Skip to main content

The city of Laguna Beach, California went on record Tuesday as supporting San Clemente's appeal to the Nuclear Regulatory Commission that public concerns be fully addressed before the 2-unit nuclear plant is allowed to restart. Laguna Beach went further to also challenge any consideration by NRC of relicensing the plants before they expire in 2022.

In a 4-1 vote Tuesday night, the Laguna Beach City Council decided to sent a letter to the NRC outlining their concerns. To which the SCE spokesperson at the meeting responded...

"Southern California Edison has not made a decision on whether we'll apply for renewal," said Edison spokesman Christopher Abel.

The majority of 14 speakers at Tuesday's meeting would be delighted if Edison immediately dismantled the plant, let alone opted not to renew the license.

Abel verified that 4,000 tons of high-level, radioactive waste are stored there.

It's not bad enough that there's two wannabe operating nukes (with faulty Replacement Steam Generators recently installed) in close proximity to the known to be active Newport-Englewood fault between San Diego and Los Angeles, or for there to be no public evacuation plans for the municipality in case of accident. The site is a high level nuclear waste dump (as are all our nukes everywhere in the nation) with 4,000 tons of deadly-for-100,000 years garbage sitting in it.

Meanwhile, the California Department of Emergency Services has estimated that a meltdown of just one of San Onofre's reactors could contaminate 16,000 square miles of land at the level used for relocation in the 'dead zone' surrounding Chernobyl. That would include the city now designated as a "shelter zone" for accident evacuees, and the citizens - and their representatives in City Hall - aren't the least bit comfortable with that in the wake of Fukushima. Which more than graphically educated us all about what a nuclear "worst case scenario" looks like.

That plan, drafted by SCE in 1982 without bothering to consult the city of Laguna Beach, specifies that residents should "shelter in place" rather than be evacuated. We also now know that the Japanese citizens in "shelter in place" zones outside the no-go zone in Fukushima have absorbed more dose than those who were evacuated. Rather than expand evacuations to the necessary 50-miles (80.5 kilometers), the Japanese government simply increased the allowable annual dose to 20 mSv in perpetuity. Which is 20 times the allowable in most other nuclear nations on the planet. Nobody in America wants to find themselves in that situation, and now they're doing something about it.

The most interesting (to me) aspect of this story is that SCE's spokesperson made an issue of the fact that the corporation hasn't yet decided whether it will ask for a 20-year license extension when the time comes. Despite the fact that NRC has thus far granted every single license extension requested by every ancient nuclear rustbucket in the nation, no special equipment upgrades or safety retrofits required, no requirements to do anything with the thousands of tons' worth of accumulated high level radioactive waste either. Just build another Olympic-sized swimming pool and you're good to go.

This is something worse than insane, but I don't know a better word for it. San Onofre's 2 reactors provide somewhere between 5 and 7% of California's electricity, and each of them consumes somewhere close to 250 megawatts of electrical energy from the grid on a constant basis just to operate. Nobody ever seems to factor that in when they talk about why we need these monster nukes to supply the "demand." One commenter at the City Council meeting put it this way…

"We wouldn't miss it [San Onofre] if each of us exchanged two light bulbs."
I bring this news item to your attention because I think that the 'defense' mounted by the SCE rep is interesting (and possibly hopeful). The whole "we haven't decided to ask for extension yet" deal might mean they have run the numbers and know they can't get the Utilities Commission to AGAIN make the ratepayers buy the new-new steam generators the plant must now have in order to run just to the end of its current licensing period. If they spend the money themselves, they must of course get an extension so the profit margin justifies it. Yet public opinion and NRC upheaval since the Fukushima disaster has put a very large dent in the 'expected' renaissance this industry's been planning. Even if SCE ignored the locals and paid for its own new steam generators, the NRC may yet shut them down anyway just for lousy siting now that Plate Tectonics is an actual accepted science with ramifications.

