The statement PG&E would abandon, walk away from the responsibility of safely storing the used nuclear fuel at Diablo Canyon Power Plant is absurd (“PG&E plans to leave behind a ‘radioactive mess’ at Diablo Canyon,” Aug. 1, The Tribune). The fuel is delivered, used, and stored in the same assemblies through the entire process. Just go to the internet and type in “nuclear fuel assemblies” and see for yourself. There’s no “hot mess,” as described in an opinion in the press by one of the usual fearmongers.
Each fuel assembly lasts about 4 1⁄2 years. One third of the 193 fuel assemblies is removed and replaced at intervals of 18 months. The fuel to be removed is transferred through a tunnel filled with water into the 40-foot-deep pools of the fuel handling building filled with purified, borated water. The water is circulated in a closed system to cool the assemblies.
Water, lead, concrete are all excellent sources of shielding from the radiation. Protection is also provided by time and distance. Within 10 years, 90 percent of the radiation present in the assemblies has decayed away. Furthermore, the NRC (Nuclear Regulatory Commission) would never allow used fuel to be stored unless the strict rules and regulations of the NRC are followed. Go to YouTube and find the Diablo Canyon Dry Storage Project to see for yourself how fuel is removed from the pools and transferred to dry storage.
Statements such as the one printed in the local press need to be researched for truth, otherwise people believe something like the statement “hot mess,” which is meant to frighten. But it’s only an assumption, not proof.
Ellie Ripley
Arroyo Grande
This article appears in Aug 11-21, 2022.
Anyone who thinks that Diablo should be repurposed and continue in operation should read, “CHERNOBYL: The Unbelievable, Forbidden, Hidden but True Story of the Worlds Worst and Greatest Nuclear Disaster” by Svetlana Kostenko.
It’s an eye-opener, as is the recent news that Japan is getting ready to dump over ONE MILLION TONS of radioactive waste from the Fukushima-Daichi power plant into the Pacific Ocean.
Diablo lies virtually on top of the Shoreline fault which, scientists have predicted, could produce earthquakes up to 6.5 on the richter scale. The Sylmar Earthquake, which rocked the San Fernando Valley in 1971, was 6.6 and it caused severe damage.
The U.S. needs to continue to ramp up its investment in renewables. The floating wind farm off our coasts is slated to provide as much as 25% of California’s power needs. Similar Farms are already being mapped in places like Mendocino. Moreover, there are literally millions of acres in California’s deserts that can be outfitted with solar farms like the gigantic facility at state line near Primm, Nevada.
I agree with Michael Smith as far as ramping up investment in renewable sources of energy; however, I respectfully part ways with him with regard to keeping the Diablo Canyon facility in operation and expanding its capabilities. When the decision to close the plant was announced back in 2016, I anticipated follow on progress reports detailing the vast new sources of renewable energy coming on line. That has not happened. While the potential for things like solar farms, windmills, etc. is great, the undeniable reality is that none of these projects will be ready any time soon.
That will leave fossil fuel burning plants as the primary alternative to replace the 9-10 % of the State’s power currently provided by Diablo. Given that we are desperately searching for ways to reduce carbon emissions, the alternatives to Diablo are not at all enticing.
We are also experiencing a severe drought. Diablo could help mitigate that problem if kept open. The plant has been meticulously inspected for earthquake readiness. The conclusion, in the event a large earthquake takes place, inside the Diablo facility would be the safest place to be. Diablo is not Chernobyl. It was built to far higher and more exacting standards. Now is not the time to close it. Let’s keep a source of clean power that can produce fresh water.
Renewables and Diablo Canyon are not an “either/or” proposition. We can do both. We can,and should, keep Diablo open while we develop renewals. It may take a while, as we still have not developed any way to store the substantial amounts of energy needed during possibly extended periods when wind and solar may not be available. If the alternative energy source is not nuclear, it will be carbon emitting. How can we take the dire warnings of liberals about carbon and the climate seriously when they are so eager to introduce even more of it into the atmosphere just to accommodate their emotional reaction to nuclear? Sure, nuclear can be dangerous but you’re telling us that climate change will be fatal – isn’t accepting danger preferable to the certainty of climate disaster that you forecast? Time for a little pragmatism instead of emotional indulgence.
Well said, John. Most of life is about weighing risks against benefits. There are no 100% solutions. In the case of the Diablo Canyon facility, an objective analysis of those risks and benefits (as was documented in the recent Stanford study) strongly favors keeping the facility open for the foreseeable future.
Looks like you pro-nuke guys will get your way as several incentives to repurpose nuclear plants are part of the Inflation Reduction Act which is now heading to Biden’s desk.