- Erika Stutzman: Changes to our online letters policy
- Susan Marine: House Bill 1140 to help prevent suicide
- Tim Hogan: Free birth control and the U.S. Conference of Catholic Bishops
- Andi Jason and David Simon: Support House Bill 1140 for hospitals to provide information about suicide
- David R. Guilinger: Contraception controversy
- February 2012
- January 2012
- December 2011
- November 2011
- October 2011
- September 2011
- August 2011
- July 2011
- June 2011
- May 2011
- April 2011
- March 2011
- February 2011
- January 2011
- December 2010
- November 2010
- October 2010
- September 2010
- August 2010
- July 2010
- June 2010
- May 2010
- April 2010
- March 2010
- February 2010
- January 2010
- December 2009
- November 2009
- October 2009
- September 2009
- August 2009
- July 2009
- June 2009
- May 2009
- April 2009
- gold ira on Edd Doerr: Personhood amendment: Personhood begins at birth
- cheap christian louboutin on Cheri Felix: The Thanksgiving Project
- winter coats on Elisabeth Borden: Diverse housing needs for seniors
- Mackenzie Verran on Charles Proudfit: Shame on the Boulder Police
- Charli Matra on Kent Brown: Political parties move us forward or backward
Monthly Archives: June 2010
I am writing in support of Senator Michael Bennet. Senator Bennet is a decent man who is motivated to serve as our senator by a genuine concern that we could be the first generation to leave our country – economically, environmentally, socially and possibly even diplomatically- in worse condition than it was when we stepped into our leadership role. He believes it is time for a serious course correction, time to put the common good and our common future foremost as a yardstick for considering whether any solution measures up as the right approach to the complicated problems we face on each of these fronts.
Senator Bennet is not a glib, celebrity politician. He is a smart, unassuming hard worker willing to do his very best for Colorado today and for our children’s generation. His approach to problems is thoughtful and reasoned, all the more important because the issues we face don’t have simple solutions. I encourage you to learn more about his record and to cast your vote for him in August if you are a registered Democrat and again in November regardless of your party affiliation.
It occurred to me that while reading Joe Rubino’s article, “Boulder Creek Open for Business”, from Wednesday, Jun 23, 2010, that again, commerce trumped natural resources. While it’s thoughtful of the Camera to promote and essentially offer free advertising to the businesses that rent intertubes and let everyone know that the creek is “open for business” again, I wish someone would mention how fragile the area around Boulder Creek is. It is a treasure to be sure, and I’m always saddened at how trashed it is after every weekend, and especially in the Fall. Wouldn’t it be wonderful if those who have profited by selling tubes were to organize a fall cleanup of the area, and give back to the area? We who are fortunate to live by Boulder Creek feel under siege in the summer when it’s tubing season, and can barely access our homes on a Sunday afternoon …while many who come to enjoy cooling off are considerate and clean up after themselves, there are so many who do not, and who park in residents’ private parking as well as other parking that is not permitted. Tubers exiting vehicles parked too close to the road pose a danger to themselves and to motorists…and cause traffic to slow to a crawl.Every summer I hold my breath, waiting for a big accident as some tuber carrying several tubes casually strolls across 119.
> Please, tubers, enjoy yourselves, but be safe and most importantly, CLEAN UP after yourselves and be considerate of residents!
