| By Keith - Jun 22nd, 2007 at 5:34 am EDT |
| Also listed in: Campus Progress Blog |
Congresswoman Shelley Berkley (D-NV) is trying to kill Yucca Mountain Johnny.
While less known than Mickey Mouse, Mighty Mouse, or even the Planeteer Ma-Ti, Johnny had a profound mission: teaching America about the Yucca Mountain nuclear waste site.
Rep. Berkley, failing to slash Yucca Mountain funding by $200 million, set her sights on the Department of Energy’s Yucca Mountain educational website.
‘‘Regardless of how you feel about Yucca Mountain,” Rep. Berkley penned in a letter to colleagues, “we should all agree that the Department of Energy's use of a Joe Camel look-alike to influence children is an inappropriate use of taxpayer money.''
Last year the same motion failed. But in a fortuitous turn, it seems few legislators wanted to revisit this bruising political battle: her motion passed by a voice vote, without any debate.
Does Yucca Mountain Johnny look like Joe Camel, or does nuclear energy have the same addictive power as nicotine?
No. (Okay, okay—perhaps the French do suffer from a nuclear addiction)
Is Yucca Mountain Johnny (since 2005, he’s gone by J. Mo Jay) a bit biased?
Well, let’s look at the site’s “solution” for nuclear waste:
The scientists' studies show that deep down in Yucca Mountain's dry rock, the waste packages and drip shields will protect the waste for more than 80,000 years! (To give an idea of how long that is, the ancient Egyptians built the pyramids about 5,000 years ago.)
So did we solve the problem of storing nuclear waste?
Not exactly. Since we're dealing with people's safety, we must question whether the scientists' studies and conclusions are correct and what would happen if they're wrong. In addition, scientists must study things like what are the chances of earthquakes and volcanoes, and what would happen if something like this were to occur in the future.
Nuclear waste is a problem—even for the French who uncharacteristically rioted upon discovering their prized nuclear program who require waste sites.
Johnny may look like a nuisance, but he doesn’t seem to be a liar.
Then again, what child would be caught dead on this dilapidated website?
But let me close by sending Johnny a personal message, inspired by the Planeteer Ma-Ti. Don't lose heart Johnny, don't ever lose heart.
!
Comments are closed for this post.
Nevada benefits from a metric fuckton of benign neglect from the rest of America. If Yucca Mountain is all they have to pay for that, they should be grateful.
It doesn't matter if they're Democrats or Republicans, there's nothing in this world I hate more than NIMBY assholes.
By the by, Joe, has ANYONE ever tried to build a landfill, sewage treatment plant or nuclear waste disposal site in YOUR backyard? Not to be presumptuous, but I think your attitude about such things might change if you personally had to live in proximity to such areas. You might reevaluate the health arguments, or issues related to groundwater or property values. Or you may just decide out of the blue that you don't want your neighborhood to smell like processed shit.
Tell me, when was the last time your backyard was considered for such projects?
(btw, the correct term is 'spent-fuel' not 'waste' as technologies exist to recycle it, but for various reasons we choose not to do it).
Either way, the spent fuel will be stored in non-corroding glass containers that foreseeably should last for at least 100,000 years all by themselves. Also, the geological nature of the mountain is salt dome that over time should encase the storage containers in such a way that makes seismic issues not important. Also, the spent-fuel's transuranic elements will decay into non-water soluble elements, so even if everything else goes wrong, there is really no risk that Yucca Mountain poses to the public.
Besides, if not Yucca, where should we put all the existing spent fuel? Your backyard?