 |
| Diablo Canyon from Wikipedia |
In California, Californians for Green Nuclear Power is supporting the continued operation of the Diablo Canyon Nuclear plant. This citizen's group is entirely volunteer and self-funded. Several of them recently carpooled to Sacramento to testify in front of the California Energy Commission.
Now you can help them, help the nuclear industry, and help Diablo Canyon! But you have to do it by 5 p.m. today. (California time).
A group called Alliance for Nuclear Responsibility has accused Diablo Canyon of not being seismically safe because the plant supposedly did not analyze the effect of a huge earthquake…directly under the plant! The Alliance does not acknowledge that scientists analyze earthquakes by analyzing the result of earthquakes due to faults, not earthquakes that that they assign to occur at random locations.
Please submit your comments here. DO IT TODAY!
https://efiling.energy.ca.gov/Ecomment/Ecomment.aspx?docketnumber=15-IEPR-12
You don't have to write anything very lengthy. Just say that PG&E did an excellent review of seismic safety in the 2012 time-frame, and that the NRC regularly reviews seismic safety in terms of new data. Or say whatever you want to say, in the words you want to use. Just do it!
Background
Here's the PG&E report: Central Coast California Seismic Imaging Project. I found the first pages of the Technical Summary the most useful.
Gene Nelson has single-handedly uploaded many comments in response to the Sierra Club and other comments. Let's help him. Here's the docket, and you can see his comments.
4 comments:
I just wrote this note. It was a little long. Hopefully, yours will be shorter! But do make it personal, if you can.
-----
California is surely earthquake territory. When I lived there, I lived through the Loma Prieta earthquake at my home in Palo Alto. Later, our son had the bad luck to be visiting Los Angeles during the Northridge Earthquake. I take earthquakes seriously.
Nobody takes earthquakes more seriously than the people who build, run and evaluate nuclear plants. Recently, PG&E did a careful study of the earthquake risk around Diablo Canyon, and concluded that the public safety would not be affected by major earthquakes on the local faults. The NRC also requires new evaluations of earthquake risk when new information becomes available. Again, the evaluations show that Diablo Canyon is built safely.
For some reason, one of the anti-nuclear groups has decided these evaluations are insufficient. They want an evaluation of an earthquake right under the plant! Apparently, they don't know that earthquakes don't just happen in random locations. There's a reason people map faults, evaluate faults, and so forth! Don't let unscientific fear-mongering get in the way of keeping the public safe. Diablo Canyon is safe.
Yes, keeping Diablo Canyon operating is indeed keeping the public safe. California does not need more gas line explosions like San Bruno. California does not need more carbon dioxide to feed global warming and drought. In other words, California does not anti-nuclear scare stories to set policy. Closing nuclear plants diminishes public safety by requiring more use of natural gas and causing more global warming.
Dear Meredith: I appreciate you making this request via your blog. I believe that it will make a difference to have expressions of support for Diablo Canyon. CGNP's testimony currently totals 225 pages with one more comment in queue.
http://www.scientificamerican.com/article/nuclear-power-seems-doomed-to-dwindle-in-the-u-s-infographic1/
How does a transformer fire condemn a nuke?? Tell me, does SciAm have it in for nuclear power?
James Greenidge
Queens NY
James,
Thank you. SciAm has a variety of reporters. I don't think they are all against nuclear power. Some may be.
Unfortunately, the lead on this story seems typical of innuendo: "After another transformer fire…the Governor would like to see the power plant shut down for good." Well, that is true. Before the transformer fire, Cuomo wanted the plant shut down. After the fire, Cuomo had another reason to say he wanted the plant shut down.
But the implication of the wording of the SciAm sentence is that "Shut the plant down" is a reasonable reaction to a transformer fire.
The reporter could say, no doubt, that he was merely reporting on Cuomo's opinions. He didn't mean to imply that transformer fires should lead to plant shut-dowsn. He just said that Cuomo said that the plant should be shut down.
Discouraging to say the least.
Meredith
Post a Comment