Re: "Nuclear Waste Really Does Have A Home"

[RuthWeiner@AOL.COM]

The cost may be overkill by what we consider to be the actual potential 

hazard, but the cost is of course very much influenced by political 

considerations.  I know first hand what is being demanded of the 

environmental impact assessment for Yucca Mountain.  Risk assessment projects 

that I have worked on over the past few years were probably unnecessary, but 

were demanded by states through whioch RAM is transported, etc.  Every 

lawsuit, and every public hearing, no matter how frivolous, increases the 

cost.  (I get really angry when some DC anti-nuke lobbying group yammers 

about the cost and then, in the same breath, demands multiple public hearings 

that cost at least $250K per hearing) Under these circumstances, what is "too 

great a cost?"  Moreover, what are the alternatives, and are they lower cost? 

 I might point out that the same argument is made about nuclear plants -- 

that they cost too much -- and yet the cost depends very much on the 

licensing process.


Ruth Weiner, Ph. D.

ruthweiner@aol.com