What is Yucca, and how do GOP candidates feel about it?

Presidential hopefuls at the Republican debate last week in Nevada took their stands against the Yucca Mountain nuclear waste repository that has been at the center of political controversy - a stand that most legislators in South Carolina aren't pleased with.

In the debate, candidates, including Texas Rep. Ron Paul and Gov. Rick Perry, as well as former Massachusetts Gov. Mitt Romney, said they oppose the use of the Yucca Mountain storage site for which more than $1 billion South Carolina dollars have already been spent.

Locally, S.C. legislators and members of the nuclear community have said that Yucca Mountain is the best option for the storage of nuclear waste currently in storage at the Savannah River Site and are disappointed with President Barack Obama's decision to put a stop to the project.

The Yucca Mountain repository, a geological, underground storage site for the disposal of spent nuclear fuel and waste, much of which is currently stored at SRS, was taken off the table as an option.

Aiken County, along with the states of South Carolina and Washington and other parties, have filed a lawsuit attempting to reverse the decision.

SRS is nearly halfway through turning 37 million gallons of waste in 49 tanks into a glass form that is encased in stainless steel, and those containers were intended for shipment to Yucca Mountain for long-term storage.

While presidential candidates said Tuesday that they did not support other states "punishing" Nevada by forcing them to store waste, state legislators and the local nuclear community largely believe that Yucca Mountain is still the best option.

"Yucca Mountain has been reviewed numerous times for its appropriateness as a repository for nuclear waste, and every study finds it suitable for its intended purpose," said Clint Wolfe, executive director of Citizens for Nuclear Technology Awareness. "I personally oppose putting used nuclear fuel, as we now know it, into any geologic repository because it is a resource containing 95 percent of its original fuel value, and we should extract that energy before disposing of the waste resulting from those recycling efforts. Those wastes along with Defense High level waste currently encased in glass logs at SRS could then be placed in a deep geologic formation like Yucca Mountain."

In the absence of Yucca Mountain as a possibility, however, Wolfe said that other alternatives, such as the Waste Isolation Pilot Plant in Carlsbad, New Mexico, is another good option because of its 250 million year salt formation a half mile under the desert and its role in safely disposing transuranic radioactive waste for more than 10 years.

Lastly, he said, "the people of Carlsbad would welcome the mission intended for Yucca Mountain."

The Associated Press contributed to this article.

What GOP candidates had to say about Yucca Mountain:

"I think the people of Nevada ought to have the final say as to whether they want (Yucca), and my guess is that, for them to say yes to something like that, someone is going to have to offer them a pretty good deal, as opposed to having the federal government jam it down their throat. ... Let the free market work and, on that basis, the places that are geologically safe, according to science, and where the people say the deal is a good one will decide where we put this stuff. That's the right course for America." - Mitt Romney, former Massachusetts governor

"I approach it from a states' rights position. What right does 49 states have to punish one state and say 'We're going to put our garbage in your state?' I think that's wrong. Quite frankly, the federal government shouldn't be in the business of subsidizing any form of energy and nuclear energy, I think, is a good source of energy but they still get subsidies. Then they assume this responsibility, then we, as politicians, and the bureaucrats get involved in this and then we get involved with which state is going to get stuck with the garbage." - Ron Paul, representative from Texas

"We need to have a discussion in this country about our 10th amendment and the appropriateness about it as it's been eroded by Washington, D.C., for all these many years, whether it's health care, education or dealing with energy. We don't need to be subsidizing energy in any form or fashion. Allow the states to make the decision and some state out there will see the economic issue and they will have it in their state." - Rick Perry, governor of Texas

"We have to find a safe method of taking care of nuclear waste, and today, because this has been caught up in a political fight, we have small nits of nuclear waste all over this country in a way that is vastly more dangerous to the United States than finding a method of keeping it in a very, very deep place that would be able to sustain 10,000 or 20,000 or 30,000 years of geological safety." - Newt Gingrich, former Speaker of the House

"We've been clear that South Carolina will not become a permanent dumping ground for nuclear waste, and we are not interested in investing in any more Nevada real estate when we get nothing in return. If the feds want to renege on the promise to keep Yucca open, they must refund the $1.2 billion our state has spent on the facility. We want our money back. This is something I'm going to continue to talk about as governor." - Gov. Nikki Haley

"The decision to close Yucca Mountain was a political, not a scientific, decision. Failing to open Yucca Mountain creates real problems for states like South Carolina. I believe it's a mistake for the Republican Party to buy into the political answer like President Obama did. We should stick to the science." - Lindsey Graham, U.S. Senator - R

