http://www.lasvegassun.com/news/2008/jun/01/yucca-license-application-next-round-20-year-battl/
This is a really interesting article about the progress (or lack thereof) of storing spent fuel at Yucca Mountain.
As of now, there is an application being presented to the government in order to proceed with the plans for storing nuclear waste in this mountain.
This article deals with what Barack, Clinton and McCain would do about this issue if they were president. Both Barack and Clinton would deny this application, and more specifically, Clinton's spokesperson said that Clinton would cut funding. McCain on the other hand is for this nuclear waste site, but he "still hopes waste could one day be sent overseas." The issue with nuclear waste is that it is radioactive and many people here in the United States are against storing it at Yucca Mountain because they are afraid of the radioactive effects on the population. However, I personally do not think the answer is to send it overseas so it can harm other people.
Here are some questions to consider:
- Is storing the nuclear waste at Yucca Mountain a good or bad idea?
- What do you think about McCain's desire to send our nuclear waste elsewhere?
- If you lived in Nevada, near Yucca Mountain, would you feel differently about this issue or would you have the same opinion no matter where you lived?
4 comments:
The issue of Yucca Mountain is often made quite complex, but I think it is not so- creating nuclear waste is creating a problem that will be around longer than humans will be. That to me is passing the buck.
Now what to do with the waste we have and will create- store in numerous locations around the country/ world or one place in Nevada. If containment is an issue, I think one location is a better idea than many. The good of many outweighs the good of the few.
Sorry Nevada, I believe the waste will eventually be stored there.
the good of many outweighs the good of the few is a really good point.
it goes back to the fundamental debate of what is more important.
for the china dam, some may argue that it was the good of many that outweighed the good of the few.
I just wonder if we as New Yorkers would stick to that principle if the government was proposing to create a nuclear waste site by our homes.
I honestly don't really know how I would feel. I would probably be selfish and think about myself more than "the many," but it's hard to tell what I would think when the situation isn't tangible.
Placing the site in or near NYC would affect many. There ar 2.5 million in all of Nevada and 8 million in NYC- with suburbs we get close to 12 million. Plus we have the money to fight it.
It is hard to justify anything other than keeping the waste near the people receiving the power.
Yet we can probably accurately state that no one wants a nuclear dump near them. If this is true, perhaps we should stop producing nuclear power.
I believe this problem is fundamentally an American one. I think that, for one, there wont be a waste near nyc because that is to urban, and that the waste has to end up at Yucca Mountain. Now, i am not certain as to why they chose that place, but i am sure there are logical reasons.
In the first scene of Indiana Jones: crystal skull, the soviets are driving through an empty desert. i am sure that in the huge United States that we live in, we can find room for "dump" where no one will find it.
If the French can do it...so can we?
I am not sure that France would be the example to look it. Their Nuclear Power administration is too sophisticated and organized to be a model for the US. All their reactors are the same, working under one company, with clear goals in mind. This frontline articles exaplins France Nuclear and their problems with Waste. http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/pages/frontline/shows/reaction/readings/french.html
Post a Comment