Is Diablo Canyon worth saving? It’s time to run the numbers
Nuclear power is back on the table in California — and, according to at least one poll, most Californians are fine with that.
A January survey by FM3 research shows 56% of California voters support keeping Diablo Canyon Power Plant open. That figure is even higher in San Luis Obispo County, where 74% favor continued operation of the nuclear power plant.
Decision-makers are coming on board as well.
Gov. Gavin Newsom, who at one time advocated for closing the plant, recently signed a bill that allocated up to $75 million for energy uses, including the continued operation of Diablo Canyon.
PG&E is moving forward with an application for a share of $6 billion in federal funding for nuclear plants
“We expect to submit an application for DOE funding, as it would lower costs for our customers should the state want to preserve the option to extend DCPP operations to help ensure grid reliability,” spokesperson Suzanne Hosn wrote in an email.
This is seeming more and more like a done deal.
But is Newsom motivated by science, or self-interest?
Is the governor seeking cover in the event of more blackouts, which would leave millions of Californians looking for a scapegoat?
And are we having a collective “Save Diablo” moment we may regret later?
Looking for answers
Keeping Diablo Canyon online a few years beyond its scheduled closure in 2025 might make sense if California needs more time to transition to other sources of power, including wind, solar and battery storage.
But is a short extension of the plant’s license even possible under federal and state regulations?
If it is, how much longer would the plant need to operate?
Are we talking two years, or 10?
Those are among the questions that no one seems willing or able to answer, though we assume they are being discussed behind closed doors.
That’s not good enough, as Central Coast Congressman Salud Carbajal made clear in a recent statement.
“If there is a plan to temporarily extend (Diablo Canyon’s) lifespan, Central Coast families must be shown a clear roadmap when it comes to Nuclear Regulatory Commission relicensing, as well as the NRC’s safety and environmental processes, and the plan for the additional nuclear waste that San Luis Obispo will be asked to keep in its backyard for more years to come,” he said.
Experts differ on keeping Diablo Canyon open
To add to the confusion over Diablo Canyon’s future, experts have been making wildly conflicting statements about the nuclear power plant.
There have been some scientific studies, including a much-publicized report from Stanford University and the Massachusetts Insitute of Technology.
It concluded that keeping Diablo open until 2035 would reduce California’s carbon emissions by more than 10% from 2017 levels, among other benefits.
The public has been reassured that increasing the amount of spent nuclear fuel stored on-site is no big deal — and that worries about siting a nuclear power plant in an earthquake zone are overblown because Diablo Canyon was built to withstand the maximum possible quake.
But for every scientist or engineer who supports continued operation of Diablo Canyon, there is another warning that continued operation of the plant puts us in danger.
Former state Sen. Sam Blakeslee of San Luis Obispo is among those sounding the alarm.
“We’re willing to roll the dice on the safety of our state and, as a seismologist and as a resident of this area, I am troubled by the direction (this) appears to be going,” he said at a recent meeting of McClatchy’s California opinion editors.
It’s true that Diablo Canyon has been running for roughly 40 years without a major incident — but that’s no guarantee there won’t be a major earthquake or another catastrophe in the future.
Here’s another factor to consider: PG&E has been operating the aging plant under the assumption that it will close in 2024-25.
Is Diablo Canyon in good enough condition to keep running past that date?
That’s a question the Diablo Canyon Independent Safety Committee, a group of nuclear power experts, has been mulling.
“There would be a lot of work,” committee chair Robert Budnitz said. “We’ve talked among ourselves about how much work there is to do in many, many different areas. .. It’s a real safety concern.”
All that work is going to take time, which has prompted the committee to stress that the decision should be made sooner rather than later.
Is nuclear power plant ‘only solution’ to energy crisis?
At this point, experts don’t even agree on whether we need the energy produced by Diablo Canyon.
Some are convinced that we won’t be able to replace Diablo Canyon’s zero-emission energy. Others say we’ve already done that.
So how do we choose who and what to believe?
Should we count the number of experts on each side of the debate? Maybe weigh their credentials? Do we listen to the politicians?
Or should we demand some objective answers?
Maybe we should follow the approach that former NRC Commissioner Peter Bradford laid out for McClatchy opinion editors.
“There’s a rational was to approach the concerns that Governor Newsom and others have articulated,” he said. “You can say all right, we’re in a new situation... We want to rerun a competitive market simulation. ... We want to find out whether, in fact, we’re looking at potential crises in the next few years.
“But that’s not what the governor and the legislature have done. They went in very abruptly with no hearings at all — essentially played pin the tail on the donkey and said Diablo Canyon is the only solution to the crisis.”
If Diablo Canyon is indeed the only solution to the energy crisis, we should consider extending its life for a limited period.
But if this is another example of California’s slap-dash energy planning, there is no reason to alter the closure plan already in place.
By all means, rerun the numbers. Let us know exactly where we stand.
And stop keeping San Luis Obispo County residents, who have most at stake here, in the dark about the future of the Diablo Canyon Power Plant.
This story was originally published July 17, 2022 at 6:00 AM.