Editorial: Resurrect search for waste site

Friday, Aug. 24, 2001 | 4:30 a.m.

It's no secret that scientific considerations have been absent in deciding where 77,000 tons of high-level nuclear waste should be stored. Still, it was refreshing to see former President Clinton not mince any words Friday about the controversial Yucca Mountain Project. In an exclusive interview with the Sun, Clinton questioned whether Yucca Mountain was the best and most remote site to store nuclear waste, and said that Congress should consider revisiting other sites that may be safer. Clinton got in a sly jab at the Bush administration, suggesting it should promote a more remote location: "The last time I looked at the map, the Texas site was farther away from any populated area than the Yucca site."

At one time Deaf Smith County, Texas; Hanford, Wash.; and Yucca Mountain all were being studied to see which site would be the best to store nuclear waste, but in 1987 Congress targeted Nevada as the only place to be considered. At the time Texas was erased as a possible repository, it wasn't a coincidence that George W. Bush's father was vice president. The political landscape has changed significantly in the past few months, and Clinton noted that Nevada Sen. Harry Reid's elevation to assistant majority leader is the state's best chance of stopping a repository.

Divorcing politics from the issue has been next to impossible, but there still is hope. For instance, scientists at Argonne National Laboratory-West in Idaho are making progress on a technological advance that could render high-level nuclear waste less harmful, which could eliminate the need for a repository. We hope that more members of Congress will consider the issue the same way that Bill Clinton is doing.