Boulder Continue reading
I’ve lived in Boulder County for the past 20 years but my wife and I moved to the City of Boulder last year. We live in a big house with our three children, two dogs and occasionally my step parents. I drive a truck, my wife drives a SUV and we both drive to work each day. Some would say my carbon footprint is as big as my convenience score. Before anyone lashes out in retribution to our lifestyle we do everything we can to recycle and we are making additional environmental changes in our personal lives. One of my co-workers told me that he heard that it’s a City of Boulder law (Boulder City Council Approved) that when you move into the City of Boulder you must buy a bike and ride it whenever possible in place of your automobile. I did not know if this was true but he guiltily me into buying a bike last week. My wife strongly suggested (that means do it or else) for me to buy a helmet so now I’m all set to join my fellow Boulderites in Ride Your Bike to Work Day. I got up early, packed my bag with my work clothes and realized there is no place on my bike for me to set my coffee. By the way, do not try putting hot coffee into a plastic water bottle. Very excited, off I went on my first three mile bike adventure to work. I’m pretty familiar with the rules of the road when it comes to driving a car and where cyclist should ride in the City of Boulder so I stayed in my lane however that was not the case with a few automobiles that I encountered. Look, I like contact sports and played several in my days growing up but this is not a fair fight. Having automobiles 6-12 inches from my left hand shoulder – let’s just say this made me a little uncomfortable. In one instance, I could clearly see myself in the side view mirror of someone’s automobile. Unfortunately I do not think this is what they are intended for. I thought if I can just make it to the Boulder Creek Path I’ll be home free. Are you kidding me – the Boulder Creek Path was insane! I almost got hit by two different cyclists and one of these had a baby stroller attached. Once again, I know I was in my lane because I had several professional cyclist (at least that what they looked liked) whizzing past me on my left. They must have been training for the Tour De Boulder coming up in the near future. I finally got to work, unpacked my wrinkled clothes, drank some mystery potion call coffee and tried to get my heart rate down. The experience of riding to work was so enjoyable I left at lunch time and road home to get my truck. Yes, I know it defeated the purpose of Ride Your Bike to Work Day but there’s something to be said in staying alive while getting to and from work. I’ll take my chances driving.
PS. FYI –Just so you know I found out it’s not a City of Boulder law to buy and ride a bike in Boulder.
Boulder Continue reading
I have listened to the voices for and against the proposed Wilderness. What has struck me are the egocentric reasons behind the rationalizations opposing this wilderness plan. I think we need to step out of our own realities and accept our responsibilities as stewards of our mountains, our country, and our planet.
Our mountains: As our population continues to grow, we need to realize is that we are not alone; others live here. We need to respect our biodiversity; indeed we need to grow up, not out. We are only passing through. If the oil spill in the gulf teaches us anything, it is that we cannot take what we have for granted without forethought and care.
Our country: America is what it is because of the land, the wildness. Americans grow up with a can do attitude because they have a place to test themselves, a place that makes them think outside the box of society. The American spirit, the American heart is there because of the land. Not everyone can touch it, but all Americans know that we are not settled; we are wild, brave, and unstoppable because we have this place called home that keeps that spirit alive.
Our Planet: The North American continent and the planet are alive and moving. It is home to massive wildlife and human migrations annually. We need to recognize and acknowledge that we are just a part of this planet. We are entering a new time in the history of the world. Let us step up and control our unending wants and desires. Let us step up and say that here and now we accept our planet and care for it as we should and as we can.
The Hidden Gems wilderness proposal is one small step in caring for our mountains, our country and our planet. Our children’s children will respect us more, and thank us for our wisdom and our gift. Let us think of something bigger than our own selfish desires. We should all support the Hidden Gems and urge our leaders to do the same.
Curtis H. Green
In America, we take pride in our vast landscapes, natural parks, coastlines and waterways. Yet despite all we’ve been given, we have so much to lose if lawmakers don’t take immediate action to address the real danger posed by global climate change. Pollution from dirty energy sources is warming our climate and threatening human health. Continued inaction will only jeopardize the air our children breathe and the water they drink.
We can do better. Let’s invest in clean, renewable energy, one of the world’s fastest growing industries. Investments in wind, solar and energy efficiency can create up to 1.9 million jobs nationwide. For the sake of our nation’s future, let’s protect our environment, our health and our way of life.
Boulder Continue reading
In light of Congressman Joe Barton’s (R – Texas) recent heartfelt apology to British Petroleum for the Obama administration’s gall in demanding that they pay to clean up the mess they made, I would like to offer my own humble, sincere apology to Her Majesty’s Government for the revolution we started in 1776.
Given the representation Mr. Barton is providing the folks in his district, I can understand that there are times when taxation without representation might not be such a bad idea after all.
Louisville Continue reading
To Daily Camera:
I am following up with a whole lot of agreement to Ellen Steiner’s letter about how “impossible” it was for me twice to get the bills into the payment machine at Park ‘N Ride. I wonder if it is only problematic at Table Mesa Park ‘N Ride because that is where I was as well. As the bus is about to pull out I had to leave the machine unpaid because it just didn’t accept my dollar bills or $5 bill or credit card. BUT I wrote down the “If problems exist with this machine call 303-292-1505″ number and I left a message and RTD called back two days into my trip and took the payment and license plate number with my credit card. And getting there early when the bus leaves for the airport at 4:30 AM is a little much. Make it easier RTD please.
