Trying to solve the long-term nuclear waste storage problem

Despite the uncertainties, the authors argue that there are very real reasons to start using Yucca Mountain: 60,000 metric tons of waste, currently stored in 72 sites, "many adjacent to metropolitan areas and all next to rivers, lakes, or the ocean." It's easy to default to inertia while waiting for greater certainty about Yucca Mountain or hoping something better comes along, but the authors argue that the current storage system creates far too much risk ... Full Story »

Posted by Rebecca Hale

See All Reviews »

Review

Rebecca Hale
3.6
by Rebecca Hale - Oct. 1, 2008

In this review the author wishes to open discussion about a paper published recently in "Science" by two former members of the US Geological Survey, about the topic of the disposal of nuclear waste. Nuclear is not a clean or sustainable / renewable technology. Marketers have obscured this fact and scientists wish to open up the discussion to a wider group, because consequences affect all of us. The article presents some of the facts and talking points, and is well written.

See All Reviews »

Rebecca's Rating

Overall
3.6

Good
from 7 answers
Quality
3.5
Fairness
3.0
Information
3.0
Sourcing
3.0
Context
4.0
Popularity
4.0
Recommendation
4.0
Credibility
4.0
More How our ratings work »