Quoting

"Quote Sandwich"

Regarding the massive expenses of a storage facility for nuclear waste, Muller proclaims that, "the cost of the facility is expected to reach $100 billion, with hundreds of billions of dollars more in operating costs" (Muller 207). The expense of storing nuclear waste is outrageous, and Muller takes a valid and respectable stand against spending such ungodly amounts of money on storage. If we could have taken the money we will be spending and allocate it to other departments or causes, just imagine all the good it could have accomplished. Yet instead we are forced into wasting billions on simply storing waste that we created in the first place.

"Group Wiki Project"

“Nuclear Waste” by Richard A. Muller brings to the surface the issue of disposing nuclear waste. He portrays the problem by giving many examples of the harmful effects and the social responsibility that comes with using this alternate source of power. Problems ranging from the presidents agenda, the fear that it brings to the public, and the massive amount of money spent on it. The dilemma of alternate fuel sources is a main topic around the world. It is brought up in many political debates and is a constant issue the president is trying to find a solution for. Muller agrees when he writes, “Nuclear waste is one of the biggest technical issues that any future president is likely to face” (Muller 206). Muller’s point is that the issue of a nuclear waste is a very pressing and sticky matter and will be one of the most important topics the president has to address. Nuclear waste is a controversial issue that society is dealing with today. Muller observes “the paradox of public safety. Raise the standards, increase the safety, do more research, study the problem in greater depth, and in the process you will improve safety and frighten the public” (Muller 213). In other words, Muller believes that since this problem causes so much debate and emotion, scientists are trying to come up with more solutions, which then lead to new revelations and thus instilling new fears into the public. Regarding the massive expenses of a storage facility for nuclear waste, Muller proclaims that, "the cost of the facility is expected to reach $100 billion, with hundreds of billions of dollars more in operating costs" (Muller 207). The expense of storing nuclear waste is outrageous, and Muller takes a valid and respectable stand against spending such ungodly amounts of money on storage. If we could have taken the money we will be spending and allocate it to other departments or causes, just imagine all the good it could have accomplished. Yet instead we are forced into wasting billions on simply storing waste that we created in the first place. In conclusion, Muller takes a brave stance against nuclear waste and helps the readers open their eyes to the severity of the problem. This issue is very large and needs to be dealt with safely and swiftly in order to avoid a catastrophe. The President needs to take more time on his agenda to address this issue. The public needs to take a bigger stance against this problem. And the government needs to search for alternate, less expensive ways to deal with the waste. If these objectives are not realized soon then the U.S will soon be facing a bigger problem then they can handle.