Friday, Aug. 4, 2000 | 9:13 a.m.
When the debate turns to nuclear waste storage, scientists often speak their own language, making it hard to understand what it all means. But there basically are two critical issues that must be addressed in the disposal of spent nuclear fuel: storage and transportation of it to a repository. Transportation is the issue that takes a back seat, but a frightening accident Wednesday involving a gasoline tanker truck on U.S. 95 drove home the real-world worries that Nevadans have about the prospect of shipping 77,000 tons of high-level nuclear waste from points all across the nation to a proposed repository in Yucca Mountain.
The spectacular crash prompted a flurry of "what if" scenarios among valley residents. Repeatedly Nevada officials told Sun reporters that the accident was a foreshadowing of their worst fears involving the transportation of high-level nuclear waste. Indeed, recently a consultant for the state of Nevada conducted a computer-generated analysis to calculate what would happen if a gasoline tanker caught fire after crashing into a truck carrying high-level nuclear waste. That consultant determined that radiation would escape from the nuclear waste hauler, causing 200 deaths from cancer and resulting in 9,000 people receiving some type of medical care from the leak.
Our choked valley roadways frequently are used by gasoline tankers and other huge trucks, which all have the potential to create a catastrophe if they collide with a truck containing high-level nuclear waste. If only because of the dangers of transportation, Congress should halt its irresponsible attempts to send deadly nuclear waste to a central repository such as Nevada's Yucca Mountain.
archive
