Reader responds to Yucca Mountain letter
I read the letter “Insights on Yucca Mountain” and while I like the author’s conclusions, I have to argue that the “incinerator” idea may not be a good choice. First off, only a small amount of radioactive waste could be burned, work gloves, coveralls, etc., but even then the act of incineration would only release the microscopic radioactive particles into the air to cause more widespread problems.
Better to shred, pulp, and encase in concrete I would think.
But let’s talk about radiation and the overall need to isolate and shield the emitting waste. In short, certain unstable elements will “shed” excess nuclear particles in the form of radiation and for those isotopes with a long half-life the amount of radiation is not nearly as dangerous as that coming from isotopes with a short half-life.
Half-life is a measure of how long it takes to lose half of the starting mass; if it’s spread out over hundreds of years it’s more acceptable than if it throws out high-density radiation over a short period of time.
We need something like Yucca Mountain to act as a shield to stop the high energy radioactive emissions from items like spent nuclear fuel rods. I don’t care for the idea of filling a repository with stuff like used gloves, Coveralls, and that sort of radioactive waste, preferring instead to see primarily the short half-life waste encapsulated and stored away until it has degraded into more harmless forms. The problem is that the used clothing has become polluted with high energy microscopic particles so we have to deal with that too.
Another thought is that the waste of today could become highly prized “ore” in the future. How would that change the economy in Nevada? How many of us could take home a federal salary if Yucca Mountain were to become operational?
James C. Patterson
PVT chided for publishing letter from non-local
Despite Pahrump residents’ annoyance, letters written from Stewart B. Epstein of New York and Pennsylvania continue to be printed in our local newspaper. I felt strongly that our newspaper was just one of probably hundreds, or even thousands, being used as his partisan sounding board.
My extensive computer search on Mr. Epstein did prove my suspicions. He writes on behalf of his political views to papers all over the country. He has no known interest or ties to Pahrump, other than humans live here to whom he feels are in need of his nebulous progressive ideology.
I am adding my vote to nixing this legal but vexing bombardment from a man writing from the east coast, using our towns and cities as his personal Facebook page. Every letter printed from Mr. Epstein is one less letter from a local citizen with interest in Pahrump. And yes, I would feel the same if his political diatribes were from the conservative perspective.
Editor’s note: The Pahrump Valley Times has readers near and far. We welcome all readers’ letters for consideration. A reader’s community of residence plays no role in whether his or her letter is considered for publication. To subscribe to the Pahrump Valley Times, call 775-727-5102. Mail subscriptions are available for readers outside of our delivery area.
Reader disagrees with former commissioner on President Trump
I am moved to say that I was astounded at the ignorance of some of Dan Schinhofen’s comments in his review of the president’s racist tweets.
He seems to think that nothing short of shouting the “N” word is racist, sexist, misogynist or simply offensive. Clearly, he needs to broaden his perspective and get out Nye County more often. I love living here but our isolation from urban areas can sometimes breed parochial views — like Schinhofen’s.
I suspect that people will view my comments as liberal or feminist, which is quite okay if they need to label me as such.
However, it must be remembered that the president not only picked these women as targets (they were not a “squad” until he did so), he lied about their beliefs, he trampled on their rights to free speech which they feel can improve our country for everyone, and he created a jingoistic atmosphere that’s just not helpful.
Schinhofen shows his ignorance in his opinion. He’s entitled to his opinion, certainly, as am I, and mine is that Schinhofen needs to learn a thing or two about what is and what is not divisive.
Are some new laws causing us to lose our rights?
Regarding “Red Flag”, which is now state law – does anyone realize this law violates our Bill of Rights and therefore is illegal? This law was signed by our governor after passing our state legislators. Why?
Red Flag means anyone can claim that anyone they have a dispute with has weapons and is a danger to society, and stay anonymous, thus causing police to get a search warrant from a judge to raid your, my, anyone’s home without proof.
So what are we to do when they come unannounced in early morning? We think it’s someone coming to rob us and we use the Second Amendment rights to defend ourselves. Naturally they will shoot us dead. This has already occurred back east.
I hope our elected law enforcement officials would not allow this to happen in our state’s counties. It would be nice to hear what our sheriffs and local judges would do.
Closed store always gave good customer service
On February 28th, Jewelry of Romance closed after many years of great service to our community. It was always a good experience going there and being treated so well, no matter what the problem, a battery or repair.
Let me tell you this: jewelry of Romance is open and has the same great service as before. Thank you, Laura, for re-opening this fine store. I highly recommend this to anyone needing their service.
Mueller’s report did not accomplish anything
One would assume, according to Mr. Stewart B. Epstein, only the news on the right are biased in their news coverage. While I agree there is bias on the right, there is at least equal or more on the left.
While I’m not a college professor and I don’t even own a sport coat with elbow patches, I am very, very capable of doing my own homework on issues that are important to me.
For example, the Mueller testimony was lacking in both the right and the left on one extremely important factor. Hearing Mr. Mueller repeatedly refer to so many questions as being “out of his purview”, even seemingly totally unaware of things like “Fusion GPS.”
Now any fair-minded person would recall the main focus of the entire special council was to determine “all” areas of Russian meddling, which any fair-minded agent would look at both horses.
As it turned out, only one horse got a thorough examination. Watching Mueller, he clearly looked confused much of the time, or lost, he didn’t seem very familiar with his own report.
One could easily conclude he was more of a figurehead than actually involved, which was driven by “investigators” whose main goal was to “get the president out of office by any means.”
I’m very sure if there was any real evidence to do so they certainly would have.
Just for practical purposes, I did not vote for Trump in 2016, but that does not mean I must join a Trump hatred group, fueled not by reason, only emotion.
Reader astounded by letter to editor
The letter by retired college professor Stewart B. Epstein published 7/26/2019 is astounding. The first paragraph is one sentence of 97 words. The second paragraph is one sentence of 108 words. The third paragraph is one sentence of 63 words. The fourth and final paragraphs is one sentence of 78 words followed by a second sentence of 10 words. I’m amazed that a college professor would construct such a letter for publication! In his formal education he seems to have avoided high school, college and graduate courses in English composition and writing.
I’m very interested in his topic – political conservatives – because I am one. He states that he is a liberal/progressive Democrat. Bless him. In his lengthy, passionate and convoluted anti-conservative rant he gives no facts to support his strong opinions. However, he said he has researched the issue, particularly conservative news media, and “would be thrilled to share his research.” I would like to see it. In writing. Hopefully with brevity.
Winston Churchill said, “If you’re not a liberal by twenty you have no heart, if you’re not a conservative by forty you have no brain.” To that I would add that the closer one is to the academic community — like Professor Epstein — the more likely one is a liberal Democrat. The closer one is to the business and military communities – like me — the more likely one is a conservative Republican. I was a registered Democrat for about twelve years after college. Then, upon serving in military and business communities I became a conservative Republican. It’s not only age but also dealing with life and the world away from academia changes one’s perceptions.
Bobby O. Edwards
Chaplain, Lt Col, USAF (retired)
Editor’s note: A count by the Pahrump Valley Times found slightly different totals for the first, second and fourth paragraphs.