|
> > Abraham is certain to urge
Bush to move ahead with the project, according to
> > government officials and industry sources. But the GAO study has greatly > > complicated the administration's efforts, particularly because it reflects > > the views of Bechtel SAIC Co., the private contractor hired by the Energy > > Department to oversee the project. > > The study said Bechtel SAIC recently told the DOE that it would take until > > January 2006 to complete the detailed research and cost estimates and to > > resolve hundreds of outstanding issues before the administration could > > responsibly designate the site and then begin the lengthy process of seeking > > a license from the Nuclear Regulatory Commission. "DOE is not ready to make a > > site recommendation because it does not yet have all of the technical > > information needed for a recommendation and a subsequent license > > application," the study said. As I suggested in a recent message--- as long as the funding keeps rolling in, there is little hope for a solution. I hate to see the government continue throwing good money (my tax and utility money) after bad. The political problems with Yucca Mountain seem insurmountable. For that reason, plus the fact that it was basically a dumb idea in the first place (i.e. gross overkill), the project should be scrapped immediately! The nuclear
waste gravy train needs to be derailed. .
When the dust clears, assuming the administration and the congress have the
political courage to do so, they should implement a program to
recycle
nuclear fuel,
and dispose of
nukewaste by the safest and least
expensive
method available.
That method would clearly be oceanic disposal. Essentially, the necessary information is already at
hand. No further studies would be needed.
|