Editorial: Don’t rush to judgment

Thursday, May 25, 2000 | 9:13 a.m.

Transmutation's advocates believe the experimental technology one day could reduce the amount and danger posed by radioactive waste. But as the Sun's Mary Manning reported Wednesday, a group of independent scientists is contending that transmutation might actually create more radioactive hazards for people and the environment. The Institute for Energy and Environmental Research says that the Department of Energy should stop any research into transmutation.

But the fact is that transmutation still is in its infancy in terms of development, so it would be irresponsible to abandon research now. Many believe that if transmutation can be perfected, it could eliminate the need for a high-level nuclear waste repository. If the waste can be rendered less harmless then there's no reason to ship it across the nation to a single site in Nevada; instead the waste could be kept in containers at reactor sites. Transmutation's opponents cite the technology's potential high costs, but as Anthony Hechanova of UNLV's Harry Reid Center for Environmental Studies notes, the $1 billion needed to demonstrate transmutation's viability is considerably less than the $6 billion already spent on the suitability study of Yucca Mountain.

The current approach in dealing with high-level nuclear waste, in which Congress seeks the politically convenient option of burying the waste in Nevada, absolutely ignores scientific evidence that shows how dangerous this would be. A more reasonable approach would be to keep the nuclear waste where it is while allowing scientists to explore other avenues, such as transmutation, to find a better way.

archive