Tuesday, Dec. 18, 2007 | 12:26 p.m.
Clinton has been an opponent, saying at an October Senate hearing that "Yucca Mountain is not a safe place to store spent fuel from our nation's nuclear reactors." She has said the fault lines and seismic activity in the area makes it unsafe. She said the containers that the waste would be stored in would have to be trusted not to rust for hundreds of thousands of years. She said the country does need to find a solution for storing nuclear waste, but Yucca Mountain is not the answer. Until a better solution is made, the country needs to make sure the waste is stored safely at the existing reactor sites. Clinton also voted in 2002 against a Senate bill that called for a nuclear dump at Yucca.
(Note: The Sun asked top tier Democratic candidates this question in October.)
All Democratic candidates oppose Yucca Mountain, but what’s your solution to solving the waste issue — and what’s your stance on nuclear power?
I’ve been against Yucca Mountain from the beginning, and I’m working with Harry Reid to try to starve it to death. When it comes to nuclear power, I’m an agnostic. We’ve got two big problems: What to do with waste? And how do we afford to build and maintain nuclear plants?
If we can deal with those two big question marks, I’m not against it. I’m just not sure it’s the most economical way to move toward renewable energy, which I think is essential to our national security, environment and economy.
YouTube video: At a Senate Environment and Public Works Hearing on Oct. 31, 2007, Clinton addressed the licensing process and the status of the Environmental Protection Agency's radiation standard for the Yucca Mountain nuclear waste repository.
Las Vegas Sun: Clinton, others weigh in against proposed Nevada nuclear dump (Oct. 31, 2007)
Las Vegas Sun: Brian Greenspun sees Yucca foe in Clinton (12-16-2007)
— Las Vegas Sun new media managing editor Dave Toplikar compiled this report