Front Page  »  

Mothers for Peace seeking delay of Diablo Canyon lease

June 27, 2016

Diablo Canyon Nuclear Power Plant

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Statement by Mothers for Peace

Today, San Luis Obispo Mothers for Peace (SLOMFP) asked the California State Lands Commission to delay approval of Pacific Gas and Electric Company’s application for a new lease that would allow the Diablo Canyon nuclear power plant to use state tidelands until 2024 and 2025. SLOMFP asked the state to postpone making a decision on the lease for 30 days to allow comment on whether the state should prepare an Environmental Impact Report for the proposed lease.

SLOMFP wants more time to respond to assertions by the state staff — which did not become public until June 24 — that the Diablo Canyon site does not present an unusual degree of environmental risk. The group seeks a chance to submit its own expert analysis, prepared in 2015 for the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission’s license renewal proceeding, showing that the earthquake risk posed by Diablo Canyon is potentially very serious.

SLOMFP said that a thorough environmental review by the state is not incompatible with the settlement recently reached by PG&E, Friends of the Earth, and other groups that plans the complete shutdown of Diablo Canyon by 2025 and replacement with renewable energy.

“While we are very pleased by the announcement that Diablo Canyon will close after 2025, it is also important to ensure that the plant’s environmental impacts are minimized during the interim period of operation,” said Jane Swanson, a spokesperson for SLOMFP.  “These impacts, which are potentially significant, include the effects on marine life of the once-through cooling system and discharges from the desalinization plant, as well as the effects of an earthquake-caused radiological accident.”

Swanson noted that the settlement agreement anticipated that an EIR would be requested; and that preparation of EIRs typically takes less than a year. “Avoiding the preparation of an EIR in this case is neither justified nor wise policy for protecting the environment,” she said.

 


Loading...
Subjects:             
Related:


19 Comments
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments

Go Pound Sand, Moms for Socialism.


The plant is closing.


Allowing 9 years time for the plant to close allows the economic affects of Diablo’s closure to be ameliorate by the community and government agencies.


0

When one reads the negative posts about the plant closing, the name calling against Mothers for Peace and the lame BS about no one ever being harmed by a nuke (seriously,who actually believes THAT?) one needs only remember how many people in this county work there for a bloated average salary of over $!50,000.00 per year. That sort of puts a different slant on why there are so many sour grapes over our closing that horrendous catastrophie waiting to happen. Thank you Mothers for Peace, for caring enough to hang in there all these years, without pay, to bring up our safety standards and help to finally close this threat to our way of life. I am looking forward to more employment in green industries, less pork in our fiscal diet and less radiation in our county. Here’s to avoiding the closing and cleanup costs that PG$E would like us to eat after they shoved that money sucking monstrosity down our throats.


0

Wrong!

Since 2010 Califonia installed enough solar and wind capacity to replace Diablo Canyon. Not including residential rooftop installations California solar and wind was cranking out 21,000GWhs in 2014 VS the 17,000GWhs of Diablo Canyon, in addition to that 40,000 jobs were created.


0

Do you know what Mothers For Peace has called us over the years? Let me just say, it’s far from polite. Combine that with the continual use of lies and half-truths to further their short-sighted agenda at the expense of all else and I say some name-calling is well-deserved.


And Mothers for Peace has done NOTHING to raise the safety standards at Diablo Canyon. Mothers For Peace was NEVER concerned with safe operation – they were focused solely on no operation.


You can call it sour grapes if you like, but I actually care about the environment and I’m worried about climate change. Shutting down Diablo Canyon will result in one of two things (and possibly both): more greenhouse gas emissions from burning natural gas and coal to import power, and higher rates from trying to double the number of solar cells we’ve installed over the last 20 years in less than 10. Oh, and don’t forget that many of the solar cells that have been installed over the last 20 years are due to be replaced soon. More money out of the ratepayers pockets!


0

Everybody in San Luis Obispo had better get their checkbooks out. It now has become certain that Diablo Power Plant is going to close. The only thing to be determined is whether it’s in 2018 or 2025.

