Re: Two (2) Newspaper Articles Concerning Barnwell

["Tom O'Dou" <tom_dixie@email.msn.com>]

Here we are again.  One of the comments regarding my posting last week
indicated that Barnwell is "not that expensive" another indicated that "it's
a good deal".

I disagree, the costs of disposal at Barnwell are an outrage.

What should you derive from this article?

1.  The govenment of SC wants more and more dollars and are willing to shut
the doors unless they get em.

2.  Chem Nuclear wants utilities to reserve space in Barnwell so that they
can charge you whether you use it or not.

3.  Utilities are sick of shelling out the outrageous fees at Barnwell as
indicated by the reduced use of Barnwell, and the increased use of
Envirocare and other sites when possible.

4.  Now they think that if they give more money to NC - they will set up a
site.  Learn from the past, Michigan - Ohio - NC (just a few years ago).

Will Barnwell be with us much longer - now that 1998 dollars have decreased
from $67M to $39M?

>"Hodges move to ban out-of-state nuclear waste from the disposal facility
in Barnwell. That issue may not be on the top of Hodges' things-to-do list
when he takes office, but the public airing it has received may lead to
certain expectations."


>"On Tuesday, Hodges' environmental transition committee will give the
governor-elect a formal proposal on what to do with the controversial
facility, which takes low-level nuclear waste from around the country."
>
>"The committee, chaired by vocal Barnwell critic Rep. Bob Sheheen,
D-Kershaw, is expected to recommend closing the facility to all states
except South Carolina."


What we have here is a failure to communicate!

Are you as amazed as I am?

Tom O'Dou
tom_dixie@msn.com




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