What do you think about " Yucca Mountain Repository"?

pros and cons Yucca Mountain Repository from a geologic, geographic, and climatic viewpoint

What do you think about " Yucca Mountain Repository"?
In addition to the excellent answer from geoweeg, Yucca Mountain is in the Great Basin, an area with a negative water balance. Water from the Great Basin does not escape to the sea.





However the area is tectonically active. Personally, I think a better permanent storage site would be at Whiteshell, Manitoba, Canada, where the rocks have been stable for over one billion years and extensive research has been done already.





Nobody wants it in their backyard, but its still a lot better than burning coal and dealing with millions of tons of radioactive toxic coal ash.
Reply:I think that this is about as good spot as you could find. It is in a very remote, sparsely populated area. The repository is 300 ft below the surface of the mountain, whereas the water table is at 800 ft below. The majority of the rocks in the area are welded tuff (solidified volcanic ash). The has a very low porosity and permeablity, and short of serious fractures, this is about as impervious an environment as you could find. The area has been tectonically stable for 500 thousand years, and there is nothing that would indicate renewed activity.





Finally, have the vitrified nuclear waste stored at this site is certainly better than having it scattered around the country in surface ponds at nuclear power plants.
Reply:Its better then being in my backyard.





Seriously though, no matter what humans do, it will always be wrong, if we burn oil or coal for energy, thats bad for the air, if we make wind turbines, they kill birds, wave power interferes with the ocean, on and on... Nothing we do is good enough for enviromentalists
Reply:Gotta do something with the stuff.