ref> | With $32 billion received from power companies to fund the project, and $12 billion spent to study and build it, the federal government had $27 billion left, including [[interest]]. In March 2012, [[United States Senate|Senator]] [[Lindsey Graham]] introduced a bill requiring three-fourths of that money to be given back to customers, and the remainder to the companies for storage improvements.<ref>{{Cite news |author=Rosen |first=James |date=March 13, 2012 |title=Graham wants Yucca fees repaid in rebates to electricity customers in S.C. |url=http://www.myrtlebeachonline.com/2012/03/13/2714903/graham-wants-yucca-fees-repaid.html |url-status=dead |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20120319163712/http://www.myrtlebeachonline.com/2012/03/13/2714903/graham-wants-yucca-fees-repaid.html |archive-date=March 19, 2012 |access-date=2012-03-14 |work=[[The Sun News]]}}</ref> | ||
| Line 310: | Line 313: | ||
|first=Fred | |first=Fred | ||
|date=May 24, 2018 | |date=May 24, 2018 | ||
|work= | |work=The New York Times | ||
}}</ref> Although his administration had allocated money to the project, in October 2018, President Donald Trump stated he opposed the use of Yucca mountain for dumping,<ref name="Judy Fahys for KUER, 2018"/> saying he agreed "with the people of Nevada."<ref name="Seung Min Kim for Washington Post, 2018"> | }}</ref> Although his administration had allocated money to the project, in October 2018, President Donald Trump stated he opposed the use of Yucca mountain for dumping,<ref name="Judy Fahys for KUER, 2018"/> saying he agreed "with the people of Nevada."<ref name="Seung Min Kim for Washington Post, 2018"> | ||
{{cite news | {{cite news | ||
| Line 328: | Line 331: | ||
|first=Michael | |first=Michael | ||
|date=June 3, 2018 | |date=June 3, 2018 | ||
|website= | |website=USA Today | ||
}}</ref> The [[Nuclear Waste Policy Amendments Act]] was sponsored by [[John Shimkus]]. ''The Hill'' clarified that the bill would "set a path forward for the DOE to resume the process of planning for and building the southern Nevada site, transfer land to the DOE for it, ease the federal funding mechanism and allow DOE to build or license a temporary site to store waste while the Yucca project is being planned and built."<ref name="Timothy Cama for The Hill, Year"/> | }}</ref> The [[Nuclear Waste Policy Amendments Act]] was sponsored by [[John Shimkus]]. ''The Hill'' clarified that the bill would "set a path forward for the DOE to resume the process of planning for and building the southern Nevada site, transfer land to the DOE for it, ease the federal funding mechanism and allow DOE to build or license a temporary site to store waste while the Yucca project is being planned and built."<ref name="Timothy Cama for The Hill, Year"/> | ||
| Line 356: | Line 359: | ||
|title=Don't let the window close on a Yucca Mountain nuclear waste storage deal | |title=Don't let the window close on a Yucca Mountain nuclear waste storage deal | ||
|date=December 17, 2018 | |date=December 17, 2018 | ||
|website= | |website=Los Angeles Times | ||
|access-date=April 30, 2019 | |access-date=April 30, 2019 | ||
}}</ref> | }}</ref> | ||
| Line 404: | Line 407: | ||
* {{cite book |editor1-last=Macfarlane |editor1-first=Allison M. |editor2-last=Ewing |editor2-first=Rodney C. |title=Uncertainty Underground: Yucca Mountain and the Nation's High-Level Nuclear Waste |publisher=MIT Press |date=2006 |isbn=9780262633321}} Set of articles by technical experts on numerous scientific and technical issues that are unresolved; presents arguments that Yucca Mountain has not been and may never be shown to be an appropriate repository for high-level radioactive waste. Does not pass judgment on suitability of the site. | * {{cite book |editor1-last=Macfarlane |editor1-first=Allison M. |editor2-last=Ewing |editor2-first=Rodney C. |title=Uncertainty Underground: Yucca Mountain and the Nation's High-Level Nuclear Waste |publisher=MIT Press |date=2006 |isbn=9780262633321}} Set of articles by technical experts on numerous scientific and technical issues that are unresolved; presents arguments that Yucca Mountain has not been and may never be shown to be an appropriate repository for high-level radioactive waste. Does not pass judgment on suitability of the site. | ||
* {{cite book |title=About a Mountain |author-link=John D'Agata |first=John |last=D'Agata |date=2011 |publisher= [[W. W. Norton]] |isbn=9780393339017 |url-access=registration |url=https://archive.org/details/aboutmountain00john}} Focuses on the mountain as well as the city of Las Vegas. | * {{cite book |title=About a Mountain |author-link=John D'Agata |first=John |last=D'Agata |date=2011 |publisher= [[W. W. Norton]] |isbn=9780393339017 |url-access=registration |url=https://archive.org/details/aboutmountain00john}} Focuses on the mountain as well as the city of Las Vegas. | ||
** Review: {{cite news |url=https://www.nytimes.com/2010/02/28/books/review/Bock-t.html |title=American Wasteland |first=Charles |last=Bock |date=February 26, 2010 |work= | ** Review: {{cite news |url=https://www.nytimes.com/2010/02/28/books/review/Bock-t.html |title=American Wasteland |first=Charles |last=Bock |date=February 26, 2010 |work=The New York Times}} | ||
== External links == | == External links == | ||