You can bet that the politicians are scrambling on how to replenish the financial loss that will be coming with the closure of the Diablo Plant. One thing for certain is that they will be going after our checkbooks to keep subsidizing their lifestyle.

Remember what will be happening to us when all fees, taxes and whatever else they can think up will be raised to compensate for this. One might remember this as SLOCOG appears to be the first in line to get their 1/2 cent sales tax increase.


0

You are so right Mr. Holly! Here come the requests for increases in taxes and fees:

Cuesta College, San Luis Coastal Unified, Lucia Mar Unified, Paso Robles Unified, Atascadero Unified, County Schools Service, County Library, Port San Luis Harbor, County General Fund etc etc etc


Although not connected to the closing of DCPP, there is the SLOCOG proposed 1/2 cent sales tax that is working its way through the process and will be on the ballot in November.


And I hear there will be many state initiatives on the November ballot asking for more $$ from all of us!


I for one, will say NO. Enough!


0

Oh please, other counties do financially well without a outdated nuke sitting on faultlines. The only ones that need to worry is the overpaid staff.


0

Got this today “PG&E has called a SmartDay event for Tuesday, 06/28/2016 for your residence. Remember to reduce your energy use between 2 p.m. and 7 p.m. to save energy when electric rates are highest.”


I had one for today too.


I’m not sure shutting down this power plant is a good idea.


0

Looking at that magnificent picture that accompanies this story, I cannot imagine why a nuclear power plant was built there in the first place. It’s such a waste of pristine real estate. In contrast, San Onofre’s location looks more compatible, at least as far as real estate beauty is concerned.


Scott


0

Scott, you are right. YOU should purchase coastal real estate and then you can do with it whatever YOU see fit. Until then, shhhhh.


0

My comment was a serious one. I don’t understand your reply. All I’m saying is that is seems surprising that Diablo Canyon was placed there. I thought the California Coast was more or less off limits to “development” (e.g. private ownership). If you doubt this, wyy is so much of the coast unavailable for private ownership? Now, I’m not saying it’s right the state/federal government should own as much coastal property that they do. All I’m saying is that section of coast line is exceptionally beautiful and I am surprised that area was chosen as the location for a nuclear power plant. Yes, this decision goes back to the ’60s, so there is a perspective issue to consider. I suppose local jobs were of paramount concern.


TaxMeAgain, suppose a mega-billionaire had the financial resources and legal means to buy up all coastal real estate between Monterey and Cambria – and close it to all public access – and clear cut the redwood trees. Would that be fair game to you, just because that person has the means to do it and, as you say, “do with it whatever YOU see fit”.


All I’m saying is that it was my belief that coastal real estate was more or less “protected”, and that particular location seems a surprising way to have used it. Then again, Avila back then was not the Avila we know now.


Scott


0

You don’t know the history of Diablo Canyon’s development.


Diablo Canyon was a compromise site agreed upon the state of California, the Sierra Club and PG&E. The original site for the Nuclear Power Plant was to have been the Guadalupe Dunes. A Nuke plant on low lying coastal dunes. Can you say Fukushima?


The plant was moved to Diablo Canyon because the Sierra Club wanted to save the Guadalupe Dunes. At the time, there was nothing out there but cattle ranches and beach shacks at Avila. The big dig in the 90s hadn’t happened, which turned Avila into a mini Carmel. The area was remote, so it seemed like as good a spot as any for a nuclear power plant.


0

An EIR for an existing operation? Huh? There is no legal precedent for that. Do the Mothers for Peace (Mothers AGAINST Diablo) just make up laws as they see fit?


Really?


0

Mothers for peace, please go away. You are ineffective. The Diablo Plant has out lived your fear tactics. You Lost!! There have been more people killed by steam boilers than Nuclear Energy.


0

Please watch an episode of “Naked and Afraid” to see what our future will look like if all these activists keep being successful because all our politicians have become so PC.


0

Enough! Your misguided meddling only hurts people…. Go away.


0
1 2