In Richard A. Muller’s “Nuclear Waste”, he discusses the problem with left over nuclear waste and how it is causing headaches for scientists and politicians. The University of California at Berkeley professor agrees that nuclear waste does present a threat to our well being, but also states that society assumes there is a much larger danger than actually exists. Muller does a great job at proving his point by explaining how nuclear waste is not a forever lasting danger and by also providing alternative methods of storing the waste. Regardless of whether one supports the development of nukes, Muller mentions that this waste already exists and a solution must be made for it. Sending the waste off into the sun may backfire if a space ship encounters technical difficulties. One possible idea that the author seems to be a big fan of is storing it in Yucca Mountain. …show more content…
Many fear that the high number of earthquakes in the region could cause a possible leakage. This would most definitely harm not only our environment but also eventually infiltrate our drinking water. What if a big earthquake released a portion of the nuclear waste before we could contain it again? This is where Muller does a great job of explaining to the reader that more research must go into leakage prevention rather than absolute containment. Muller uses mathematics and science to show how we have the possibility of being exposed to less radioactivity with the toxic waste, than if we never dug the uranium up in the first place. He shows his readers that after 300 years, the radioactivity would be much lower than at first. The question for Muller is, is there a 1% chance that a large enough earthquake will release 100% of the nuclear waste? If not, then the radio activity levels of the waste are lower than that of the original uranium that was in the