IOW, they're never likely to make it to 2042 even if they got new-new SGs and the people of California didn't reject nuclear via referendum at some point (which they will if they have to). If they can't replace their replacement SGs without cutting into projected profits to 2022, they won't run through 2022 either. In fact, now that they're both shut down and we know their replacement SGs are shit, they may never operate again. That would be nice.

Originally posted to Joieau on Fri Feb 10, 2012 at 04:02 PM PST.

Also republished by California politics, Nuclear Free DK, and Community Spotlight.

EMAIL TO A FRIEND X
Your Email has been sent.
You must add at least one tag to this diary before publishing it.

Add keywords that describe this diary. Separate multiple keywords with commas.
Tagging tips - Search For Tags - Browse For Tags

?

More Tagging tips:

A tag is a way to search for this diary. If someone is searching for "Barack Obama," is this a diary they'd be trying to find?

Use a person's full name, without any title. Senator Obama may become President Obama, and Michelle Obama might run for office.

If your diary covers an election or elected official, use election tags, which are generally the state abbreviation followed by the office. CA-01 is the first district House seat. CA-Sen covers both senate races. NY-GOV covers the New York governor's race.

Tags do not compound: that is, "education reform" is a completely different tag from "education". A tag like "reform" alone is probably not meaningful.

Consider if one or more of these tags fits your diary: Civil Rights, Community, Congress, Culture, Economy, Education, Elections, Energy, Environment, Health Care, International, Labor, Law, Media, Meta, National Security, Science, Transportation, or White House. If your diary is specific to a state, consider adding the state (California, Texas, etc). Keep in mind, though, that there are many wonderful and important diaries that don't fit in any of these tags. Don't worry if yours doesn't.

You can add a private note to this diary when hotlisting it:
Are you sure you want to remove this diary from your hotlist?
Are you sure you want to remove your recommendation? You can only recommend a diary once, so you will not be able to re-recommend it afterwards.
Rescue this diary, and add a note:
Are you sure you want to remove this diary from Rescue?
Choose where to republish this diary. The diary will be added to the queue for that group. Publish it from the queue to make it appear.

You must be a member of a group to use this feature.

Add a quick update to your diary without changing the diary itself:
Are you sure you want to remove this diary?
(The diary will be removed from the site and returned to your drafts for further editing.)
(The diary will be removed.)
Are you sure you want to save these changes to the published diary?

Comment Preferences

  •  Get prepared to pay for it if it is decommissioned (6+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    Shockwave, arodb, Joieau, Lujane, Creosote, HugoDog

    with an enormous increase in electricity rates. There is no way the utility will bear that cost without an increase in rates.

    "The two pioneering forces of modern sensibility are Jewish moral seriousness and homosexual aestheticism and irony." Susan Sontag

    by Shane Hensinger on Fri Feb 10, 2012 at 04:16:27 PM PST

  •  4,000 tons of high-level, radioactive waste (9+ / 0-)

    How much does that cost?  And for how long? Oh yeah, not our problem.

    Republicans: Taking the country back ... to the 19th century

    by yet another liberal on Fri Feb 10, 2012 at 04:36:12 PM PST

    •  Since you can't assign a dollar amount to it (10+ / 0-)

      It must be zero.  Besides, we'll all be dead and gone.  It's somebody else's problem.

      Republicans: Taking the country back ... to the 19th century

      by yet another liberal on Fri Feb 10, 2012 at 04:37:29 PM PST

      [ Parent ]

    •  The steadfast opposition (0+ / 0-)

      to any attempt to establishing a centralized long-term storage facility is the main reason we have this problem.

