U.S. Rep. John Shimkus, R-Ill., Rep. Bob Latta, R-Ohio and Rep. Cresent Hardy, R-Nev., walk along the train tracks during a congressional tour of the Yucca Mountain exploratory tunnel Thursday, April 9, 2015. (Sam Morris/Las Vegas Review-Journal) Follow Sam Morris on Twitter @sammorrisRJ
Nevada Rep. Cresent Hardy, who joined a pro-Yucca Mountain congressional site visit this past week, recently asked the question, “Is there a scenario in which Nevadans would actually welcome nuclear waste storage at Yucca Mountain?” (“Time for Nevada to talk Yucca Mountain,” March 22 Review-Journal).
The answer to that question is an emphatic “no” for one simple yet unavoidable reason: Because Yucca Mountain is an unsafe place for storing or disposing deadly nuclear waste and was selected for purely political reasons having nothing to do with science or suitability. There is nothing for state officials to negotiate. In fact, our leaders would be remiss in their duty to protect the public and the environment to entertain the notion that any amount of dollars could possibly compensate for likely grievous and lethal harm from siting a facility in such an unsafe location as Yucca Mountain.
From day one, science with respect to Yucca Mountain has taken a back seat to Washington, D.C., power politics...
No comments:
Post a Comment