Nuclear Power Controversy

One week the Yucca Mountain nuclear dump site proposal is covered as a dubious proposition because storing deadly nuclear waste for 10,000 years is hard to do (Part I, March 19). Yucca Mountains are near fault lines and active volcanoes, but then no one else wants nuclear waste, so why not “screw Nevada”? The next week, you print not one, but two columns supporting nuclear power. One is by James Flanigan (Business) who wrongly assumes that the Three Mile Island accident helped us have safe nuclear facilities. According to Rep. Edward J. Markey, D-Mass., four of our five U.S. atomic reactors have not completed sweeping safety changes required following the 1979 accident at TMI. He requested documents from the NRC to find out this frightening information.

The other article is by Rossin, a consultant for the nuclear industry. Of course, the fact that Rossin makes his living pushing for nuclear power doesn’t seem to color his warped view, does it?

The idea that nuclear power is safe and cheap is nonsense. Just digging for the uranium to start the nuclear process causes cancer and contaminates the soil. The waste is an immoral legacy for our descendants. How would we feel if we found nuclear waste in the pyramids? That’s less than half the time required to house the slow death radioactivity. You don’t need a nuclear war to have nuclear annihilation. Slowly steadily, we’re letting the Department of Energy be the Department of Extinction.

MARY JACOBS

Westlake Village