      With all this manure around, there must be a pony in here somewhere. - Count Piotr Vorkosigan

      by jrooth on Sat Feb 11, 2012 at 10:06:51 AM PST

      [ Parent ]

      •  Yeah. Damn all those (4+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        Jim P, native, Karl Rover, cotterperson

        disposable NIMBYs who don't want to volunteer their homes and lands as National Sacrifice Zones. They should have no say about whether or not their gub'ment or their greedy utility dumps radioactive garbage on them! Maybe one of these days they'll give up on cleaning up the DOE/DOD nuclear outhouses and just declare THEM to be National Sacrifice Zones. Put up a chain link fence and signs that tell the isotopes not to go any further. Isotopes always pay attention to serious sign language, you know. Particularly if it's yellow print outlined in black on magenta background. Stops 'em in their tracks every time, as some three-legged gators and two-headed bottom feeders in the 'glades outside the chain link fence around Homestead would gladly tell you if they could speak English without those annoying clicks.

        Then happy pro-nukes everywhere can line the highways and railroad lines to wave their cute little made-in-China flags with variable numbers of stars and stripes, salute as the forever deadly fuel rod bundles go by five or ten times a day in full confidence that accidents never happen.

        Forward to the Futuristic Fifties! [/snark]

        •  My point is ... (0+ / 0-)

          that hundreds of distributed storage sites is far riskier than one centralized (preferably remote) site.  And for all its flaws, nuclear power has killed a tiny fraction of the number of people that coal has killed.

          But by all means don't let my attempt to rationally weigh relative risks get in the way of a good rant.

          With all this manure around, there must be a pony in here somewhere. - Count Piotr Vorkosigan

          by jrooth on Sat Feb 11, 2012 at 01:07:27 PM PST

          [ Parent ]

          •  I agree coal is bad stuff. (4+ / 0-)
            Recommended by:
            jeanette0605, cotterperson, cany, Jim P

            Spent a lot of time growing up in Eastern Kentucky, got to see up close the kind of harm it does right from the git-go of getting it out of the ground. Don't live far from Oak Ridge/Clinch River either, the ash spill was horrendous. And will hopefully spur real action on all the spills waiting to happen. And always hold my breath during wildfires in that area, don't eat the trout...

            It's just that once a disaster happens - and disasters happen, you can count on it - there's not a lot of difference to be made to those who are sickened and dying on whether it was coal or nukes (or the paper plant dumping dioxin into the river, or the chemical company dumping God only knows what, or the fracking outfit that causes your toilet to explode and your kids to get cancer or the garbage in our food supply that keeps us fat and malnourished, too weak to do anything but watch television...). Our ways of financing and orchestrating our so-empty "Modern Lifestyle" are total crap as well as Prideful Mass Suicide Writ Large.

            There's gotta be a better way. We will never find it if we don't make the firm decision to go looking. And THAT comes from at the very least deciding not to keep doing the same stupid things over and over again. Nukes are stupid. So are many other things. But the fact that many things are stupid doesn't make any one or more of the stupid things less stupid.

      •  The continuing production of nuclear waste (2+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        Joieau, cotterperson

        is the main reason we have this problem.

        Fear is your only God.

        by JesseCW on Sat Feb 11, 2012 at 11:32:52 AM PST

        [ Parent ]

        •  So all these distributed storage dumps (0+ / 0-)

          will magically disappear if we shut down all nuclear plants today?

          With all this manure around, there must be a pony in here somewhere. - Count Piotr Vorkosigan

          by jrooth on Sat Feb 11, 2012 at 01:09:09 PM PST

          [ Parent ]

          •  No, but if we stop (3+ / 0-)
            Recommended by:
            JesseCW, Karl Rover, cotterperson

            producing the shit then it won't still be building up, will it? Then we can begin dealing with the filth in a rational manner. First by requiring the producers to actually DO THE JOB they've been promising to do for decades of dry-casking. Then by building safe state and/or regional repositories away from the coasts, well hardened and earth-bermed for at least a century or two, nowhere near reservoirs, rivers or groundwater, and not sitting on fault lines. Oh... and well engineered with natural ventilation and site generation for the means to keep casks cool and dry whether anybody's around or not.

            Then we can start talking about perpetual disposal and the best way to get the filth to the repository. Who knows? In a hundred years people might have some good ideas and means to accomplish them. If your filthy waste is positively deadly for 100,000 years, what's a century or two?

