This issue has been approved by whereIstand editors.
This page shows the dialogue between users and editors regarding the merits of this issue. If you have comments about the issue's wording, relevance, etc., write them here. Only registered whereIstand members can edit an issue. Users must register in order to participate in all aspects of the whereIstand community.
whereIstand admin
821 Opinions
90 Followers
Set as news: False
whereIstand editor
438 Opinions
34 Followers
Set as news: True
I think this and "should the U.S. build more nuclear power plants has to be under "domestic policy" and "energy policy." Congress will be voting soon on whether to put waste in Yucca or not.
Tough call. It's going to be a political issue this year. Not sure...
whereIstand member
353 Opinions
3 Followers
does this belong here or in our nuclear power topic? i'm not sure. .
MSNBC SEN. EDWARDS: My position is that, that what’s happened with Yucca Mountain is there’ve been serious questions, including the, the possibility of lying and fraud in the scientific evidence of—that Yucca Mountain would work. I was always concerned, still am, about this nuclear waste being transported around the country. I, I think, at this point in time, it does not make sense to do—to do Yucca Mountain. So the, the, the answer is we have nuclear plants, the, the stuff has to be stored—waste has to be stored somewhere, so it has to be stored where the plants are. MR. RUSSERT: So in... SEN. EDWARDS: Or in the vicinity. MR. RUSSERT: So in Seabrook, New Hampshire, the nuclear waste has to be stored in New Hampshire. SEN. EDWARDS: It has to be stored somewhere close by.
608 Opinions
Looks good to me. Maybe "Yucca Mountain, Nevada?"
You must be signed in to participate on whereIstand.com.
Register now to take stands, follow people and issues, request opinions and interact with other whereIstand members.