Climate groups move to stop relicensing of Diablo Canyon nuclear plant - Washington Examiner
Climate groups move to stop relicensing of Diablo Canyon nuclear plant - Washington Examiner
California climate groups on Tuesday filed a motion to intervene in the relicensing process for the Diablo Canyon Nuclear Power Plant, citing concerns over safety and environmental hazards at the plant that they say could risk disaster.
The motion, filed by Friends of the Earth, Mothers for Peace, and the Environmental Working Group, comes less than a year after the Nuclear Regulatory Commission approved the Pacific Gas and Electric Company’s request to extend the lifespan of Diablo Canyon beyond its originally planned 2025 closure date.
Continued operation of the plant, the groups said, “hurts the state’s shift to safe, renewable energy and prolongs the risk of a disaster at the plant.”
In the filing, petitioners said they are “highly concerned” about extending the life of Diablo Canyon, located on the coast in San Luis Obispo County — citing both high costs for consumers and “extreme safety and environmental hazards” in keeping the plant online. They also asked the Nuclear Regulatory Committee to hold a hearing to assess any safety risks associated with relicensing Diablo.
Diablo is the single largest energy source in California, generating roughly 2,200 megawatts of carbon-free power, or roughly 17% of the state’s total zero-carbon power, according to data from the Energy Information Administration.
However, some environmental groups in the state have said the safety of the plant is a worry because of the risk of embrittlement or damage due to shaking from nearby earthquake faults.
Supporters of the push to keep Diablo online argue that keeping it is crucial to helping the state achieve its goal of reaching 100% clean electricity by 2045 and to avoid blackouts during peak summer demand.
A study from the Brattle Group found that extending Diablo Canyon’s lifespan could help California decarbonize “more quickly, more reliably, and at a lower cost,” approximately $5 billion less, than if the plant shut down in 2025 as previously planned.
But the plan has drawn sharp criticism from dozens of environmental and anti-nuclear groups, including over safety concerns that they say warrant additional testing. In a petition filed last fall, University of California, Berkeley nuclear engineering professor Digby Macdonald said these concerns pose “an unreasonable risk to public health and safety” due to the potential for serious embrittlement.
Pacific Gas and Electric “has repeatedly postponed essential metallurgical tests and ultrasound inspections over the past two decades” on the vessel, the environmental groups argued, making it susceptible to cracking during an earthquake or natural disaster.
CLICK HERE TO READ MORE FROM THE WASHINGTON EXAMINER
The matter has been a divisive one in California, though Democrats in the state, including Gov. Gavin Newsom (D-CA), approved a plan last year to keep Diablo online through at least 2035.
PG&E did not respond to the Washington Examiner’s request for comment regarding the update.
Related Knowledge Center: ENERGY BASICS: nuclear
Nuclear energy provides almost 20 percent of the U.S. electricity supply. Advocates have called for an expanded role for nuclear as an emissions-free fuel source. But the economics of building new reactors are daunting. In addition, lingering safety concerns are an institutionalized part of the calculation of nuclear regulation, and highly radioactive nuclear waste remains a can that public officials have been inclined to kick down the road. The Energy Information Administration projects a sharp decline in nuclear power generation over the next decade, as new nuclear plants — two are planned — are more than offset by anticipated retirements of several operating reactors.