Letter to the Editor

Correcting errors

Paso RoblesAugust 11, 2013 

Jane Swanson’s viewpoint article of July 31 is full of errors and distortions. The proper way to compare carbon dioxide emissions is to compare the entire production cycle of competing types of power, such as nuclear and coal or nuclear and natural gas power plants. PG&E’s nuclear capacity does provide approximately 20 percent of the power it provides its customers. Ms. Swanson tries to confuse the statistics by glossing over the fact that PG&E does not serve the whole state of California. Ms. Swanson also misunderstands the system operator statement.

There is enough reserve power to compensate for the loss of Diablo Canyon’s output; the point is not that Diablo Canyon’s power can be replaced by current system capacity, but that it will be replaced with power from fossil fuelpowered plants. The demand for power will be the same, resulting in an increase of carbon dioxide emissions.

In my opinion, a permanent solution to the fuel storage issue is a concern, but it has to be evaluated with respect to other environmental concerns such as global warming.

The Tribune is pleased to provide this opportunity to share information, experiences and observations about what's in the news. Some of the comments may be reprinted elsewhere in the site or in the newspaper. We encourage lively, open debate on the issues of the day, and ask that you refrain from profanity, hate speech, personal comments and remarks that are off point. Thank you for taking the time to offer your thoughts.

Commenting FAQs | Terms of Service