President Obama Tells Governors He Won't Reconsider Yucca Mt. Shutdown

[bigtree]

Dec. 03, 2010

WASHINGTON -- President Barack Obama told newly elected governors at a meeting Thursday he would not reconsider his decision to shut down the Yucca Mountain nuclear waste site.

"It was a fast exchange," said Nevada Gov.-elect Brian Sandoval, one of 23 incoming state leaders in the room, "but it reaffirmed to me the president will not be supporting the long term storage of nuclear waste in Nevada. I have the understanding the administration has not changed its position."

"That reaffirmed to me the president will not be supporting the long term storage of nuclear waste in Nevada," Sandoval said on Friday morning, his third day of meetings in Washington with various federal officials.

By various accounts of the closed door meeting, South Carolina Gov.-elect Nikki Haley asked Obama if he would rethink terminating Yucca Mountain, a decision her state is challenging in court.

"You might want to ask the Nevada governor about that," Obama quipped, at which point Sandoval jumped in. "I think I can answer that question for you, Mr. President," he said.

According to Sandoval, Obama went on to defend the decision, saying his administration was looking for alternatives to the Nevada storage site.

"He said that was not an option because of safety concerns," Haley said afterward, according to a report in the Gannett News Service.


read more: http://www.lvrj.com/news/obama-tells-governors-he-won-t-reconsider-yucca-shutdown-111266619.html

[joeybee12]

1. That's good....knr

[City Lights]

2. K&R. nt

[Major Hogwash]

3. Where are we supposed to put the waste?

The state of Idaho had an agreement with the federal government back in 1995, when Clinton was President.

[closeupready]

7. Ship it to one of our colonies, maybe?

n/t

[bluestateguy]

10. I dunno. Find some red state and dump it there

I pick Oklahoma, but I am open to suggestions.

[Major Hogwash]

11. That's too far. Trains that carry nuclear waste are targets of opportunity for terrorists.

Plus, many of the truckers hauling waste across the country have been caught drinking on the job.
So, we need a short trip that won't take too long.
I picked Utah years ago, but no one else would agree with me.

[MineralMan]

17. I don't know....Idaho, maybe?

How's that sound to you?

[Angry Dragon]

4. I wonder where they plan to store the nuclear waste??

DC would be a good choice .......... so much waste there already
no one would notice

[closeupready]

5. LOL

:rofl:

[bigtree]

6. still on-site

better than transporting it, imo

(watch it about D.C.. It has it's 'waste' but it's a beautiful city with wonderful parks, magnificent buildings, great entertainment and eats, and wonderful people from every walk of life.)

[MineralMan]

19. The Boundary Waters Canoe Area?

Who knows? Every state has a reason not to want it stored in that state.

[Little Star]

20. Best suggestion ever! lol

[MilesColtrane]

8. What IS the alternative?

And what makes Mr. Obama and Secretary Chu think the NIMBY won't be just as strong in other parts of the country?

[bigtree]

9. It isn't as if states have no say in whether to build and operate plants

The waste will be stored on-site like it has been. It'll remain that way until someone, somewhere can come up with a plan to, possibly, convert it, and, to store it safely.

[Radical Activist]

12. Awesome. Bad news for the nuke industry.

That isn't the future.

[MineralMan]

23. It's interesting that some of the very people who are objecting

to President Obama's decision live in states that have nuclear power plants creating this waste. Maybe we should store the waste from each state's plant in that state, somewhere. That seems like a good solution, don't you think? I'm in Minnesota. We have a nuke here. Let's store the waste from that plant somewhere in Minnesota. I'm serious.

[Radical Activist]

24. That makes more sense than

the safety hazard of transporting it by rail all over the country. It's only a matter of time before that results in a major disaster. Train wrecks are a common occurrence.

http://www.bizjournals.com/triangle/stories/2007/10/22/daily43.html

[MineralMan]

25. That's what I'd think, too.

However, it seems that every state with nuclear plants in it wants the waste to go somewhere else...to someone else's state. That's typical, I think, and it won't wash. That's why I'm suggesting the states where the complainers live. Florida has three plants. The only one I mentioned that doesn't is Idaho. It's got lots of open country, though...perfect for nuclear waste storage, I'd think.

NIMBY is bankrupt thinking, in my opinion.

[Radical Activist]

29. Sometimes NIMBY is good.

What NIMBY is expressing in this case is that nuclear power has a fatal flaw. It will force policy makers to find better energy alternatives or stop building new plants until next generation nuclear with much less waste is developed. I like your tactic of triggering NIMBY in other states, who will then have to confront the realities of nuclear power themselves.

[MineralMan]

30. True. I was an active protester of the Diablo Canyon plant

near my home in California. I've been opposed to nuclear power generation from the very beginning. The very first experimental power plant was built not far from my childhood home. It had a partial meltdown in 1959, when I was a freshman in High School. Long, long ago, and long forgotten. Look up Chatsworth Nuclear Plant and read the article at the link below:

http://articles.latimes.com/2009/jul/13/local/me-meltdown13

I've been an opponent ever since.

[FLPanhandle]

13. "not an option because of safety concerns"?

Like leaving it in local above ground storage near major cities is safer?

Yucca Mountain isn't perfect, but its damn sure safer than the situation we have now.

[bigtree]

14. It's far safer than transporting it across the country and storing it at the flawed Yucca site

Yucca is far less than 'perfect'; it's downright dangerous to store the nation's nuclear waste there.

[FLPanhandle]

15. It's more dangerous leaving it where it is.

I've read the issues with Yucca. It's still a far safer alternative than leaving nuclear waste scattered in sometimes marginally maintained sites near major cities.

If not Yucca, something needs to be started NOW. This, I'll stick my head in the sand approach is stupid.

[bigtree]

16. so you have a difference of opinion. Good for you.

Plenty of folks on the other side of that debate. Alternatives have been considered and proposed for some time now, but, they are subject to the same political constraints as always; especially ones that involve transporting nuclear waste through numerous states.

You're not going to be able to easily impose one states' waste on another without the same battle that Nevada fought against and won. Certainly, I wouldn't want the federal government to have that kind of power to impose the toxic consequence of states which choose to operate nuclear plants on others.

You may well be settled on Yucca as a 'safer' site, but that debate has been waged and lost by proponents long ago.

[FLPanhandle]

26. The debate on which is safer hasn't been lost

The debate is just on what is more politically acceptable.

Few people believe that today's situation is anything but a disaster waiting to happen.

What Obama needs to do is not just cancel Yucca, but cancel Yucca in conjunction with starting the construction of another site. Canceling Yucca and then doing nothing in the name of safety is naive.

[bigtree]

28. You incorrectly single him out in this debate

. . . which proponents lost.

[MineralMan]

21. I'm thinking it should be stored in Florida somewhere.

Out in the swamps or something. :sarcasm:

[FLPanhandle]

27. Yes, it's not going to be politically attractive anywhere

But ignoring the problem isn't the solution either.

[MineralMan]

31. Nobody's ignoring the problem, you see. It's just been decided

that Yucca Valley isn't a good site. There are many reasons for that. You could look it up. In the meantime, there are three nuclear plants in Florida. Store the waste in your own state. Thanks!

[asdjrocky]

18. Wow, that's brave. nt

[MadHound]

22. Good for him, hopefully this spells the beginning of the end for the nuclear power industry

It is dangerous, outmoded, unneeded, and far more expensive than renewable alternatives like solar and wind.