I attended many of the meetings associated with PG&E’s proposal to close Diablo Canyon. I was amazed at the lack of pushback by citizens and local business who depend on more than $1 billion that Diablo Canyon Power Plant brings to the region yearly. I expected loud wails of, “No, we’ll go broke! The plant brings over a billion dollars to the economy per year.”
But Americans seem a complying bunch lately. Kick us, mock us, take our money supporting our family and we whimper and crawl away, wounded.
This proposed closure of Diablo Canyon (by 2024-25) is all about one thing: selling more and more natural gas. The “fix” seems in nationally. Helping that industry played a role in the proposed closure of an Entergy Indian Point nuclear power plant reactor in New York, too. Politicians in Sacramento regularly get checks from this industry (campaign donations).
Wind and solar are pushed in Sacramento. Both need massive amounts of natural gas to back them up. Wind and solar contribute a pitiful 5 percent to national electricity. Nuclear makes up 20 percent of U.S. electricity (plus, it’s carbon free) using only 60 power plants out of more than 7,000 total power plants of all types.
Diablo Canyon is a “baseload” source of electricity: It runs all the time. Solar puts out about four hours of electricity on sunny days. Wind is good for 40 percent of its rated capacity (when there’s wind).
Diablo Canyon is the most powerful emission-free single electricity source in California, and we’re in a climate crisis. Fires burn even on the coast regularly. But oil and gas get what they want—every time. Take your vote from politicians who don’t care if your business goes broke and don’t care about your family’s climate and future.
COVID-19 is a mild problem compared to what global warming will soon bring.
William P. Gloege
Santa Maria
This article appears in Best of SLO County 2020.
The purpose of a nuclear power plant is to generate electricity and sell it at a profit so that shareholders can make a profit. The fact that it provides some jobs along the way is incidental to this purpose. The fact that it creates literally tons of high level radioactive waste is also incidental and a minor inconvenience to shareholders and to management that is responsible for the business plan. The decision on whether or not to continue operations is based on how much profit can be extracted from the production of electricity – with or without subsidies from the state government.
People in the reactor community have choices: they can to a very limited extent support the status quo and struggle to hold on to a dangerous and dirty technology or they can come together and figure out how to support community members who are loosing their jobs and how to clean up waste that is lethal for thousands of years. Congratulations to the people in this reactor community for coming together and making wise choices for their future and that of the planet.
Marilyn,
Please do some actual research on how “dangerous and dirty” nuclear power really is. I imagine you’d be surprised at what you find because, as it stands, you are very wrong about almost everything you’ve said.
I have done a lot of research and have closely followed Indian Point for decades. While cheap electricity from fracked gas cut into the profit margin of Indian Point it was a business decision on the part of Entergy that closed the reactors. It was a surprise to everyone. Please be more specific in your criticism. My statement is correct and there is nothing in your response to answer or think about.
Marilyn,
Your description of business decisions and shareholder profit applies to any enterprise, including electricity generation enterprises, and not exclusive to nuclear plants. For example, wind and solar farms also require a profit or they go out of business . In order to be profitable, such energy harvesting facilities require priority dispatch i.e. guaranteed payment even should the power generated not be needed. And not only are such renewables facilities ratepayer burdens, they require inordinate amounts of taxpayer subsidies to remain profitable.
Nuclear is the lowest cost clean power generation technology when system cost externalities are included, especially once built and loans are paid . Decommissioning nuclear plants while they remain in perfect running order is a criminal shame on California lawmakers.
WRT nuclear wastes, what wastes? The small amounts of spent fuel being safely stored in dry casks remains 97% unspent, ready to be reprocessed for advanced nuclear reactors. In other words, that “dangerous” “waste” will no longer exist thousands of years in the future. Those “wastes” will have been converted to fission products; many valuable for medical and industrial use the remaining elements remaining above background radiation levels for merely a few hundred years.
It’s going to be pointless trying to explain science to her. After a quick google search I’ve found out Marilyn here is a very obsessed opponent of nuclear energy from New York (she’s not even local). She ignores the information that would challenge her preestablished opinions on nuclear power. Sadly, another victim of misinformation and misunderstanding. Unfortunately, there are far too many who have only been exposed to the conspiracy level lies concerning the safest and most efficient form of energy production known to humanity (thus far), so thank you, Ike, for answering before I had the chance. Keep telling the truth and hopefully at least some will hear it.
Is anyone in America aware that in Europe, nuclear waste is re-used until it is hand sized and easily stored safely?
https://www.forbes.com/sites/realspin/2014…
Why don’t we do the same? Because our Congress bases laws on the fears of a few rather than any real, accurate understanding of what they are doing. Then they give the federal agency they create unlimited power and no Congressional oversight.
Dude. 20th century nuclear has got to go. But we also can’t keep shutting down reactors whilst burning gas and “biomass” as if that’s really green (renewable, ya I guess.. but a good idea? Idk). We need to get going on next gen nuclear but the science isn’t there yet. And that’s in large part because of the nuclear stigma. Basically we’re boned
I know Marilyn Elie NOT AS A FRIEND. She is a librarian in York Town school district. She has no nuclear engineering degree, was never in the nuclear navy, never worked in a nuclear power plant. So when she tells you she has done a lot of research it is one sided. Based on little fact mostly meant to bring out fear of nuclear power. You should see the circus her, Gary Shaw, Mark Jacobs, the raging grannies, and the rest at NRC meetings. Clowns! Then they want to be taken seriously. Ask her how she got the electric to go on her computer and look up this site and write in. Does she have a windmill in her backyard? I notice that her comments were posted at 22:04 and23:10. So I would have to say she didn’t use solar power. I guess she got her electric to read and post from good old Indian Point! The worst part about Marilyn is in the job she has she can poison young impressionable minds with her anti-nuke rhetoric.