------- Forwarded message follows -------
···
To: vpFREE@yahoogroups.com
BCC to:
From: "pesach kremen" <royalflush2222@hotmail.com>
Date sent: Sat, 06 Nov 2004 00:55:21 -0800
Subject: RE: [vpFREE] Re: XVP: Nevada nuclear waste dump
Some truth here, but even if the land is dry, are their aquifers
beneath it, what is the usual atnospheric circulation, what is the
movement of the pacific and north american plates beneath the site
(tectonics), what will weathering and climate do? these need to be
examined at all possible waste sites by impartial parties prior to
making a decision. it shouldn't be political!
From: "rockofjello333" <rockofjello333@yahoo.com>
Reply-To: vpFREE@yahoogroups.com
To: vpFREE@yahoogroups.com
Subject: [vpFREE] Re: XVP: Nevada nuclear waste dump
Date: Fri, 05 Nov 2004 01:11:33 -0000--- In vpFREE@yahoogroups.com, "diversified_slave"
<diversified_slave@y...> wrote:
>
> Hope you can still do the Republican cheer when all the nuclear
(not
> nuculer) waste in the country is in Nevada. God help America.Uh....have you ever driven across Nevada, either north-south or east-
west? There's more useless. empty land here than anywhere else in the
US. Nevada is the IDEAL place for a nuclear waste dump IMHO.Doesn't it make sense to store the stuff in the driest, most
geologically stable, and emptiest place in the US? If it's a hundred
and fifty miles away from me and a mile underground, I don't think
it'll affect me much. The Yucca Mountain "issue" is only an issue for
those that don't understand basic science.(The other day, I heard some impassioned blather from someone who
was vehemently opposed to the Yuccs Mountain waste dump because of the
grave danger it would pose to the health of Nevada residents. When he
was finished bloviating, he lit up a cigarette.)