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

Dwight Rousu
2.3
by Dwight Rousu - Oct. 1, 2008

The article, in review, ignores nuke impact upon water supplies and river temperatures needed for the cooling function. It implicitly assumes we will or should go forward with nuclear power, in spite of its hazards and costs. It suggests there are solutions to nuclear waste, if only we can find them.

See All Reviews »

Dwight's Rating

Overall
2.3

Poor
from 13 answers
Quality
2.2
Facts
2.0
Fairness
3.0
Information
3.0
Sourcing
2.0
Style
2.0
Accuracy
2.0
Balance
2.0
Context
2.0
Popularity
2.5
Recommendation
3.0
Credibility
2.0
More How our ratings work »