EDITORIAL: Nuclear Power

Mar 9, 2010 — Richmond Times-Dispatch

Mar. 9, 2010 (McClatchy-Tribune Regional News delivered by Newstex) -- "Every idea has been put on the table," President Obama says about the year-long debate over health care. "Every argument has been made. Everything there is to say . . . has been said."

Alas, the same standards don't apply to Nevada's Yucca Mountain. After years of discussion, no new arguments have come to light that would justify the administration's decision to withdraw the Nuclear Regulatory Commission license application for a nuclear waste depository there. Nothing has changed, except the president's mind. Of course, Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid hails from Nevada, and he is firmly opposed to the repository.

If America is to reduce its dependence on fossil fuels, then nuclear energy simply has to make up a large component of the substitute. Conservation and green energy are important, but even on a romantically idealistic scale they are not nearly enough to close the gap. The U.S. needs more nukes.

What to do with the waste? A repository deep underground at Yucca Mountain seems far more safe than the current practice: storing the stuff outside on concrete slabs.

There is a third alternative -- heretofore rejected because of nonproliferation concerns. Spent fuel rods retain a sizable proportion of their energy potential, and could be reprocessed, reducing the waste generated. Although it seems unlikely, perhaps environmentalists will come around to the idea that the motto, "Reduce, Reuse, Recycle" could apply to nuclear fuel as well.

Newstex ID: KRTB-0177-42693286