[NukeNet] Need Arguments Against Vitrification and Transmutation

[Mike Ewall]

Does someone have good arguments written up about why nuclear waste 
vitrification and/or transmutation are not good ideas?

I recall hearing about failed vitrification experiments at West 
Valley, NY... something about the glass logs cracking?  Also, it 
seems that vitrification only contaminates more materials, increasing 
the volume.  I understand that some are promoting vitrification for 
plutonium-containing waste, as a counter-proliferation strategy.  Is 
there any reason to promote it for nuclear waste in general?  I know 
some who ARE promoting that, and it seems like a really bad idea, but 
I could use details.

I know little about transmutation, but doesn't that also require a 
chemical process to separate isotopes before trying to transmute 
them?  Wouldn't this also ultimately increase the volume of toxic and 
radioactive wastes?

Mike