Sharon Bakker wrote on June 21, 2008 09:20 AM: The men in the House of Representatives are so brilliant! Do they realize these new lights they want us to use are full of Mercury which everyone says is bad for you. They even changed the termometer for children because of it. People with pace makers can be affected also with new lights in their homes. I don't know about anyone else, but I am stocking up on the old lights and storing them away to last me the rest of my life. Not everything the Govt. tells us to do makes sense, does it?

Clifford MacPherson wrote on January 10, 2008 06:29 PM: The change Americans are looking for is, I suspect, a time of peace, a strong economy, full employment, federal surpluses and significant paying down of the national debt. That is exactly the situation that prevailed when the Clintons were in the white house.

With the economy turning down and recession already underway it’s a significant fact the voters should keep in mind .

When the Clintons occupied the white house “the state of the union was strong!”

Beytovin wrote on January 10, 2008 02:17 PM: While definitive "expertise" might be considered a stretch, I posess a healthy bit of experience in nuclear power. As yucca_insider mentioned, there is a big difference between low level and high level nuclear waste, and we do have a responsibility to deal with it. And we are, sort of.

However, here is where our next leader, if we ever get a leader (pardon my cynicism), should challenge, and support, the bright minds here in America. We've proven our half-century old technologies' safe power generation capabilities. Now, let's go to the "nuclear" moon with some new technologies, already in development, and beyond. I think we're all tired of the "can't can't can't" attitude out of the elected mouths over the last several years. The petroleum economy has served us well for over a century, it's time for a revolution. We ought to demand it. Other coutries in the world are moving ahead of us in several areas of technology for several reasons, but one of those reasons SHOULD NOT be a lack of leadership from the beltway.

OK, enough rant. We have current technology to process spent fuel making Yucca Mountain less of a concern to store massive quantities of high level waste. With leadership, guidance, and funding in the interests of national stability and environmental stewardship, we can develop and refine technologies to make Yucca Mountain even less relevant.

Ed. R wrote on January 10, 2008 01:15 PM: Mr. Ziser is proud that his "concerned" organization can overcome obscure theological differences that in any case will be laughed at 100 years from now (in fact many people are already laughing). He should be less proud it does this by rallying paranoid, frightened people of diverse faiths around medieval right-wing social prejudices. Neff got it right. It's all about hatred.

howard wrote on January 10, 2008 11:29 AM: Richard, great letter. Liberals like Ms. Neff are quick to scream when they see racial bigotry but are blind to their own religious bigotry. I am a catholic republican and have never seen anything remotely close to what she describes. Ms. Neff should stick to her usual democrat talking points and not attempt to write anything about republicans. She doesn't know anything about them. If you want to hear about religious bigotry you should ask my wife about her years as a pro life democrat. These self proclaimed protectors of free speech treated her hideously. Ms. Neff should appologize.

Jon H. wrote on January 10, 2008 11:28 AM: B Mused and Yucca_Insider write about the difficulties of recycling weapons grade fuel.

With regards to Pebble Bed Reactors, see:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pebble_bed_reactors

The article includes the following quote:

“MOX fuel of There is a project in progress to develop pebbles and reactors that use MOX fuel, that mixes uranium with plutonium from either reprocessed fuel rods or decommissioned nuclear weapons.”

I would be interested in comments on this idea, and on the overall safety of this reactor design.

B Mused wrote on January 10, 2008 11:18 AM: In response to Bill Gordon's letter on "Nuke Dump" in which he asked if we reprocessed spent nuclear fuel as is done in France, would we still need Yucca Mountain for waste disposal, the answer is "yes." Two reasons:
1. The high-level radioactive waste from Defense weapons production needs to be disposed of and cannot be reprocessed.
2. Under all existing or contemplated reprocessing methods there remains some (reduced) quantity of waste that requires either geologic disposal (like Yucca) or long-term surface storage at much more expensive price extending out many centuries. Even the French (eventually) plan disposal in a similar manner as at Yucca Mountain.

yucca_insider wrote on January 10, 2008 10:53 AM: Also, I don't stutter. You click "submit" once, and your comment appears twice!

yucca_insider wrote on January 10, 2008 10:37 AM: John F., reactors can be dismantled. In some places, public parks have replaced dismantled nuclear power plants. During dismantling, radioactivity is not "released." The reactors are taken to low-level rad waste disposal sites and the spent fuel is transported (gasp! - yes, it's been happening safely for decades) to temporary storage.

It's important to understand that "spent" nuclear fuel is completely different from medical waste or other forms of rad waste-- and thus, has been designated by Congress for disposal at Yucca Mountain.

It's also important to note that even in a recycling scenario, there are leftovers that need long-term geologic disposal. But I agree, the U.S. should resume recycling spent fuel. We stopped during the Ford/Carter era.

And finally, there are defense wastes that cannot be recycled. Communities in Washington state, Idaho, and South Carolina bore the burden of producing nuclear weapons because they were promised the waste would be removed and put in a safe place-- Yucca Mountain.

And Lee... I feel your comment about complaining and research, first-hand.

aksmith wrote on January 10, 2008 10:03 AM: Medical waste is low level radiation waste and I believe it's already being stored in New Mexico if not other places. That's the deal they made to keep from having the high level waste in their state?

As for recycling the waste, I've been wondering why nobody had noticed this happening in France before. The feds are sure invested in Yucca for some reason other than utility.

And an obligatory mention - The deomcrats are all against Yucca for whatever reason. And as for Republicans, only Ron Paul is against it, as a states' rights issue. People should be aware.

Read All Comments