Nederland Continue reading
First a woman in RMNP is attacked. Then, a woman fights off a man on Boulder’s very own trails. These attacks remind me why I got a dog: Dogs discourage human attackers. No need to worry if I’m going to fight him off; he’s already ruled me out as a target because Fido is by my side.
It saddens me every time Boulder’s OSMP decides to close a trail to dogs (even on-leash dogs) – it means another trail I can no longer safely visit; and so one I avoid. Long Canyon trail was my saddest loss as it closed a favorite (and already a relatively people & dog free) loop on Green Mountain’s north side.
Women in this county need to feel safe, and do to that, we need OSMP to stop closing trails to women who want to hike with their loyal protectors.
To the Editor:
Last week, I was almost run over twice, both times by young women driving big black SUVs, and on their cell phone or texting. Once at the Twenty-ninth street mall near the Apple Store, and once in the King Sooper’s parking lot on 30th. Both times, I was crossing in an official crossing zone, with white zebra stripes on the street & big yellow signs in advance and in the middle of the crossing zone about pedestrians crossing. Both women just kept on driving right toward me at about 35 MPHs, and I had to literally run out of their way! I could see what they were doing (cell/texting), as they passed within inches of me. They never even looked back. Totally in their own “zone”, and unaware of anyone or anything else. I wish I’d gotten their license plate #s, as I had witnesses both times. I would have been killed or maimed if I had not run out of their way, What if I had been expecting them to actually stop for a pedestrian? Or if it had been a kid, or a mom with a baby stroller in the crossing? Or an elderly lady/gent who couldn’t run? A blind or handicapped person? A person walking their dog on a leash? Or even someone crossing while on their cell phone or texting? My advice (other than moving to the Australian Outback and living off the grid) is to keep your eyes open, watch for cars, never expect them to stop for you, try to make eye-contact with the driver, and be ready to run out of their way. Get the license-plate number, and call the police to report it. What if it was against the law in Colorado to talk on a cell phone or text while driving? These people who drive while talking on a cell phone or texting are as “out of it” as drunk drivers are!
Boulder Continue reading
Bob Greenlee’s disdain for the small people of Boulder was never better illustrated than in his suggestion (Sunday, June 20) that we leave our energy acquisition policies and decisions to the “experts” at Xcel. These are the same experts who built a billion-dollar coal-fired power plant in Pueblo (Comanche 3) with a projected 60-year operating life without bothering to assess the availability and cost of the fuel necessary to run it. Evidently, we small people have deep enough pockets to absorb any slight errors in Xcel’s guesswork (not research-based calculations) on the price of coal, such as the recent revelation that their fuel costs are now, in 2010, at the level they projected for the year 2035.
Furthermore, to label Boulder’s decarbonization efforts as “social engineering” is nothing more than a transparent attempt to slap an inflammatory political label on responsible and realistic planning for the future. A better example of social engineering is allowing a powerful monopoly to determine the quality of the air we breathe, the sources of the energy we use, and whether or not our community will assume a position of leadership as our nation attempts to move away from its destructive and unsustainable fossil-fuel dependency. As the disaster in the Gulf has so painfully demonstrated, business-as-usual in the energy business just isn’t good enough.
Boulder Continue reading
Gov Ritter has suggested that we not eat meat because “animals exhale CO2″. Why is he saying that? This is a sincere question. I do not know the answer.
It seems to me that if all the animals that the governor objects to were killed, the plant matter they had been eating would still become CO2 because microorganisms in the soil would decompose those plants into CO2 when they died.
The only way to block that would be to keep dead plants matter very very dry or transform it into coal or plastic or something like that. And even that has its limits. For example there are bacteria that can consume coal. Plastic is perhaps the most durable.
And fixing CO2 like this as plastic or something could create problems. CO2 concentration is one of the factors determining the rate of plant growth. It’s certainly not the only factor or necessarily the most limiting at every point in time but it is an important one. And the growth response to CO2 can be geometric: the more CO2, the more plant growth and the more plant growth the more plant growth. If plant growth slows enough it will be even harder to remover CO2 from the atmosphere. Also don’t forget that plants produce oxygen.
