Pacific Gas and Electric Company has produced affordable electric power for our state for decades. The Diablo Canyon Power Plant produced 10 percent of all the electric power in California and was the cleanest form of energy production, yet the environmentalists could not stand PG&E’s success so they shut them down through government regulations. The combination of radical environmentalists, government regulations, government subsidies to wind and solar, along with faulty forest management practices resulted in last year’s catastrophic forest fires, finally forcing PG&E to file for bankruptcy.
Now that the environmental movement has forced PG&E to bankruptcy, who will provide cheap electric power to the population? Will it be the environmentalists? I think not; they never provide solutions to the problems they create. The environmentalists’ unreasonable demands and government regulations have put us in this mess.
Please don’t say you are going to buy electricity and redistribute it via the PG&E-owned power grid. If that is the case, all we will have is a government “middleman” who will ration our power and create additional increased costs. Will we never learn that government is the problem, not the answer? The private sector is fully capable of producing and marketing all the cheap electric power we need. The government and the environmentalists need to get out of the way and let the private sector work.
The state wants everyone in an electric vehicle yesterday, yet there is no way our power grid can support the power needed to bring this about. We need all sources of energy to include keeping the Diablo Canyon Power Plant open as long as possible. Nuclear power is the cleanest and most cost effective power source. Until technology and the private sector can develop what is required to meet the state’s electric energy needs, we should utilize all available energy resources. This includes nuclear, as well as oil, natural gas, wind, solar, and hydro-electric plants. Natural gas is a clean and cost effective energy source.
Government and the environmentalists need to get out of the way and let the energy industry experts do their job and develop the state’s energy needs in accordance with the cleanest and most cost effective means possible.
The sun doesn’t shine at night and the wind doesn’t blow 24 hours a day, 365 days a year, and the environmentalists don’t want us to mine the rare earth materials required for battery production.
Keep Diablo Canyon open and let PG&E construct three new nuclear power plants and three new hydro-electric power plants to power the grid. Our elected representatives need to start providing solutions instead of creating problems! Δ
John Texeira writes to New Times from Paso Robles. Respond with your own opinion, by emailing a letters@newtimesslo.com.
This article appears in Jul 20-30, 2023.
“cleanest form of energy production”…..BS, and you don’t get to say that. If I have to explain it to you, you still won’t accept it.
“environmentalists could not stand PG&E’s success so they shut them down through government regulations” Really? That’s BS too. C’mon man, be real. You are just getting paid, somehow, to keep this albatross flying….
I agree we have problems with power generation. BUt keeping an aged, dangerous, past it’s design date problematic dinasaur tromping is insane. And I do have a dog in this fight-I live 5 miles away, and I know a little about nuclear power.
When I was a kid in the early 70’s I would often visit relatives in the LA area during the summer. I remember several hikes into the San Gabriel Mountains. On a clear day, you could see to the ocean, but those days were few and far between. Typically, once you got up to about the 4k foot mark or were all the way to Mt. Wilson, the city below would disappear and all you would see was a thick layer of grime hanging over Los Angeles.
Today, when I go to LA I do not experience the same amount of pollution as was the norm in the 70’s. What happened? In 1975 the government mandated that all motor vehicles had to be equipped with catalytic converters. This was totally thanks to the progressive politicians and “environmentalists” who ultimately forced the auto industry to transition to cleaner burning engines.
Likewise, our water is cleaner because of “environmentalists.” We no longer experience Acid Rain because of “environmentalists.” I could go on.
Today, environmentalists are preaching sustainability and a consistent movement away from fossil fuels. They are taking their lead from climate scientists who say that we cannot continue to burn carbon at today’s levels.
So, I get it, conservatives hate “environmentalists” and they really hate the “government.” But, in this case, neither group is holding up Diablo Canyon. In fact, as far as I know, the “government,” both Gov. Newsom and the Biden administration are poised to spend at least $2 billion refurbishing the plant. They realize that if we are to reach zero-emission goals within the next 30 years Diablo will be needed, despite serious concerns.
Environmental groups oppose the refurbishment. Their arguments are strong. They point out that Diablo is situated on top of several earthquake faults. Mother nature dealt the Japanese a losing hand with Fukushima and she could very well do the same thing here. Let’s hope not. Second, opponents point to the ever growing number of spent fuel barrels on the site. They pose a definite problem into the future.
