Re: Bush and Gore on science issues

["ruth_weiner" <ruth_weiner@email.msn.com>]

The Texas site opposed by the state was a low-level waste facility (under
the Low-Level Radwaste Compact that Texas is a part of) in the southwest
corner of Texas.  I think the name was Sierra Blanca (or something similar).
It was investigated and characterized and, as I recall, was an OK site.
Opposition was purely political.

Ruth Weiner
ruth_weiner@msn.com
-----Original Message-----
From: Dukelow, James S Jr <jim.dukelow@pnl.gov>
To: Multiple recipients of list <radsafe@romulus.ehs.uiuc.edu>
Date: Wednesday, October 18, 2000 11:40 AM
Subject: Bush and Gore on science issues


>
>The current (13 October 2000, vol. 290, pp. 262-269) issue of Science has
>responses by Bush and Gore to 20 questions on science issues posed by the
>editors of Science.
>
>The only question directly related to nuclear energy was "Do you support
the use
>of Yucca Mountain as a site for long-term storage of nuclear waste?"
>
>Gore responded that until the scientific analysis of Yucca Mountain was
>complete, it would be premature to make a determination about its use as a
>disposal site.  He said that he strongly supported the administration's
fight
>against legislation that would move waste into Yucca Mountain before the
>analysis is complete.
>
>Bush said that the decision should be based on sound science, not politics,
and
>said that he would respect the administration's current timetable of a
decision
>on Yucca Mountain before the end of 2001.  He said, "I oppose shipping
nuclear
>waste anywhere until all of the scientific studies at its destination site
have
>been completed."
>
>I vaguely recall that the state of Texas opposed, during Bush's tenure as
>Governor, a proposal to put some sort of nuclear waste site in West Texas.
>Perhaps someone can refresh and/or correct my memory.
>
>Both candidates responded to a question on global warming without
mentioning
>nuclear energy.  Gore did refer to "tax incentives for the purchase of
energy
>efficient and low-carbon energy supplies" and Bush supported "the
development of
>... alternative sources of fuel and new fuel alternatives."  I don't have
the
>sense that either had nuclear energy in mind.
>
>Best regards.
>
>Jim Dukelow
>Pacific Northwest National Laboratory
>Richland, WA
>jim.dukelow@pnl.gov
>
>These comments are mine (and Bush's and Gore's) and have not been reviewed
>and/or approved my management or by the U.S. Department of Energy.
>************************************************************************
>The RADSAFE Frequently Asked Questions list, archives and subscription
>information can be accessed at http://www.ehs.uiuc.edu/~rad/radsafe.html



************************************************************************
The RADSAFE Frequently Asked Questions list, archives and subscription
information can be accessed at http://www.ehs.uiuc.edu/~rad/radsafe.html