{'fraction_non_alphanumeric': 0.02158273381294964, 'fraction_numerical': 0.0017985611510791368, 'mean_word_length': 5.252808988764045, 'pattern_counts': {'":': 0, '<': 0, '<?xml version=': 0, '>': 0, 'https://': 0, 'lorem ipsum': 0, 'www.': 0, 'xml': 0}, 'pii_count': 0, 'substrings_counts': 0, 'word_list_counts': {'cursed_substrings.json': 0, 'profanity_word_list.json': 0, 'sexual_word_list.json': 0, 'zh_pornsignals.json': 0}}
The Ultimate LULU? Public Reaction to New Nuclear Activities at Major Weapons Sites

Abstract Finding locations for locally unwanted land uses (LULUs) has become a major challenge in the United States, and no land uses are more controversial than nuclear weapons research, nuclear waste management, and nuclear power generation. In this research, sponsored by the U.S. Department of Energy (DOE), we explore whether U.S. government-owned land already devoted to nuclear uses would provide logical locations for new nuclear activities. We surveyed people living within 50 miles of six existing DOE nuclear weapons sites, asking about their attitudes toward banning additional nuclear activities at these sites and about factors that might influence these attitudes. Although the majority said prohibiting additional nuclear uses at these sites was a high priority, many were willing to entertain the idea. This work suggests ways to make nuclear siting more successful by considering pre-existing sites, and encouraging the DOE to try harder to open communication channels with the public and its representatives.