Bosses at one of America's busiest airports have sparked fury by unveiling controversial plans to explore using nuclear energy. Leaders at Denver International Airport in Colorado made the announcement earlier this month, sparking an immediate backlash from locals who claim they were never consulted. The airport has since been forced to pause its plans for a feasibility study following the outcry. Councilwoman Stacie Gilmore, who represents District 11, said the issue was never discussed with her constituents, who have questions about safety and nuclear waste. 'It never came up,' she told Daily Mail. 'Denver International Airport is trying to put the cart before the horse, and they got called out by the community.' The airport was planning to pay up to $1.25million for a six to 12-month study to determine if nuclear power is viable for the airport long-term, what are the risks, and how much it would cost, among other things. But Gilmore said her constituents are unequivocally opposed and highlighted that the proposed nuclear reactor is a relatively new technology which would be located near the two most racially diverse populations in the city and county of Denver. 'People don't want something that produces radioactive waste - something that we currently don't have a way to even store it - in a community of color,' Gilmore added. She called Denver Airport CEO Phil Washington's 'rushed' plan 'half-baked'. But more than that, she said the airport hasn't reached out the community to hear their concerns, which include, the heightened risk for cancers, air and noise pollution, and radioactive chemicals being nearby, among others. The study is now on pause while the city and airport talk to constituents. Normally, they said, they would do community outreach while the study was happening. 'However, since it was requested, we are happy to do so,' the airport said in a statement. But Gilmore said that wasn't enough and claimed the airport would never shell out so much on a study if it hadn't already made up its mind. 'The concerns of the community would be one page of that study. The rest of the study would be saying exactly how this is a great idea,' she told Daily Mail. 'If you're raising your kids in a single neighborhood where you bought a single-family home and that is your greatest asset of your family, do you want your grandparents' home located next to a small nuclear reactor? 'And god forbid something catastrophic happens out there, it will mean people's lives,' she continued. 'It doesn't jive with Denver's values. Phil Washington is so greedy.' She said the communities that would be affected by this have been 'systematically ignored' and she's 'not willing to play with people's lives'. 'This is brand new technology that nobody really knows long-term issues with,' she told Daily Mail. 'That's irresponsible.' Denver is the third busiest airport in the US and the sixth worldwide. It handles 80million passengers a year and is estimated to see more than 120million by 2045. The city is hoping to find a more sustainable way to generate electricity to become 'energy independent' and to have the 'greenest airport in the world,' a press release stated. 'Denver leads with bold ideas, and our vision for the future of our airport is no exception,' Mayor Mike Johnston said in a statement. 'We must explore every innovative solution available to meet the demands of a growing city and a changing climate.' Mayor Johnston and Denver Airport did not return Daily Mail's request for comment. Nuclear power is a growing energy field as it has low greenhouse gas emission, while still generating electricity. Those that use small reactors can also add more as the demand for energy grows and have a smaller carbon footprint than a bigger reactor. However, small reactors are still in the development stage in the US and it could be up to a decade before operations begin. Another drawback to nuclear power is that waste is stored on site as the US does not have a national disposal site. The US, however, is the world's largest producer of nuclear power, accounting for roughly 30 percent. The Donald Trump Administration set a target to quadruple the US' capacity by 2050. The majority of nuclear reactors are on the Eastern side of the country.