The storage of nuclear waste is a problem that not a lot of people are aware of, but is an important issue because nuclear waste is piling up at the reactor sites and is awaiting storage at Yucca Mountain in Nevada, where all of the United State's nuclear waste will be stored for about 10,000 years (until the waste is no longer hazardous). However, it is not set to open until 2018, and the decision to open it faces a lot of controversy, especially from the people living nearby.
I am doing a term/research paper for my dual-credit college class and I need a poll of the general public for use in my paper, which will be on the opening of the Yucca Mountain Nuclear Storage Repository in Yucca Mountain Nevada.
I would like to discuss both views involved with this issue, which are the supporters/opposition, so with this question I'd appreciate it if you could choose one answer and elaborate on your ideas, if possible.
Please answer one
*Yes
*No
*Do not know enough about the issue.
2007-02-27 12:05:49 · 8 answers · asked by Mandy M 2 in Environment
NO
2007-03-04 08:20:59 · answer #1 · answered by Anonymous · 2⤊ 1⤋
Yes, I support it. However, your facts are a little wrong. The current plans are not to store the waste at Yucca Mountain for 10,000 years but to permenantly dispose of it. The 10,000 years is the original EPA requirement for the Department of Energy to show that the system will work to contain the radioactive waste. This limit was challenged in a lawsuit and has since been revised (the last I heard they were going to change it to 1 million years or have Congress intervene). Also, the nuclear waste will not be hazardous for 10,000 years but 300 years for the some of the really nasty fission products and approximately 300,000 for the plutonium.
The country needs a national repository for the disposal of spent nuclear fuel and I can't think of a better place than Yucca Mountain to do it since the mountain is located on the site where the government use to test nuclear weapons. Also, whether one agrees with nuclear energy or not the fact is we already have quite a bit of this stuff in the country and ignoring it is not an option. Many argue that it should be left in place; however, in my opinion this only increases not only the risk that it places on human health and the environment but also national security.
2007-03-05 10:03:39 · answer #2 · answered by caldwemj 3 · 0⤊ 0⤋
I don't agree with storing waste in the mountain. There is always some chance that whatever is being stored in Yucca will leak into ground water. I can understand it is a risk people around that mountain do not want to take. This controversy leads back to the question of how can we recycle our waste and create less land fills and storage places for nuclear waste. Until that question is answered and put into action, Yucca Mountain probably be used the storage of nuclear waste.
That is all i am capable of writting
sorry, if it dose not help
2007-02-27 14:58:11 · answer #3 · answered by she_devil_666222 1 · 0⤊ 0⤋
No. This will remove from the public trust another large piece of nature, geological stability is a concern, cost will be higher than estimated like all similar projects, who is in charge of security over a 10000 year period (will the U.S. even be around), and the potential for leaks and accident while getting the waste there causes me some concerns. From the little I've seen on this solution to store nuclear pollution it's probably better to leave it where it's at than put it in Yucca. One thing for sure is the ever generous US taxpayer will foot the bill.
However: A long term solution for high level nuclear waste is to bury it on a diverging tectonic plate and let the natural rock cycle carry these deadly materials completely separated from the biosphere for 50000 years or more.
2007-02-27 13:22:07 · answer #4 · answered by Hydrogen Guy 3 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Yes, I do.
We need nuclear energy if we wish to continue with the lives we know now. I agree, it may take a long time for the nuclear waste to become non-hazaordous, but at least it can be contained and managed. We should be more concerned about the NOX/SOX from fossill power plants - which can not be contained or managed.
Finally, I do not think there are many people living nearby the repository. Of course, it would depend on what you mean by "nearby".
2007-03-03 18:38:41 · answer #5 · answered by royal_dutch_club 2 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Yes, I support the opening of Yucca Mountain to deposit spent nuclear waste.
2007-02-27 12:16:35 · answer #6 · answered by stargazergurl22 4 · 0⤊ 0⤋
No too close to a faultline.
2007-02-27 12:12:45 · answer #7 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
no way
2007-03-05 22:10:44 · answer #8 · answered by arka_spacerocker 2 · 0⤊ 0⤋