> 
> Part of the cost-effectiveness equation is liability. Do some research on
> the effects of the Chernobyl incident. Then transpose those effects to a
> heavily populated area like Southern California and you can see why nobody
> wants to take on the responsibility, legally or ethically.

Huh? You can't transpose Chernobyl to ANYWHERE in the US. We don't build 
graphite-shielded reactors here. If you want to see what a 98% meltdown 
looks like HERE, check out 3 mile island. THAT'S a worst-case scenario.

As for the Yucca Mt. foolishness, I think that any program that has even the
> slightest possibility of poisoning the entire American Southwest, Mexico 
> and
> the western coastal waters of the Americas should be an obvious no-go.

Vitrified (mixed with molted glass) waste doesn't leach out, so it CAN'T 
poison the "entire American Southwest". A 5-ton blob of glass buried under a 
mountain is far safer than the NATURAL radon gas leaking into basements all 
across the country.