          •  Something bad plus something bad is (0+ / 0-)

            more of something bad.


            Today, if you exist... that's already suspicious.

            by Jim P on Sat Feb 11, 2012 at 11:31:31 PM PST

            [ Parent ]

  •  Southern Co. (7+ / 0-)

    I saw a headline while eating lunch about nuclear power & Obama.
    so I googled it.
    I found this article.

    http://online.wsj.com/...

    Wondering if you saw this?

    Thanks for keeping us informed on San Onofre

    •  Yes, that's in Georgia & approved w/ NRC dissenter (1+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      eeff

      from your link...

      Four of the five NRC members said Thursday they favor Southern's proposal to build two new reactors at its existing Plant Vogtle site in Georgia. However, NRC Chairman Gregory Jaczko voted against issuing the license, saying the license should be conditioned on making "safety enhancements" as a result of meltdowns last year at Japan's Fukushima Daiichi nuclear plant.

      Southern's chairman, president and chief executive promised Thursday that the company has already "taken into account" the events at Fukushima last year and will make any safety changes necessary to existing reactors and the new reactors it plans to build, following completion of a pending analysis of lessons learned from the accident...

      ...Fanning said that there "really [was] not a difference of opinion with the chairman of the NRC" and suggested that the disagreement was over timing of changes that could be made to the new reactors.

      "Our commitment, as it always has been, is to incorporate the comments of everyone...to ensure we have the safest, most reliable nuclear generation in the world," Fanning said. "That process with the NRC continues long after the [project] goes into operation. This industry has a track record of continuous learning and we'll continue that posture."

      Atlanta-based Southern said the project would create 4,000 to 5,000 construction jobs.

      Eliminate the Bush tax cuts Eliminate Afghan and Iraq wars Do these things first before considering any cuts

      by kck on Sat Feb 11, 2012 at 08:01:06 AM PST

      [ Parent ]

      •  Did they ever fix (1+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        eeff

        the containment design for these things? They were so top heavy it was questionable they'd last through a stiff wind, much less an earthquake or tornado or a missile disguised as an airliner (we've seen that).

        Or is that what they're "still working on," hoping to have something workable by the time they actually have to build the containment?

  •  The fact is that conservation must be an (18+ / 0-)

    alternative to re-licensing anything at SONGS.

    About 11 years ago, I changed all the light bulbs out here and at my mom's triplex. My own electricity bill nose dived as did hers.

    I just added an energy efficent washer (both water and energy) and the dryer and fridge are next month, then the small box freezer. I am adding energy efficent appliances at mom's triplex and am looking at installing roof solar there (roof gets sun ALL day).

    I take my safety seriously and these small things add up when done by many. Her entire neighborhood is ripe for solar... it is all triplex and apartment houses, some with pools.

    Tax incentives need to continue to be offered to do this so we can take these dangerous old plants off line forever.

    Laguna is the most progressive city in OC. WHY other cities wouldn't do likewise is beyond me but then head-in-sand is generally the rational here for almost all things.

    202-224-3121 to Congress in D.C. USE it! You can tell how big a person is by what it takes to discourage them. "We're not perfect, but they're nuts."--Barney Frank 01/02/2012

    by cany on Fri Feb 10, 2012 at 06:08:12 PM PST

    •  Neighborhoods (18+ / 0-)

      collectiely generating their consumptive needs is an idea that's more than come. I live half a mile from the nearest road, WAY out in the boonies. But my neighborhood of about 50 homes/properties has enough close-by resources to produce enough for all of us. With extra during non-peak times to sell back to the grid. Many of us can go solar on rooftops, most of us have south-facing land on which solar can be deployed. There are spots on ridge lines that could host vertical wind generators no problem. With plenty of breeze all year to keep 'em turning. A series of undershot hydro-turbines along the fast-moving creek/river for 24-7 backup.