Anyway, your piece struck me as simply antagonistic against your perceived enemies. You present zero in the way of solutions to our problems. You basically just want to bitch about the “government” and the “environmentalists.”
I agree with John Texeira’s first sentence and the beginning of his second sentence. I work with Californians for Green Nuclear Power (CGNP,) an independent nonprofit founded a decade ago. To learn more about why Diablo Canyon’s operating license should be extended, please visit CGNP’s website at CGNP dot org
CGNP also runs a booth at the Downtown SLO Farmer’s Market on the second and fourth Thursdays most months. Our booth is a green canopy next to Shin’s Barbeque at the intersection of Higuera and Garden. Please talk with us there.
Mike: For once we’re in agreement. This brawl can not be blamed on conservatives. It is basically an internecine battle between those liberals who recoil in horror at the thought of nuclear power and who are unable to tolerate it, and the more pragmatic liberals who recognize that Diablo Canyon is the “least bad” option available. Perhaps the fraternal nature of this fight will keep the usual name-calling down.
The author is out of touch with the current realities of California’s electricity system. California is well into its transition to powering the grid with renewables and other zero-carbon resources. Here’s some data points from testimony recently filed in the CPUC’s Diablo Canyon proceeding.
· Nuclear advocates incorrectly state that Diablo Canyon supplies 8.6% of California’s total electricity, and 17% of its zero-carbon electricity resources. These are highly inflated estimates, that omit out-of-state imports, rooftop solar, and energy efficiency.
· Diablo Canyon accounts for just 5.5% of the state’s electricity, about 17,000 gigawatt-hours (GWh) out of 310,000 GWh electricity from all sources for California in 2023.
· Diablo Canyon represents only 6.2% of the state’s zero carbon resources, including wholesale renewable and zero carbon electricity supply, as well as rooftop solar, energy efficiency.
· Advocates for extending Diablo Canyon nuclear plant have pushed the false narrative that California is lagging in meeting its renewable electricity goals, caused by supply chain problems. However, the California Public Utilities Commission’s 2022 annual report to the legislature on renewable energy, shows the state is actually far advanced in meeting the state’s policy targets.
· By next year, 2024, rooftop solar is forecast to provide for 10% of the state’s electricity consumption; far more than the 5.5% of total electricity supply from Diablo Canyon.
· Based on government data, WEM estimates that Diablo Canyon’s energy is being replaced about every 1.7 years by continued growth of renewables, rooftop solar, and energy efficiency.
· SB846 authorizes extended operations of Diablo Canyon if it is needed to address reliability issues. State agencies have pinpointed the reliability concern to a very narrow timeframe: late summer evenings for a 4 hour period between 5pm and 9pm.
· Since August 2020, more than 5000 megawatts (MW) of new large scale batteries have come online to meet summer evening demand. CAISO reports that battery storage resources totaling 5600 (MW) are now available on the grid. This doesn’t just replace – but more than doubles — the 2300 megawatt peak power capacity of Diablo Canyon, with a resource that can adjust to changing grid conditions.
· The state also recently committed to bringing over 3000 MW of new Demand Response resources online by 2030.
· The reliability issues Diablo Canyon is supposed to solve are already being addressed by zero carbon resources. In the summer of 2021, batteries were credited for keeping the power on in California when transmission import lines were disrupted by Oregon wildfires. In September 2022, batteries and demand response avoided power outages during the late summer heat wave. This summer, there are adequate resources to meet forecast summer peak demand, plus an additional 35% reserve margin, according to the North America Electric Reliability Council.
· Ratepayers and taxpayers should not be ordered to pay PG&E billions more to keep Diablo Canyon online when it is not a needed or an appropriate resource.
The most recent and most lengthy reply is replete with the exaggerations and distortions that DCPP opponents typically utilize. This person seems to want to sound educated regarding the technologies employed at DCPP but perceives the plant through a set of distortions. The scientific consensus is that DCPP is a safe plant that has been running well since 1984, almost 40 years without significant incidents. A pair of quotes from Professor Christopher Lasch’s 1975 book The Culture of Narcissism come to mind. “When the images of power overshadow the reality, those without power find themselves fighting phantoms.” and “Ruling classes have always sought to instill in their subordinates the capacity to experience exploitation and material deprivation as guilt, while deceiving themselves that their own material interests coincide with those of mankind as a whole.” As a science and engineering professor, I encourage students to utilize their critical thinking skills and ignore self-appointed experts (narcissists.)