Just read this statement from the WSJ:
“The U.S. government has spent more than $34 billion over two decades at a nuclear-cleanup site in Hanford, Wash., a 586-square-mile site contaminated over four decades. Underground waste-storage containers there, thought to be impermeable, leaked. The cleanup is expected to take another 50 years and cost an additional $115 billion, according to the Department of Energy.”
I personally love technology, have great expectations about future technology and have at times been enthusiastic about nuclear power. I am an expert witness in the field of energy.
When I read the paragraph above, my business view of the world kicks in. It says that regardless of Harry Reid or the citizens of Nevada, safe storage of nuclear waste is not the issue. The issue is the cost of cleanup.
“The U.S. government has spent more than $34 billion over two decades at a nuclear-cleanup site in Hanford, Wash., a 586-square-mile site contaminated over four decades. Underground waste-storage containers there, thought to be impermeable, leaked. The cleanup is expected to take another 50 years and cost an additional $115 billion, according to the Department of Energy.”
I personally love technology, have great expectations about future technology and have at times been enthusiastic about nuclear power. I am an expert witness in the field of energy.
When I read the paragraph above, my business view of the world kicks in. It says that regardless of Harry Reid or the citizens of Nevada, safe storage of nuclear waste is not the issue. The issue is the cost of cleanup.