      More compact neighborhoods, villages and even towns could develop their own resources. It would make a very serious dent in overall grid demand. We can, most of us, tailor our peak usage to accommodate generation/demand. And not nearly so much of capacity (10% and more) would be 'lost' to grid inefficiencies in the area of direct service.

      It can be done. All we have to do is decide to do so.

    •  Hear, hear (5+ / 0-)

      All light bulbs in non-essential areas (my reading lamp being an exception) got changed out with CFLs about ten years ago.  More recently, LEDs are starting to appear in some essential areas.

      It takes a lot of effort to color-balance well with CFLs.  With the newer LEDs, I can't see the difference between them and incandescent lighting.

      The electric bill took a serious nosedive.  My reading lamp is still halogen, but I expect that to change eventually.  My vision is bad, so I need very bright light and very white light to see the text.

      (-6.25, -6.77) Moderate left, moderate libertarian

      by Lonely Liberal in PA on Sat Feb 11, 2012 at 06:56:39 AM PST

      [ Parent ]

    •  San Francisco has some crazy rate (3+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      Joieau, cany, cotterperson

      of uninsulated houses and buildings.

      http://sfdbi.org/...

      ... under state law, San Francisco apartments need not have any insulation whatsoever.

      You couldn't get away with this in states like Michigan or Minnesota; if you failed to properly insulate a building there, the residents could literally freeze to death, re-enact Jack London's To Build a Fire, or heating bills would soon approach national deficit numbers. But, here in "sunny California," you can simply crank up the heat to make up for shoddy or nonexistent insulation. It's expensive, wasteful, and antithetical to a city that considers itself to be "green" -- but you won't end up like Jack Nicholson at the end of The Shining.

      The laws are not the same for those residing in homes and apartment-dwellers, notes Ed Sweeney, the Department of Building Inspection's deputy director for inspection. State law mandates that those selling a single-family or two-unit home have to go through an energy compliance process -- "You have to have your doors  and windows weatherproofed, insulate all the pipes, and do R-30s on the roofs, R-19 or the equivalent on the ceiling, and R-12 on the walls," says Sweeney (The specs he quoted above refer to the thickness of the fiberglass insulation required by law).

      And yet, San Francisco apartments of three units or more -- which house the vast majority of this city's residents -- don't have any such laws mandating proper insulation.

      cont...

      It's true of the whole Bay Area, I think. It's got to be. I wish there was some push to subsidize insulation or fix these laws. This is contributing sharply to San Francisco's energy demands, but it is obviously completely fixable.

      You might want to re-think those ties. - Erin Brockovich

      by mahakali overdrive on Sat Feb 11, 2012 at 10:47:09 AM PST

      [ Parent ]

      •  And Florida's got (2+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        mahakali overdrive, cotterperson

        all those crackerboxes. But since they're mostly made of cinder blocks, they stay fairly cool in the summer, and produce lots of black mold in the summer.

        •  I don't have insulation either except in the (4+ / 0-)

          cailing. That will change when we tear out all the walls to redo the electical (and probably asbestos in there somewhere, as well, judging by some weird things we have inadvertently found). The windows will be replaced also.

          It's a long an expensive process to turn a 1940s era weekender cabin into a home.

          202-224-3121 to Congress in D.C. USE it! You can tell how big a person is by what it takes to discourage them. "We're not perfect, but they're nuts."--Barney Frank 01/02/2012

          by cany on Sat Feb 11, 2012 at 11:37:52 AM PST

          [ Parent ]

          •  Redid the kitchen (4+ / 0-)

            summer before last, which got insulation in the exterior wall and attic. Double paned window and a nice door that actually closes and locks! But it's a piece at a time in a 100+ year old chestnut cabin in the woods. The lower level is earth-sheltered on most of three sides, with stone and log walls two feet thick, so it's fine. If I wanted a place that didn't 'breathe' a bit, I'd move into an apartment in town.

