High-level MRS (the acceptable political solution)?

["Miller, Mark L" <mmiller@sandia.gov>]

I see in the November 18 Issue of Nuclear Waste News that Yucca Mountain is
being considered for Monitored Retrievable Storage (MRS) instead of
disposal.  Probably the ONLY substantive change in the proposed operation is
titular: from "disposal" to "retrievable storage".  It seems that the U.S.
might finally be learning the lesson that the French did earlier; that you
can get public support for "storage" where you get crucified for "disposal".
Besides, given that over 90% of the energy value is still in the so-called
"spent fuel", doesn't it make sense to store it until the (political)
climate is right to reprocess it and reclaim that energy resource?

Mark L. Miller, CHP


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