Reply #17: I have not watched the debate, thought I would, but I've lost [View All]

[slipslidingaway]

interest in what the top three have to say, especially when there is nobody there to really challenge them on the issues :(


Also on Yucca Mountain, posted this last night.


http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=132&topic_id=4087454&mesg_id=4092127

The Yucca Mountain Nuclear Waste Dump Vote in Congress is Imminent!!!

Questions about scientific studies prior to the vote

http://www.nirs.org/alerts/04-30-2002/2

"...Despite a Dec. 2001 U.S. General Accounting Office report that a decision should be postponed indefinitely due to nearly 300 incomplete scientific studies, and a Jan. 2002 U.S. Nuclear Waste Technical Review Board determination that the Department of Energy's Yucca Mountain science is "weak to moderate," on Feb. 14, Energy Secretary Spence Abraham recommended Yucca Mountain as a suitable site for burying 77,000 tons of high-level radioactive waste. President Bush rubberstamped the reckless plan the very next day..."


Kucinich pointed out many of the problems with Yucca Mountain and voted No.

"BACKGROUND

Despite a Dec. 2001 U.S. General Accounting Office report that a decision should be postponed indefinitely due to nearly 300 incomplete scientific studies, and a Jan. 2002 U.S. Nuclear Waste Technical Review Board determination that the Department of Energy's Yucca Mountain science is "weak to moderate..."


Kucinich in 2000 addressing several issues including transportation of waste and scientic studies that might not be completed before approval.

http://kucinich.house.gov/UploadedFiles/yuccadeiscomments.pdf