            But we chose a lovely microclime, it doesn't get 'too' hot or cold here. No AC - we can always go sit outside under a tree or hike down to the swimming hole if it gets too uncomfortable in the summer. Little wood stove in the basement - with 3-story pipe through the middle of the main living area and loft - keeps things toasty enough in winter. Not that I wouldn't like to have a nice energy-efficient heat pump I could just set and forget, but I'd have to tear this old cabin down and build something new for that, and so far I haven't managed to win the lottery.

            USDA gave me a new planting zone this year, though. Which, if the weather would just go ahead and abide by it, would allow me an entire extra growing cycle for cool weather crops. I'm very much looking forward to that. So long as nobody nukes us (one way or the other) we'll be fine. Until we're not, then the grandkids get to take over. I'd much rather deal with nature than with nukes, and my needs are quite minimal. Main ambition is to get off-grid before I retire officially. Oh... and to have some bees and chickens and goats, maybe a couple of sheep to mow the lawn and keep the Border Collie occupied.

  •  A hard place to evacuate (20+ / 0-)

    Population growth in the area has been high since the San O plant was built.

    look for my eSci diary series Thursday evening.

    by FishOutofWater on Fri Feb 10, 2012 at 06:10:14 PM PST

  •  Really BIG light bulbs then... (2+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    BusyinCA, AaronInSanDiego
    One commenter at the City Council meeting put it this way…

    "We wouldn't miss it [San Onofre] if each of us exchanged two light bulbs."

    AFAIK, Southern has something in the order of 4 million customers and San Onofre generates 2,200 MW non stop ... when it's running.

    So shutting down the plant would remove about 550W of capacity per customer. I wish my place was large enough to burn that much electricity just with light bulbs :-)

    I deal in facts. My friends are few but fast.

    by Farugia on Fri Feb 10, 2012 at 08:35:33 PM PST

    •  Recalculate however you like (4+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      translatorpro, Joieau, JesseCW, Russgirl
      San Onofre's 2 reactors provide somewhere between 5 and 7% of California's electricity, and each of them consumes somewhere close to 250 megawatts of electrical energy from the grid on a constant basis just to operate.
      but if you note that the plants themselves are the biggest consumer, and calculate the usage based on the political unit: California, then the speaker's light-bulb comparison seems rather generous to the nuke plant.

      "As long as people believe in absurdities they will continue to commit atrocities." ~ Voltaire

      by Andhakari on Fri Feb 10, 2012 at 11:43:15 PM PST

      [ Parent ]

  •  The most interesting thing to you (0+ / 0-)
    The most interesting (to me) aspect of this story is that SCE's spokesperson made an issue of the fact that the corporation hasn't yet decided whether it will ask for a 20-year license extension when the time comes.
    has been the company line since at least this time last year. The license expires in 2022 and the way the NRC rules are set up the plant will want to submit any application no later than five years before expiration. Therefore the plant has until 2015 to decide. Given the local political climate the company would have no incentive to "decide" until it has to.
    •  Then by all means (2+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      Russgirl, cany

      keep right on hoping against hope that SCE ignores its customers and reality in a post-Fukushima world, gets its extension so it has twenty extra years to play the meltdown lottery. You never know.

      I for one hope San Diego and Los Angeles will join with San Clemente and Laguna Beach to demand shutdown.

  •  The alternative being? (0+ / 0-)

    Coal from Utah that funds nutty Republicans, ruins our air and melts the ice caps?

    Well, the people on the unfashionable side of the 5 will have some beachfront property.

