Diablo Canyon is safe

February 3, 2014

diabloOPINION By GARY KIRKLAND

The Diablo Canyon nuclear power plant is one of the safest places on earth. Back in the 1980′s, I took a tour of the plant as a science teacher in this county. We went wherever we wished, except to the actual nuclear containment domes. The place is extremely over built for safety. The plant is way above the ocean where any tsunami could hit. Pacific Gas & Electric (PG&E) has very large pools of fresh water above the plant that would cool any overheating in the facility. Gravity operates this system.

Over the years, I have talked to people who work there. They confirm that PG&E has done everything they can to make this place as safe as humanly possible.

I think the people such as those in Mothers for Peace and the Abalone Alliance are afraid of dying because they worry so much about the safety of nuclear power plants. Do they know where they are going after they die and want to stay alive as long as possible to delay going there?

The Diablo Canyon nuclear power plant is quite safe and provides much needed electricity for customers. Those who want to close the plant should quit using electricity from PG&E and allow the rest of us to have the electricity we want and need.

Gary Kirkland is an Atascadero resident and president of the San Luis Obispo County Libertarian Party.


25 Comments

  1. Ted Slanders says:

    “I think the people such as those in Mothers for Peace and the Abalone Alliance are afraid of dying because they worry so much about the safety of nuclear power plants. Do they know where they are going after they die and want to stay alive as long as possible to delay going there?”

    This statement above seems to infer the Christian paradise of Heaven, and the torments of eternal Hell. Simply put, accept Jesus or die.

    Ironically, Christians don’t hurry up their E-ticket ride to heaven by merely refusing life saving medications, operations, etc., even though their main purpose in life is what happens after death. Compare that to Muslims who will die for their religion and promise of paradise without hesitation, and facetiously, you will see who seemingly is sincere in their beliefs.

    Like or Dislike: Thumb up 9 Thumb down 14

    • jrstone says:

      Ted said: “Ironically, Christians don’t hurry up their E-ticket ride to heaven by merely refusing life saving medications, operations, etc., even though their main purpose in life is what happens after death. ”

      Well Ted, some Christians do. The Christian Scientists are prime examples of those that do refuse all traditional medicine even to the death of their children (I’ll use children as you do to raise some emotion).

      Then you have these acts of modern day Christian terrorism: Wisconsin Sikh Temple massacre, Aug. 5, 2012, The murder of Dr. George Tiller, May 31, 2009, Knoxville Unitarian Universalist Church shooting, July 27, 2008, The murder of Dr. John Britton, July 29, 1994, The Centennial Olympic Park bombing, July 27, 1996, The murder of Barnett Slepian by James Charles Kopp, Oct. 23, 1998, Planned Parenthood bombing, Brookline, Massachusetts, 1994, and the list goes on-and-on…

      While none of these examples show a Christian person strapping on a bomb and blowing themselves up, they both have the same intended purpose; to kill as many people as they can for a fringe extremest group of their chosen beliefs that will somehow garner some special rewards and attention in Heaven while bringing attention to there chosen cause.

      How ’bout we put this back on topic though? Nuclear energy is dangerous, pure and simple. It’s dangers have far more long term effects than terrorism does by any group.

      Chernobyl, the worst case in history, caused an area of approximately 20 square miles to be deemed uninhabitable for 20,000 years, and it was land locked! DC on the other hand when it gets hit by an earthquake (and it will) would be more like the event that happened in the Fukushima Daiichi nuclear disaster, where substantial amounts of radioactive materials released went right out into the ocean, where it has probably spread far-and-wide by tides and currents (no one knows for sure how far this ocean fallout has spread, or will spread).

      Hell, where investors in money look at “risk v reward” with a keen eye the same people would shrug with a blind eye at “risk v reward” when it comes to this overtly and overly dangerous method of making electricity. Why wouldn’t they? When it comes to money life always gets trumped…

      Just Sayin’…

      Like or Dislike: Thumb up 6 Thumb down 2

  2. suzyque says:

    Wow, I find it shocking that this article was even printed. What part of “nuclear energy is NOT safe” do not understand? You are coming from the wrong direction. All of us who live within 25 miles of a nuclear energy plant are at complete risk of contamination, regardless of whether it’s up and running or not. That includes sea life (which is why the Abalone Alliance objects), farms and vegetation, animals, and children (you know, the ones the Mother’s for Peace are speaking for). And all of the thousands of people who object to it have been responsible for forcing the NRC to require PG&E to comply with even further regulations.

    We all invite you to get to know and understand how your neighbors see this.

    Like or Dislike: Thumb up 10 Thumb down 7

    • topper01 says:

      Most people talk trash about nuclear energy, but in reality they know it is safe. Why else would anyone live within 25 miles of DC? They know it is safe!
      My mother told me not to criticize unless I offered solution or an alternative. Well? To all you environmentalists, what is your solution? Hydroelectric? Coal fired? Wind (you know those big blades that kill all those eagles)? I know Solar, Just not in my back yard. I just love what you did with Solyndra. Just when you convinced to buy one of those batteries on wheels, you pull the plug on my charger.

      Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

  3. grayotter says:

    Actions speak louder than words. When PG&E or anybody else says they will insure my home against a melt down at Diablo, I’ll actually believe it’s safe!
    Also, since those of us living within the impact zone of a meltdown and are taking ALL the risks, why don’t we have reduced rates to offset the risks we’re taking? We are subsidizing people outside of the zone!

    Like or Dislike: Thumb up 12 Thumb down 6

    • topper01 says:

      Grayotter If you thought it was unsafe, you would be a fool for not moving away from it. Having said that I don’t think your a fool, just someone who knows it is safe and wants to be politically correct by bad mouthing it.

      Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 1

Leave a Comment