Consider the risks of operating an old nuclear power plant in SLO County
August 15, 2022
OPINION by TERRY LAMPHIER
Our national government and several prominent figures have recently declared support for extending the operating license of Diablo Canyon in Avila Beach, and other aging nuclear power plants. Because of the grave threats posed by climate change, it may make sense to buy time to wean ourselves off fossil fuels by extending existing nuclear plant operations and possibly even building new ones with current ‘state-of-art’ technology.
Before that determination can be made, however, there are hard questions that need answers, especially as a bad accident could have dramatically severe and multi-generational consequences. For California, a major Diablo failure could have catastrophic effects on the Central Valley’s “bread basket to the world” agriculture. Nearby densely populated areas would be at risk of becoming permanent habitat “exclusion zones.”
How high is the risk? Most plants were engineered and licensed for an assumed life of 20 years. When plants approached the end of their operating licenses, policymakers revisited that standard and agreed to extend most plants’ lives for another 20 years, arguing that engineers “over-engineered” designs.
Up until the first license extension, nuclear accidents were fairly common and regularly reported in the press. Several were very serious, contaminating workers, nearby residents, farmlands, fisheries and even a city (now abandoned).
There are at least five melted nuclear power cores worldwide that are still radioactive and can’t be cleaned up, only contained (Fukushima was a planning failure, not a component failure). Other plants have come within hours of meltdown and are still operating. Associated industries, such as nuclear fuel processing plants and waste storage facilities have also exposed workers and the general public to unintended radiation releases.
Since the last extension, public reporting of accidents has largely disappeared. It may be because new practices and upgrades have made metal fatigue and corrosion a thing of the past or, more likely, problem-reporting protocols were changed (in the United States, regulators are appointed by the president, thus subject to political influence).
It strains credibility to believe there have been no more accidents at any of the 70 plus plants nationwide or the hundreds of others around the world. At the least, the public is owed an explanation.
Have all operational and maintenance bugs been eliminated since a mid-west plant came within hours of a severe containment breach several years ago? California closed its other two other reactors, Rancho Seco, near Sacramento, and San Onofre, near San Diego, due to major safety concerns. Diablo’s two reactors are of the same design – the second was built using ‘mirror image’ blueprints that required contractors to recopy information by hand – and both are located near two earthquake faults, one of which was discovered years after the plants started operations.
Extensions to the extensions should face strong, professional scrutiny, with decisions based on science, not politics, and each plant should be evaluated independently and rigorously. Extensions should also address recent requirements to have closed water-cooling systems – this includes Diablo – intended to mitigate environmental impacts. The advisability of relying on centralized energy facilities needs consideration, as Ukraine’s war-threatened nuclear plants have illustrated.
A transparent analysis of past safety issues and a professional and rigorous evaluation of Diablo and other’s current mechanical status must be a basic – critical – requirement before making a decision that could have multi-generational consequences.
It is essential that policymakers make informed decisions based on rigorous independent analysis, lest we buy a decade of “clean energy” at the cost of centuries of regret.
Terry Lamphier was among the 1800 plus arrests for protesting the original licensing of Diablo Canyon, later joining three volunteer attorneys and 11 other defendants in representing over 500 arrestees to protest the charges. After two years of preparation and two weeks of testimony by defendants and expert witnesses covering design, safety, security and other issues, the judge ruled in favor of defendants and the state dropped all charges.
The comments below represent the opinion of the writer and do not represent the views or policies of CalCoastNews.com. Please address the Policies, events and arguments, not the person. Constructive debate is good; mockery, taunting, and name calling is not. Comment Guidelines