    •  So you think the only options (8+ / 0-)

      are nuclear or coal-powered energy? Wow, where have you been for the last 10 years? Germany introduced its Renewable Resources Act in 2000 (enacted 2002), and in 10 years now has 20% of its overall power supplied by renewable energy sources, and expects the figure to rise to 35% by 2020, and it may end up being more. And Germany is not exactly famous for hot weather and non-stop sunshine that exists in the American Southwest. Here in the southern part of Germany you see can see a sea of rooftop solar installations, thanks to generous government subsidies that are a huge incentive to the usually super-frugal Swabians. They maximize what they have with efficient solar panels and aggressive government policy to make everything more energy efficient, from appliances to buildings to automobiles.
      Annual sunshine in Germany:
      http://www.currentresults.com/...
      Sunniest Places and Countries in the World

      Two regions dominate the top ten list of the sunniest places in the world. Half of the ten sunniest places on record are in the American southwest states of Arizona, Nevada and Texas. The other sunny region is in northeast Africa
      Bolding is mine for emphasis.

      But solar energy comprises only a small percentage of renewables here. The rest is made up of wind, geothermal, hydropower, biomass, etc. etc.

      PS: I'm a US expat, so my wish is to see my country do as much for the environment as Germany does.

      „Wer kämpft, kann verlieren. Wer nicht kämpft, hat schon verloren.“ - Bertolt Brecht

      by translatorpro on Sat Feb 11, 2012 at 02:45:48 AM PST

      [ Parent ]

    •  Utah will become the final destination (3+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      Joieau, offgrid, mahakali overdrive

      of all that nuclear waste piling up at all these plants. With Yucca out of the picture, the most viable alternative is Skull Valley.

      95 per cent of US low level radioactive waste is already stored in Utah, with those nutty Republicans paving the way for reclassification to allow for much more.

      An investment in knowledge pays the best interest. -Benjamin Franklin

      by martinjedlicka on Sat Feb 11, 2012 at 08:07:28 AM PST

      [ Parent ]

  •  I've never seen one not made in China (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    buddabelly

    Those new light bulbs, which last about 2 weeks for me before they burn out, are all made in China.

    Yeah, those factories in China have really high pollution and labor standards.

  •  San Onofre is in the most pristine spot (6+ / 0-)

    imaginable, right on the southern Ca coast, between San Clemente and Oceanside (in San Diego county)
    If it pulled a Fukushima, arguably America's very nicest places to live will be destroyed forever.
    How could anyone ever think this was a good risk?

    "But Brandine, you're supposed to be in Iraq stopping 911!"

    by leftyguitarist on Sat Feb 11, 2012 at 05:54:49 AM PST

  •  The People of California aren't even allowed (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    Joieau

    to reject the slaughter of downer cows.

    The commerce clause caught rabies.  

    We'll see how the Supremes rule on Vermont Yankee.  

    Given their recent string of decisions I strongly suspect they'll claim the state can't shut it down.

    Fear is your only God.

    by JesseCW on Sat Feb 11, 2012 at 07:54:50 AM PST

    •  If the Supremes (2+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      JesseCW, jeanette0605

      decide that a state can't say no to an extension on an antiquated, filthy and known to be dumping power plant, there's going to be hell to pay with antiquated, filthy and known to be dumping coal plants as well. I don't think they'll go there.

      But if they did and I lived in Vermont, I'd be willing to donate my crowbar and sledge hammer (along with my pitchfork and torches) to the collective demolition that would need to take place. Or homesteads, villages, towns and cities could install their own generation capacity from renewables, maybe press their claim to the river and its waters, tell Entergy to take a hike. After fining them to within an inch of their corporate life for polluting the water supply and dumping cancer causing substances on the children.

      Even the most despotic and corrupt of the "Powers That Be" only enjoy their larcenous privileges by consent of the people they're screwing. We may be in one of those times in history when that again needs to be made completely clear to the despotic and corrupt. That would be okay with me, and I'd be pleased to think my grandkids would be brave enough to make a better life for themselves and their progeny than we were able to leave them.

      •  I think they'll go there. (1+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        Joieau

        The current court believes the Commerce Clause trumps any and all authority claimed by the several states.

        They just ruled that California must allow the slaughter of downer livestock, because the FDA allows it.  

        We can't even prevent animal cruelty in our own state.  We're talking about an issue that only costs The Machine a few hundred thousand a year.