Louisville Continue reading
Neil Woelk’s love-fest with Mike Bohn and the CU athletic department reached new levels in Sunday’s Camera. Neil does get one thing right when he suggests reinstating men’s tennis. It took less than 1% of the athletic department’s budget to run this program and produce student athletes with a 3.2 combined GPA while the rest of the student athletes hovered around 2.8. Let’s not forget that when this program was cut by Bohn and the Regents it was in the top 25 in the country. Neil suggests a “commitment from administration and faculty”. How about the $8 million loan commitment already floated to the Athletic Department in 2007? Where are we with repaying that loan Neil? How about the unexpected cut of Men’s Tennis in 2006 to pay for the budget difference Bohn and his assistant Tom McGrath (a new position at that time) brought to CU? In addition, 300 donors raised $600,000 in 60 days to try to save the program in 2006. Now that was a commitment! Oh, but wait, Bohn turned down these funds (almost 2 years of operating expenses) WITHOUT EVER TALKING TO THE DONORS. Maybe Mike Bohn isn’t ready to support the sport of a lifetime. Maybe Neil Woelk has forgotten about the $8 million leveraged by the unjust and unwarranted elimination of men’s tennis in 2006. Where is the Athletic Department’s commitment, Neil? Reinstate Men’s Tennis!
Louisville Continue reading
In light of the recent assault on a lone woman hiking in RMNP, I’d like to express my views on the role of dogs on Open Space. It may sound odd describing dogs on Open Space as having a “role”, but as a woman who hikes and runs alone, having my dog as companion dramatically changes how I enjoy the trails. The dog’s ability to range further than the end of a leash gives me the pleasure of watching him take in all sights, smells, and more importantly alert me to that which isn’t obvious to my senses. Judging by the number of women I encounter running or hiking by themselves, I can’t help but wonder if they feel more secure having their dog keeping track of all that is around them.
I’m struck by the lack of awareness by Open Space to the large segment of people who enjoy a similar relationship with their dogs. Access to trails allowing dogs seems destined to shrink, despite public wishes to the contrary. We are all aware of the image Boulder likes to project as that of an outdoor paradise that offers something for everyone.
The reality for me remains one of feeling safe while enjoying the fruits of my tax dollars.
Boulder Continue reading
The Washington Post editorial on nuclear waste from nuclear power reactors in the Camera on Tuesday, June 15, is woefully naive. It focuses on the fact that there is no geological disposal, “in which waste would be sequestered safely and permanently underground,” and still assumes the viability of nuclear power, if only there were a place to put the waste. It acknowledges the 49,000 tons of nuclear waste from nuclear power plants stored in “densely compacted cooling ponds not meant to house such waste for more than five years,” that the US has simmering near reactors across the nation. There is absolutely no place to get rid of it, let alone somewhere to put waste from new generators. Every cooling pond is a potential target for terrorism.
The editorial calls for the use of technology that exists for “stable, dry containers for aboveground waste that can protect these volatile materials with layers of concrete and earthen berms.” But there exists far better technology, HOSS, hardened on-site storage for the high-level radioactive waste stored at power plants across the U.S., which is what we should use. More importantly, to lessen the problem of nuclear waste storage into the future we must stop the whole absurdly costly, dangerous, dirty, unpredictable process of nuclear power itself because it generates waste for which we have no solution. Additionally, just as nuclear waste is a byproduct of nuclear power, so too is the deadly problem of nuclear weapons proliferation.
Watching the BP executives being grilled by Congress and knowing the emerging facts of the Gulf oil catastrophe, puts one in mind of nuclear power executives being grilled after a reactor accident, because accidents there will be. The nuclear industry is more than 50 years old and its history is replete with a colossal financial disaster and a multitude of near-misses as well as catastrophic accidents like Three Mile Island and Chernobyl. To want more of any of this is naïve.
Boulder Continue reading
I disagree with Cara Anderson’s letter (June 21) in support of Romaoff for
the upcoming Senate primary race.
I am suspicious of any candidate who blatantly refuses to take ANY corporate
money. To rebuff such an important part of our society only reveals how
blindly ideological and partisan he is. Demonizing people and institutions
is a far greater threat to democracy than corporations are.
Boulder Continue reading
What does a Deadhead who has run out of pot say? (“Man, this music sucks!”)
I offer perhaps a different take on “medical” marijuana, and marijuana use in general: If it is legalized, what are they going to do with all the people, mostly black, who languish in prison for pot offenses?
