Mark Henry (“Be careful what you wish for when it comes to Diablo,” Feb. 16,) urges New Times readers to consider the consequences of the closure of the Diablo Canyon Power Plant reactors by 2025, the date PG&E committed to in 2016. In his opinion those consequences would include an energy shortage and increased use of fossil fuels. On the contrary, closure would lead to an increase in renewable energy.
Nuclear plants cannot lower their output when demand is lower, but must run at full capacity 24/7. The closure of Diablo Canyon would free up grid capacity to accept more renewable energy. One example is off-shore wind generation that has the potential to supply 4.6 gigawatts of energy, while Diablo Canyon has a capacity of 2.2 gigawatts.
PG&E should keep its promise of 2016 and close Diablo at the end of current licenses, thus enabling the state of California to have access to more renewable energy and to cease the generation of any additional radioactive waste.
Debbie Highfill
Morro Bay
This article appears in Weddings 2023.
As usually occurs, those advocating the closure of Diablo Canyon ignore the fact that renewables are not available 24/7, and that another energy source must be used at night, during overcast weather or when the wind isn’t blowing. If Diablo Canyon is closed, that power will have to be replaced by fossil fuel generated power, which will substantially increase the amount of carbon discharged into the atmosphere. Are we serious about climate chane, or not?
Debbie let me clarify your incorrect statement about nukes “…must run at full capacity 24/7”. Utilities chose to run a nuke at 100% for the economic reasons associated with the slow dilution of boric acid (especially at core EOL) to change power level in the reactor and to responsibly manage fuel consumption across the full length of the fuel rods. Nukes typically run at 50% when cleaning 1/2 of the main turbine condenser or while reduce output in anticipation of high seas choking the travelling screens with kelp, which is then imposed on fossil plants which previously provided a cushion by being rolling reserve. You are comparing apples and oranges when you incorrectly surmise intermittent offshore wind power or solar that vary from day to day no matter how huge their capacity can be substituted for a nuke that stays base loaded for months. Your techno optimism is clouding your logic, which should tell you that without fossil fuels a utility cannot meet a sudden rise in electric demand if it exceeds its hydro resources on inclement days. I am an expert on the local transmission system. Offshore wind will be the last source restored to Morro Bay. I know because I reviewed the S.F Bay Area Restoration Guidelines and digested how the 200kV DC TransBay Cable was merged into the restoration plan by being the last transmission source to be energized due to fault duty of the connected substations. So, in essence the whole green energy movement is sabotaging the grid’s resiliency that was first created by the first Oregon transmission line in 1889 by threatening us with insufficient supply to meet spot demand for the first time in 130 years. Politicians have really screwed up the CA electric system with Bills/Laws that mandate a green energy fantasy date. They have done little to no feasibility studies and they have no mandate to revisit their follies to evaluate acceptability, cost, sustainability and effectiveness. Our society will not tolerate lowering or ceasing our electric loads to match demand hourly based upon what meteorologists have forecasted on the nightly news for the next few hours. If we continue down this absurd green energy path then that is my “I told you so” moment when the TV weatherperson is telling you which hours you can use electricity. There would be no “Moore’s Law” of innovation without the boost from fossil fueled powerplants supplying more electricity than demand. Consequently, if the USA intimidates 3rd world countries from using fossil fuels to develop their society the way we did, then we are thwarting their growth which all the liberals can beat that drum as racism. Furthermore, the USA cannot defend itself or fight proxy wars without fossil fuels which makes the green energy by a certain date mindset a foolish path to surrendering domestic security. I can already visualize the cartoons of the electric Humvees sitting at the Madonna Tesla or electric planes sitting on the tarmac connect to some solar panels.