3 Comments

Let me think about it. I wouldn't want cryptic comments made during an interview to interfere with the DOE's good-faith attempt to solve the puzzle.

Expand full comment

Mike: The DOE has recently embarked on a $16 million dollar quest to define "consent" and to find communities that might agree to host a storage site for spent nuclear fuel. I applaud this latest, well-funded attempt by the federal government to define and secure consent for a spent nuclear fuel storage site, whether it's proximate to an existing facility or built hundreds of miles away from any reactor. While I commend them for undertaking this task and sincerely wish them all the luck in the world, I am not confident they will ultimately succeed. Having fought radioactive waste battles for most of my professional career, I believe we are a long way away from defining what consent even means. I'll be pleased if they prove me wrong.

Expand full comment
author

Rick, I feel that your experience and others who worked for (and against) over decades would be very valuable and very instructive for both industry and govt officials engaged in these challenging tasks. That was the reason for the poll in the article. I’d like to perform a series of interviews for the “Texas Pioneers of Consent-Based Siting.”

Are you interested?

Expand full comment