        Do you really think they're going to let individual states decide anything this important?

        Buying two legislative bodies and one President is a lot cheaper than buying 99 legislative bodies and 50 Governors.  

        Oh, and all those voters in Initiative states.

        Fear is your only God.

        by JesseCW on Sat Feb 11, 2012 at 03:19:38 PM PST

        [ Parent ]

  •  Thanks, Joieau (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    Joieau

    I live 21.6 miles directly South of the 43 year old SONGS. It has a seawall of 22 feet (which apparently one can row up pretty close to) and the plant was built to withstand a 6.5 mag, probably up to 7. There are state legislature mandated studies underway to determine how high a mag earthquake the facilities could take. Also  there's a study of what submarine faults are in the vicinity. Seems like an awful lot of unknowns IMO. I have no problem with nuclear power as a science but know not to have confidence in our implementation or readiness for staying up to date or prepared for emergencies.  The people  of Laguna Beach and San Clemente seem to have been the most organized since I've been paying attention. This coastal land is visibly fragile and in the what-could-go-wrong list the only things I would rule out are alien invasions and snow.  

    Eliminate the Bush tax cuts Eliminate Afghan and Iraq wars Do these things first before considering any cuts

    by kck on Sat Feb 11, 2012 at 08:28:38 AM PST

  •  Sacramento's Rancho Seco (5+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    Russgirl, offgrid, Joieau, S F Hippie, JesseCW

    Sacramento voted to shut down Rancho Seco 30 years ago.  We had no increase in utility rates.  We do have a public utility, SMUD, in Sacramento that is always under attack from PG&E.  SMUD is much better than PG&E.  I hope you can shut it down.  No nukes.

  •  Glad to see this rescued! (2+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    Joieau, Jim P

    I was the first to rec it :)

    It's a good read. Some of your best here, Joieau. And the statement about the two lightbulbs is just so true. I've got all energy saver bulbs in our house now, half out of the sockets, and also, when we go out, we unplug the television and other major appliances that are sucking energy up.

    Where this could really be easily enforced is obviously in  large businesses and public buildings. I know that I work in a state run building which does not take these measures at all. I'm sure it's yet worse in private buildings and companies. I'm not 100% sure what the laws are on this, but it seems like there should be more stringent ones.

    California should be a nuclear-free zone. We have good enough wind and solar and other sustainable technologies, obviously, given how many buildings are perfectly able to work off of these (plus others which I'm probably not thinking of at all).

    I saw this video the other day of lights which run 60 watt bulbs on solar in the daytime made of a bottle, a piece of corrugation, water and chlorine bleach. They're putting them into poor areas like in the Phillipines. It must have been on this site, but I thought, well now that's pretty cool. People have so many ideas.

    Nuclear power isn't one of our better ones. The waste? The earthquakes? The occasional massive tsunami? We need to not pretend we are Gods. I think playing half-rate electricians is probably just enough.

    You might want to re-think those ties. - Erin Brockovich

    by mahakali overdrive on Sat Feb 11, 2012 at 10:41:13 AM PST

  •  curious: which council person was the sole (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    Joieau

    vote?  Am overseas on extended stay and not getting my Laguna papers.

  •  Food for thought (0+ / 0-)

    Future molten salt reactors will burn nuclear 'waste' for fuel.  We should store the spent fuel rods in concrete casks until we can use them.  Future generations will thank us for not burying them, or may dig them up as needed.

    Obama is still my guy.

    by AKguy on Sat Feb 11, 2012 at 02:47:21 PM PST

  •  Wow (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    Joieau

    I remember doing these weird evac "drills" in elementary school where we'd hear sirens from SanO and all file out as if it were an earthquake. I grew up in Dana Point (between Laguna and San Clemente).

    They stopped the drills by the late '80s if I recall correctly. Such a joke.

Subscribe or Donate to support Daily Kos.

Click here for the mobile view of the site