[ RadSafe ] SNF Repository

[garyi at trinityphysics.com]

Christopher,

Mike made excellent points.  As far as your comment "hard to understand why a selfish few 
are against a more permanent and safer solution,"  consider how effectively  the waste issue  
has been used to sour public opinion.  Anti nuclear activists want that issue to hang on 
nuclear power like a stinking albatros, so any solution to the non-problem of waste is 
unacceptable to them.

-Gary Isenhower

On 24 Sep 2010 at 9:03, Brennan, Mike  (DOH) wrote:

Hi, Christopher.

Actually, the "selfish few" are in my opinion, even more short sighted
than that.  If Yucca Mountain had been used as a repository, not only
would there have been a million-to-one decrease in the number of people
living within 50 miles of the SNF sent there, but there would have been
a similar decrease in each of the risks to the fuel the antis are
worried about.  For example, they are concerned that the repository is
"only" several hundred feet above the ground water.  Currently, most dry
storage facilities at power plants are only tens of feet above the level
of nearby rivers.  

But I agree with you that Yucca Mountain is unnecessary.  I do think,
however, that several centralized long term storage sites would be a
good idea. 

-----Original Message-----
From: radsafe-bounces at health.phys.iit.edu
[mailto:radsafe-bounces at health.phys.iit.edu] On Behalf Of
cmtimmpe at aol.com
Sent: Friday, September 24, 2010 8:48 AM
To: radsafe at health.phys.iit.edu
Subject: [ RadSafe ] SNF Repository


Considering all of the people that live in a 50 mile radius of the
current SNF 'temporary' storage sites around nuclear reactors, it is
hard to understand why a selfish few are against a more permanent and
safer solution.  Nevertheless, the focus on deep geological repositories
is very short-sighted.  A 50+ year of history of no SNF problems in the
current storage configurations argues that spending millions on a Yucca
Mountain is unnecessary.  If the current storage was that much of a
public danger, then you would think that the politicians representing
all the areas of current SNF storage would be fighting hard to get it
fixed - not just to add further delays.  Ergo, only those who stand to
gain from building repositories are still hot on the idea. 


Christopher M. Timm, PE 
Vice-President 
PECOS Management Services, Inc. 
505-323-8355 - phone/fax 
505-238-8174 - cellular
=
_______________________________________________
You are currently subscribed to the RadSafe mailing list

Before posting a message to RadSafe be sure to have read and understood
the RadSafe rules. These can be found at:
http://health.phys.iit.edu/radsaferules.html

For information on how to subscribe or unsubscribe and other settings
visit: http://health.phys.iit.edu
_______________________________________________
You are currently subscribed to the RadSafe mailing list

Before posting a message to RadSafe be sure to have read and understood the RadSafe 
rules. These can be found at: http://health.phys.iit.edu/radsaferules.html

For information on how to subscribe or unsubscribe and other settings visit: 
http://health.phys.iit.edu