
@dean That seems to be a big problem. Reading this TIME article talks about the run around and lame excuses the NRC gets when they find issues. The NRC should have the promotion of nuclear power mandate removed from their operating scope. That should be part of whatever entity focuses on generic power needs, maybe DOE or one of the economic development agencies.
by lillymunster 9/2/2011 2:17:35 PM

@dean The private sector nuclear waste storage idea was floated by the same politicians that want no govt. regulation. The combination of for profit private nuclear storage and no oversight is a recipe for disaster. We have various small hazard cleanup sites around SD where private companies ignored EPA laws, went out of business and left really nasty messes to be cleaned up. I can't imagine the disaster if this kind of thing involved nuclear waste.
by lillymunster 9/2/2011 2:19:32 PM

@Mid Valley checked, fixed, email sent. :-)
by lillymunster 9/2/2011 2:23:23 PM

@ lilly, the whole bottom line on nuclear is LIABILITY and the good ole gov't ends up with the tab and cleanup. Take TMI they decided, not the NRC, that they will leave TMI-2 in a state that it's in now until end of life of TMI-1 then they say they will decommission both, I say BOGUS. It will probably never happen or they will ask for GOV'T assistance or try to SELL the plants to some other company.. this is being approached with some big plants in the country now... SELL IT TO SOME INVESTORS AND LET THEM DEAL WITH IT..
by dean 9/2/2011 2:23:34 PM

I will return I have to go to appointment... NICE NICE CHATTING
by dean 9/2/2011 2:23:43 PM

@dean selling an end of life nuclear plant? PT Barnam was right. :-)
by lillymunster 9/2/2011 2:34:13 PM