Why is a harmless substance, one that most of us have used, illegal? Is it to control supply? The weed is plentiful and easy to get, now as always. Is it for public health? Unless being laid back and maybe saying “duuuude!” to often is unhealthy, that cannot be it. Is it for the children? As every former child knows, prohibition merely adds to the allure.
The answer, in my view, is that marijuana laws are a lever that law enforcement uses to control minorities. Blacks and Hispanics are nails, and marijuana laws are the hammer.
Anyone who is white and even modestly affluent is in no danger of being busted for pot. Otherwise, look out.
Mark Tokarski, CPA
As a visitor and a long-time cyclist, I have to express my pleasure with the extensive facilities and the generally courteous demeanor of the motorists in the Boulder area. As a Texas resident, I should also say I appreciate the moderate temperatures here at this time. I still marvel at the number of riders I encounter on the surrounding roads when I go out for my rides. It is disconcerting, therefor, to read opinions of the nature of E. B. Thomas’s last Sunday, who apparently would prefer cyclists not use the roads and highways at all.
I won’t argue with his remarks on those cyclists who violate traffic laws. I ride thousands of miles a year, many of those in Dallas proper, and I didn’t survive that by ignoring the rules of safe driving. But most traffic codes treat the cyclist as the operator of a vehicle, with the same rights and responsibilities as the motorist, with a few logical exceptions. It is nice to have bike lanes on some of the busy thoroughfares, but they still create awkward situations, particularly at intersections. I am more comfortable with making my left turns with traffic, than becoming a sort of pedestrian. And the bike paths are great for a leisurely jaunt around town, but they’re less suitable for the fast rider. So the recreational cyclist, the long distance tourer, the boy racer, they have to hit the roads. Some of the roads here have lovely, smooth shoulders to ride on, but many don’t. A shoulder less than three feet wide is insufficient for safe riding. The shoulders, and the bike lanes, accumulate sand and gravel, broken glass, bits of metal, and other hazardous debris. And in this economic climate they are seldom swept. Statistically, only about ten percent of serious and deadly cycling accidents involve collisions with motorists. Road hazards and loss of control cause many more accidents. On shoulderless roads, the safest place is in the right-hand tire track, as the closer to the edge of the road the cyclist gets, the more he seems to encourage too-close passing by motorists. The cyclist also has to have room to avoid holes or objects in his path that would be insignificant to the motorist. When multiple lanes exist, most traffic codes allow cyclists to ride two-abreast, unless traffic conditions would cause congestion.
Without reasonable access to our roads, commuting would be impossible. I certainly couldn’t have enjoyed my sight-seeing trip last weekend up to Masonville. And racing for cyclists would be driven indoors. No more Lance Armstrongs would be produced to thrill sports fans in this country. We need to keep the roads open, now more than ever. What we need is for cyclists and motorists alike to give up their attitude of entitlement and to replace it with an appreciation of privilege.
Letter to the Editor,
In their Guest Commentary of 620/10, Doctors Steve Federico and Sue Townsend tell the story of one more family’s ensnarement in the twists of our country’s health care financing. We will continue to hear and experience such stories till we realize there is one fiscally responsible way to pay for our health care – including everyone in a single public system.
Over the last 40 years the number of health care administrators we’ve employed has increased by a factor of 30 – 3,000%! The number of doctors has doubled. We have a chaotic mix of 17,000 private insurance policies, with government propping things up by financially supporting 60% of health care costs through tax deductions, Medicare, Medicaid, SCHIP, VA, the Federal Employees Health Benefit Plans, Federally Qualified Health Care Centers, and other programs. Soon to come are health insurance exchanges in each state and subsidies and mandates to purchase coverage – more bureaucracy that we can’t afford; and still we’ll not all be covered.
Many other countries cover all their citizens and spend on average 60% of what we do, with better outcomes to boot and no one going bankrupt due to medical expenses. Our health care reform debate has been portrayed as a tug of war between those who want to guarantee coverage for everyone and those who want to control costs. The truth is we can significantly control costs but that is only by including everyone in a single public system. It’s both the moral and the fiscally responsible thing to do.
