Ready or not, Diablo Canyon is closing — and California will just have to adjust
Time is running out for the Diablo Canyon nuclear power plant, but there’s growing pressure to reverse course and keep the facility open.
Panic may be too strong a word, but there’s definitely concern there won’t be enough energy to replace Diablo’s zero-emission nuclear power.
That’s driving a “save Diablo” campaign that includes an ill-advised attempt to ram a bill through Congress, as well as a separate threat by a pro-nuclear group to file a lawsuit against San Luis Obispo County.
The state’s last operating nuclear plant, Diablo Canyon has been supplying between 8% and 9% of California’s electricity.
Without clean replacement power, utilities will be forced to rely more heavily on fossil fuel plants — even though there were assurances that wouldn’t happen.
When PG&E announced the closure in 2016, it said it would offset the loss of Diablo with investments in energy efficiency, renewable power and electricity storage, but as the years passed, the California Public Utilities Commission delayed giving its stamp of approval to that plan — or any other.
Leaders of The Breakthrough Institute, a Bay Area think tank that’s fighting Diablo’s closure, are among those who believe Californians were “sold a bill of goods” when they were told the plant’s closure would not result in an increase in carbon emissions.
That’s been the case every time a nuclear plant has closed. Why should it be any different with Diablo?
Green energy order
But hold on. In a recent development, the CPUC finally ordered utilities to acquire 11,500 megawatts of additional clean energy between 2023 and 2026 — more than enough to replace the 2,256 megawatts generated by Diablo Canyon. Companies that fail to comply with the order will face hefty fines.
Energy analyst Mark Specht of the Union of Concerned Scientists — one of the organizations that sounded the alarm about the need for clean replacement power — believes it’ll work: “I think the penalties are severe enough that no one will willfully ignore these requirements,” he said.
Specht still has reservations — he predicts there will be “bumps in the road” — but he believes the CPUC order is the single most important step the agency has taken to ensure Diablo Canyon is replaced with green energy.
We agree, but there are critics who question whether the plan will work.
They point out that the order specifies that energy from Diablo Canyon must be replaced with at least 2,500 megawatts of “zero-emitting resources.”
That looks good on paper, but what about the other 9,000 megawatts?
Critics fear the door is still open to importing energy from out-of-state, and the bulk of that is from coal and natural gas plants.
“If we want to keep the lights on in California, we have to accept this dirty coal,” warned Gene Nelson, legal assistant for Californians for Green Nuclear Power (CGNP).
The CPUC says that’s not the case — state law prohibits utilities from signing long-term contracts with coal facilities.
“Thus, the replacement power cannot be from out-of-state coal. Additionally, each utility and CCA (Community Choice Aggregator) must meet specific greenhouse gas targets, and if they were to import coal, they will not be able to meet these targets,” CPUC’s director of public information, Terrie Prosper, wrote in an email.
“The decision says that all of the 11,500 MW must be non-fossil,” she added. “This means there will not be any imported natural gas (or coal, as stated previously) that can qualify.”
Nonetheless, CGNP isn’t satisfied.
It’s threatening to sue San Luis Obispo County if it doesn’t conduct an environmental analysis of the consequences of closing the plant.
“The county must make sure that Diablo’s power will not be replaced with things like out-of-state coal, in-state combustible power, or wind power or batteries with massive carbon and ecological footprints,” the organization said in a letter.
Importing energy derived from fossil fuels is a huge concern, but it’s not San Luis Obispo County’s job to police California’s energy sources.
Besides, even if there were the political will to keep the plant running, it’s not that simple.
The operating licenses would have to be renewed by the Nuclear Regulatory Commission. Plus, PG&E would need an extension of a lease to continue dumping warm water into the ocean, harming the marine environment — a practice that recently cost the utility a $5.9 million fine.
Any “shortcuts” in the process — such as extending the NRC license by even a few years, without going through the lengthy review process — would almost certainly be met with legal action by Diablo opponents.
Who would run it?
Another issue: PG&E hasn’t demonstrated interest in keeping Diablo open — at least not publicly — and is proceeding with plans to decommission the plant after it’s closed.
While new ownership has been mentioned as a possibility, it’s magical thinking to expect another utility to suddenly appear and take over when there are so many unknowns.
And has no thought been given to how this would affect the community?
There are plenty of supporters who would be happy to see Diablo stay open, but there are others who have devoted much of their lives to shutting the plant down and would fight any effort to revive it.
Announcement of the plant’s retirement has finally brought some closure to the community. Most locals have become resigned — or in some cases, relieved — that Diablo is closing, and the focus has shifted to what comes next.
The Land Conservancy of San Luis Obispo County is partnering with the Northern Chumash Tribe to conserve much of the PG&E property surrounding the plant.
A regional planning organization — REACH — has formed to encourage economic development throughout the Central Coast.
There are ambitious plans to transform the county into a green energy hub. An offshore wind farm and a large battery storage facility in Morro Bay are strong possibilities, though both are in the early planning stages.
In other words, the county is moving on, though nuclear energy proponents — including some who live hundreds of miles away — are not.
Devin Nunes to the rescue?
Even members of Congress have gotten involved in this last-ditch campaign.
Rep. Devin Nunes, a Tulare Republican, introduced legislation this month to not only keep the plant open, but to also allow development of an additional 8,000 megawatts of next-generation nuclear capacity there. Every California Republican in the House, including Minority Leader Kevin McCarthy, is backing the bill.
Nunes isn’t motivated by a desire to reduce greenhouse gas emissions, but rather, by the prospect of a “bleak energy future of even higher electricity prices and more unreliable energy production,” according to an op-ed he wrote for the Washington Examiner.
That’s cynical grandstanding. California’s energy future isn’t entirely dependent on Diablo Canyon, which will have to shut down at some point, whether it’s 2025 or 2035.
Keeping Diablo open would be nothing more than a stop-gap measure, and could even lead to another period of inertia when the state fails to enforce clean-energy mandates.
What we need is a comprehensive energy policy that phases out fossil fuel plants — and it should include a ban on importing dirty energy from other states.
Nuclear energy can be a component of our energy plan, but we must be smarter in where we site and how we build nuclear reactors. Locating nuclear plants in the vicinity of earthquake faults raises costs astronomically — especially when retrofits are needed post-construction — and only invites controversy.
Instead of pressuring a small California community to continue hosting a nuclear power plant that has generated safety concerns for decades, instigators of this misguided “save Diablo” effort should change their focus.
Support San Luis Obispo County’s efforts to become a leader in renewable energy. Let the doors shut on California’s last nuclear power plant.
This editorial has been updated to correct a reference to Californians for Green Nuclear Power.
This story was originally published July 23, 2021 at 7:00 AM.