On 26 Jul 2004 12:13:30 -0700, jim rozen
calmly ranted:

In article , Gary Coffman says...

If the nuclear industry were *allowed* to dispose of its own high level
"wastes", a brisk trade in that valuable commodity would immediately
spring up. But the government forbids reprocessing, reuse, or resale
of spent fuel. That's the real issue here, the government insists by law
on maintaining ownership control of the materials, but refuses to assume
the responsibilities which go with that sort of ownership. Blaming the
nuclear industry for a problem created and maintained by government
is disingenuous at best.

Disingenous yes. But also pragmatic. The nuclear power
industry labors under a number of difficulties when it
tries to build and operate plants. This (govenment regulation)
is just one more that they have to deal with.

What's pragmatic about -not- reprocessing reprocessable
"spent" fuel? Sitting on it is pragmatic?!?


There's lots of other industries which would otherwise be
profitable, except they're regulated by the government.

And some of us have taken the first step in doing something about it.
We've bailed from the 2 corrupt parties and are supporting the parties
who wish to do more. Join us!

-
The advantage of exercising every day is that you die healthier.
------------
http://diversify.com Dynamic Websites, PHP Apps, MySQL databases