Las Vegas Sun

March 28, 2024

Letter to the editor:

Yucca the best site for nuclear waste

Regarding your editorial, “Yucca Mountain returns”:

In 1987, the “scientific selection process” was not bypassed to select Yucca Mountain. An objective evaluation showed that among the sites under consideration, Yucca Mountain was the best site for multiple reasons. There are peer-reviewed documents including a review by the National Academy of Science supporting this conclusion. As you note, reprocessing is under way, both in laboratories and full-scale operations in other countries — but this doesn’t mean research could not improve the techniques used.

Congress is right in demanding that rate payers should receive something for the billions of dollars spent comparing potential sites, conducting exploratory studies and preparing the license application for the Yucca Mountain site. Instead, the license application is tied up in election-year politics and has caused major internal strife at the Nuclear Regulatory Commission among those responsible scientists and engineers who believe they should be allowed to complete their review.

Finally, you must not have heard that Carlsbad, N.M., is lining up as a potential site for a high-level nuclear waste repository. This would be in addition to the successful operating repository, the Waste Isolation Pilot Plant, that is already located nearby.

Join the Discussion:

Check this out for a full explanation of our conversion to the LiveFyre commenting system and instructions on how to sign up for an account.

Full comments policy