LETTERS: National lab should accompany Yucca

To the editor:

I read with great interest Rep. Cresent Hardy’s op-ed on having a discussion of potential benefits associated with restarting the Yucca Mountain Project (“Could Nevadans ever allow nuclear dump?” March 22 Review-Journal). If there is to be such a discussion, I have a suggestion: No. 1 on the list of potential benefits should be establishing a Department of Energy national laboratory in Southern Nevada.

The DOE already has a number of national laboratories associated with existing nuclear facilities, in places such as Los Alamos, N.M., Oak Ridge, Tenn., and in Washington, California and Idaho.

Full disclosure: I am not an unbiased observer. I worked on the Yucca Mountain Project for 19 years in a variety of positions, and I was the lead for the contractor team that wrote the postclosure chapters of the license application that DOE submitted to the Nuclear Regulatory Commission in 2008. Our author team included a number of senior scientists from existing DOE labs.

The Yucca Mountain Project supported an extensive and detailed technical program for years. This program included data collection and technical analyses in a broad spectrum of technical disciplines. The work included cutting-edge research in disciplines ranging from unsaturated zone hydrology to corrosion science. DOE laboratories, scattered all over the country, were involved in much of this work. If the project were restarted, work in most, or perhaps all, of these disciplines would continue for decades.

A DOE lab in Southern Nevada could lead and coordinate the work that would be required in coming decades. Such a lab could bring technical expertise to Southern Nevada that can be obtained in no other way. It could provide the impetus for an important diversification of the economy. It is hard to predict the potential impact of bringing such a range of technical experts into the area. Their work would undoubtedly encompass more than just Yucca Mountain-related problems.

The state of Nevada should insist that any future technical work conducted for the Yucca Mountain Project be conducted and/or coordinated by scientists and engineers working at a DOE lab located in Southern Nevada. This is a benefit that could have a very large positive impact on the state for decades to come.

RALPH ROGERS

LAS VEGAS

Smoking and casinos

To the editor:

I was very disappointed about how Howard Stutz felt New Orleans’ going smoke-free would impact Caesars Entertainment (“New Orleans smoking ban deals new blow to Caesars,” March 18 Review-Journal). Mr. Stutz stated, “Still, hasn’t Caesars Suffered enough?” No, Mr. Stutz.

Haven’t casino workers suffered enough? Jan Jones Blackhurst, Caesars Entertainment’s senior vice president of public affairs, went to New Orleans to seek an exemption to going smoke-free. It’s OK for all other employees to be protected, but not the casino workers. That seems to be the prevailing opinion of all the casinos, not just Caesars Entertainment.

Going smoke-free is first and foremost a health and safety issue. Secondhand smoke is a dangerous workplace hazard. Throughout history, we have amended workplace safety practices when known hazards persist. In the early 1900s, there were no safety harnesses or hard hats for construction workers. Before handguards were mandatory on punch-press machines, many fingers and hands were lopped off. Casino workers are the only ones who are supposed to just accept smoking, knowing it will harm them.

Opponents to smoke-free laws always say that those laws will hurt profits. How much are our lives worth? Where’s the break-even point for them to care if we live or die? Adding insult to injury, the numbers they use for justifying an exemption are either highly misleading or completely made up. History shows that businesses thrive after going smoke-free. Theaters, airlines, hotels, restaurants and bars all said it would kill business. It hasn’t.

Back in the “Mad Men” era, the bullpen where journalists banged out the copy for the day was thick of cigar and cigarette smoke. The exact same scenario occurred in other business offices.

Now, we realize such an atmosphere is too dangerous for the workers, and we require smokers to light up outside. So I ask Mr. Stutz and the honorable former mayor of Las Vegas, Ms. Jones Blackburn, if it is too much of a health hazard to smoke in your offices, why is it OK to smoke in mine?

JOHN W. MCDONNELL

LAS VEGAS

The writer is a casino worker and founder of Smoke-Free NV.