Bill Semple, LCSW
Boulder Continue reading
I was saddened to read comments by CU Spokesman Bronson Hilliard and CU Director for Student Success David Aragon in Monday’s article entitled “CU showing slow minority growth”. In response to CU Boulder’s low minority numbers when compared to various other secondary education institutions, Hilliard reportedly stated, “to compare the numbers of a high-quality research institution like CU to those of institutions of various calibers is like comparing apples to oranges … I just can’t do that.” This might suggest to some that because CU is a ‘high-quality’ institution it might have the right to be whiter than other ‘low-quality’ schools. Aragon seems to echo this sentiment when he attributes “low diversity to the high standards of CU and the demographic challenges provided by lack of minorities in the state.” Of course, there are many ethnic groups that are not well represented in Colorado, but according to the US Census Bureau (www.quickfacts.census.gov), 20.2% of the Colorado population consists of people of Hispanic or Latino origin compared with a national average of 15.4%. How can Aragon justify making such a comment while equating low diversity to high standards at the same time? CU has more Caucasian students than average because it has high standards and is a high-quality institution? I strongly disagree with this argument and think that it could easily be misinterpreted. I feel that both of these administrators are missing the point, setting up an unjustifiable defense for CU’s low minority statistics, and forgetting about one of the basic missions of a university. A university is supposed to be ‘universal’ in order to provide a unique, varied, well-rounded experience to its student body. With minorities lacking, this experience is compromised and this high-quality institution looses some of its essential value.
Boulder Continue reading
The editorial, “Nuclear wasteland,” reprinted from the Washington Post in Tuesday’s Daily Camera, leaves out some important information. I would like to provide that information as a retired nuclear reactor scientist with some experience in nuclear waste disposal.
The editorial states, “Nuclear reprocessing as a concept has been around for more than 50 years, but the technology remains problematic.” Not so much. The French have been doing it successfully at their site in La Hague since 1976.
The article also states, “Even when successful, [reprocessing] leaves a radioactive byproduct that must be disposed of.” That is true, but it is a different kind of byproduct. Spent nuclear fuel assemblies, which were to be buried at Yucca Mountain, contain activated structure (which is not high-level waste), fission products, unused fuel, and transuranics that develop in the fuel as a result of absorption of some of the neutrons from the chain reaction. The most important transuranic is plutonium-239, which the French process extracts from the spent fuel for use in new fuel assemblies. The half-life of plutonium-239 is 24,000 years. If spent fuel is buried without reprocessing, it must be isolated from the biosphere for about a half-million years (20 half-lives of plutonium-239) to protect public and environmental health. It is difficult to promise such long isolation confidently. If plutonium is removed from the waste form, the remaining nuclides are either so short-lived that they become nonradioactive quickly or so long-lived that they are not very radioactive. In about 1000 years, the waste form will be no more radioactive than natural uranium. So reprocessing offers a way to make the required isolation time hundreds of times shorter, reduces the volume of waste to be buried, and makes use of a valuable energy resource that would otherwise be thrown away.
Objections are sometimes made to reprocessing on the grounds of nuclear weapons proliferation, but the French experience shows that any such issues can be addressed. If a country wants to develop nuclear weapons, there are easier ways to go about it than reprocessing power reactor fuel, and if terrorists want a nuclear weapon, recycled reactor-grade plutonium is a poor choice for reasons of physics.
More sophisticated reprocessing techniques are available that would also remove unused uranium for use in breeder reactors. A system of breeder reactors to make plutonium fuel for ordinary reactors, coupled with on-site reprocessing, would extend the nuclear fuel resource by as much as a hundredfold.
Some readers will gasp at the mention of plutonium, which has been claimed to be the most toxic substance known to man. That claim is a myth, and it is absolutely false. Many common substances are more toxic than plutonium. See http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Plutonium#Toxicity and http://www.fortfreedom.org/p22.htm.
The high-level waste remaining after reprocessing will have to be disposed of, and geologic disposal is the most practical way. A variant of this is subseabed disposal, in which the waste packages would be dropped in muck in four-mile-deep water at a known location of very stable geology. As the waste package sank in 300-foot-deep muck, the muck would close around it and isolate it from the ocean water. In the muck, the water is very low in dissolved oxygen, and corrosion of the waste packages would not occur on a relevant timescale.
In my personal opinion, it is good that Yucca Mountain was not opened years ago, receiving large amounts of spent fuel from then on. That would have made the energy resource contained in it difficult to retrieve. Eventually, geologic disposal of nuclear waste will be necessary, but not of unreprocessed spent fuel.
Longmont Continue reading