"The Government Accountability Office recently concluded that President Obama's rush to shut down Yucca was a political decision that will ultimately cost taxpayers billions, increase risk to public safety and leave us with no viable alternative for the storage of nuclear waste. The science on Yucca is conclusive, it's been the law since 1987 and billions have already been invested in it. If not Yucca, where? If Yucca is not reopened, then the billions of dollars taken from American taxpayers to build it should be returned." - Jim DeMint, U.S. Senator - R

"In response to the recent statements by Republican candidates for president, Congressman Wilson still believes our country needs a permanent national repository for nuclear waste and that 24 years of law should not be reserved because of politics trumping science. South Carolina rate payers have paid $1.2 billion toward the construction of Yucca Mountain and to have the licensing process halted due to political pandering is unconscionable. Not to mention it is going to cost the American taxpayers tens of millions of dollars," said Wilson's spokesperson, Neal Patel. "Congressman Wilson fully supports the legal efforts made by local and state officials to reverse the decision of this administration and political players in the Nuclear Regulatory Commission." - Joe Wilson, S.C. Representative - R-2

"Nevada has long benefited from the billions of taxpayer dollars that were sent to the state for developing a safe and permanent storage facility for our country's nuclear materials. If Nevada doesn't want Yucca Mountain, then the states should start reimbursing the American people for the costs. I'd remind all the Presidential candidates of the federal government's promise to construct a long term storage facility for the legacy weapons materials temporarily being stored in South Carolina. I suspect many South Carolina voters, including myself, will expect to hear the presidential candidates' solution to this problem during their next visit to the Palmetto State." - Jeff Duncan, S.C. Representative - R-3

"We first must recognize that South Carolina rate payers have contributed $1.3 billion toward a permanent waste disposal solution and (the state) has been taking in nuclear waste for the past 25 years believing that promises the federal government made with regard to it being housed in South Carolina temporarily would be kept. ... As governor of Utah, I opposed and continue to oppose Yucca's construction, because I do not believe it is in our best national security interest to transport to and store waste at a single facility. ...As president, I would direct the (Nuclear Regulatory Commission) and the (Department of Energy) to come up with a transitional plan to more modern techniques of reprocessing nuclear waste." - Jon Huntsman, former Utah governor & former ambassador to China

"Nearly 80 percent of the states have paid into the Yucca Mountain fund, and South Carolina is the third-highest contributor. The Savannah River Site, along with 74 other sites in the remaining 35 contributing states, was not originally intended to hold nuclear waste, and the Yucca Mountain project was found to be the safest, most viable option for the entire nation after years of study and deliberation. Our nation needs a single, long-term storage plan for nuclear waste, and the current sites do not have the appropriate infrastructure to do so." - Tim Scott, S.C. Representative - R-1

"Nevada has long benefited from the billions of taxpayer dollars that were sent to the state for developing a safe and permanent storage facility for our country's nuclear materials. If Nevada doesn't want Yucca Mountain, then the states should start reimbursing the American people for the costs. I'd remind all the presidential candidates of the federal government's promise to construct a long-term storage facility for the legacy weapons materials temporarily being stored in South Carolina. I suspect many South Carolina voters, including myself, will expect to hear the presidential candidates' solution to this problem during their next visit to the Palmetto State." - Jeff Duncan, S.C. Representative - R-3

"South Carolina has consistently paid money with the expectation that the federal government would keep its word and dispose of nuclear waste in Yucca Mountain. If Yucca Mountain does not open, not only did we pay the money in complete vain, but we will continue to have spent fuel problems. Sen. (Harry) Reid had no issue taking money from South Carolina. Either repay the money or honor the commitment made." - Trey Gowdy, S.C. Representative - R-4

"Yucca Mountain should be open. I'm hoping that what we saw (in the Nevada debate) was just a case of speaking to the local audience out there in Nevada. The truth of the matter is that this is the best place in the whole country to put this stuff. South Carolina rate payers have been paying for it. This is where this stuff needs to go." - Mick Mulvaney, S.C. Representative - R-5

"Savannah River Site is not suitable for permanent storage of high-level nuclear waste. As we continue to look for safe, long-term nuclear waste disposal solutions, I'm encouraged by the ongoing research and development happening at sites like the U.S. Department of Energy's Waste Isolation Pilot Plant in New Mexico, which I recently visited, and the Mixed Oxide Fuel Fabrication Facility at Savannah River. We must continue to invest in these facilities and others that are putting us well on our way to finding alternative means to dispose of our nuclear waste." - James Clyburn, S.C. Representative - D-6