myiW Current Conditions and Forecasts Community Forums Buy and Sell Services
 
Hi guest · myAccount · Log in
 SearchSearch   ProfileProfile   Log in to check your private messagesLog in to check your private messages   RegisterRegister 
Diablo Canyon
Goto page 1, 2  Next
 
Post new topic   Reply to topic    iWindsurf Community Forum Index -> Politics, Off-Topic, Opinions
View previous topic :: View next topic  
Author Message
mac



Joined: 07 Mar 1999
Posts: 17744
Location: Berkeley, California

PostPosted: Wed Aug 31, 2022 10:47 am    Post subject: Diablo Canyon Reply with quote

In June, Techno posted an op ed piece from one of his reliably right wing sites, going to bat for nuclear power and once again trolling California. I shudder to think of Techno, with his tribal allegiances controlling his critical thinking, and his ready, shoot aim instincts, teaching children. He went on to scold everyone who did not instantly join the culture war on one side or another.

A slip of Techno's rant:

Quote:
California tries to pass the buck on Diablo Canyon
Opinion by Todd Snitchler -

In 2016, ceding to pressures from environmentalists and state regulations that prioritized renewables over nuclear and natural gas power, Pacific Gas & Electric announced the planned closure of the Diablo Canyon Power Plant, a nuclear facility that provides 18,000 GWh of electricity annually — about 10% of California’s electricity portfolio. These regulations made the plant economically unfeasible to operate, PG&E said, and targeted 2024 and 2025 to decommission its two remaining reactors.

Fast forward to 2022, California policymakers who put those regulations in place are changing their tune around nuclear power, a baseload zero-carbon source of electricity, and the proposed closure of Diablo Canyon.



Here is a very wise op ed piece from someone who actually knows what he is talking about.

Quote:
By PETER BRADFORD |
PUBLISHED: August 31, 2022 at 5:15 a.m. | UPDATED: August 31, 2022 at 5:18 a.m.
Several times during the history of commercial nuclear power the nuclear industry, assisted by parts of the federal government, has chosen a particular power plant as poster child for its relentless effort to boost the fortunes of its staggeringly expensive technology.

Today it’s California’s Diablo Canyon. A decade ago it was Vogtle in Georgia. Before that were Shoreham in New York, Seabrook in New Hampshire, the WPPSS in Washington, and Clinch River in Tennessee. These sorties have yet to end well for the plants, the customers or the taxpayers.

These plant sites, totaling12 reactors, were overtaken by economic difficulties. Despite the choice of power sources being matter for the states, the U.S. government provided exaggerated forecasts of looming electricity shortages and lost global nuclear stature. It also offered substantial subsidy and joined in pro-power plant litigation.

At Vogtle, for example, Energy Secretary Steven Chu offered billions in taxpayer loan guarantees and waived the usual fees. Those two reactors are many years behind schedule and at least $14 billion over budget. Georgia would not have approved them if the state had had accurate forecasts. Chu offered a similar taxpayer guarantee to a site in South Carolina where the reactors were cancelled after $9 billion had been spent. This is the track record to remember as he now proclaims Diablo Canyon the “most economically viable” path to California’s low carbon energy future.

Ten of the 12 reactors have never operated, though billions of wasted dollars prolonged policy uncertainty and hamstrung better alternatives. No power shortages resulted from the loss of any of these reactors.

But memories fade. Clean and reliable electricity must be acquired as effectively and efficiently as possible, so politicians march under frivolous banners reading “all of the above,” as though caviar should be used to fight world hunger. Gubernatorial gullibility recurs. Titled professors at MIT and elsewhere produce pronuclear studies best challenged by quoting the now-obvious nonsense in the last one.

Though many believe that operating an existing nuclear power plant like Diablo Canyon provides a sure-fire inexpensive source of electricity, this is not the case. Aging reactors encounter inefficiencies, malfunctions and essential repairs that can render them neither cheap nor reliable. A dozen (of 104) U.S. nuclear power plants – including San Onofre in California – have closed in the last eight years precisely because their output became too expensive to be sold in competitive power markets. A dozen more have required tens of billions in subsidies from customers and taxpayers to stay open.

France, half of its aging reactors closed by various malfunctions, now buys power from Germany, which has replaced many nuclear reactors with efficiency and renewable energy. French electric rates are among Europe’s highest.

The legislation being proposed by Gov. Gavin Newsom to keep Diablo Canyon open also contemplates massive subsidies to the plant, money that might well do more for the climate and for reliability if spent on other low or zero carbon sources that are crowded out by commitments to take power from the uneconomic reactors.


After extensive analysis, Diablo Canyon was expressly found in 2018 not to be a low-cost answer to California’s energy future after 2025. Whether it has somehow morphed into that position can be tested again before the units close in 2024-25 if need be. It cannot be prudently tested in the prophesy-based political cattle drive needed to pass sweeping subsidy and environmental suppression legislation without meaningful hearings or public input during August of 2022.

Peter Bradford was a U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commissioner and chair of the New York and Maine utility regulatory commissions.


The great irony here is that "conservatives" often profess the religion of competition--but abandon that stance when it interferes with their social war against all things liberal. So I am a socialist because I favor letting sexually active children get birth control, while Techno is unable to see that subsidizing nuclear power with billions of dollars is actually socialism.

Sad indeed, glad he is retired.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
techno900



Joined: 28 Mar 2001
Posts: 4161

PostPosted: Wed Aug 31, 2022 1:27 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

So, I must assume that you would like to see Diablo Canyon shut down.

Since your memory is failing, you should go back to see if was pro or con shut down? What you will find is that I am neither, I was just pointing out how your Governor was flip flopping on the shutdown, and that now Calif. and apparently the Federal government may have to pump a billion plus into the plant that has been left to deteriorate, just to keep it running. Just think what it will be like trying to recharge all the electric cars that Calif will have by 2035, when the sun doesn't shine, and the wind doesn't blow. They may have to keep Diablo open beyond 2035.

Two weeks ago:

Quote:
Keeping Diablo Canyon nuclear power plant open could cost California as much as $1.4 billion, under new legislation proposed by Gov. Gavin Newsom on the eve of a hearing to discuss the contested future of the plant on the San Luis Obispo County coast.

On Aug. 11, Newsom proposed, through draft legislation distributed to lawmakers, a $1.4 billion forgivable loan to Pacific Gas & Electric, the owner of the power plant, which could keep it operational until 2035, 10 years beyond its currently schedule closure.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
mac



Joined: 07 Mar 1999
Posts: 17744
Location: Berkeley, California

PostPosted: Wed Aug 31, 2022 2:11 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

techno900 wrote:
So, I must assume that you would like to see Diablo Canyon shut down.

Since your memory is failing, you should go back to see if was pro or con shut down? What you will find is that I am neither, I was just pointing out how your Governor was flip flopping on the shutdown, and that now Calif. and apparently the Federal government may have to pump a billion plus into the plant that has been left to deteriorate, just to keep it running. Just think what it will be like trying to recharge all the electric cars that Calif will have by 2035, when the sun doesn't shine, and the wind doesn't blow. They may have to keep Diablo open beyond 2035.

Two weeks ago:

Quote:
Keeping Diablo Canyon nuclear power plant open could cost California as much as $1.4 billion, under new legislation proposed by Gov. Gavin Newsom on the eve of a hearing to discuss the contested future of the plant on the San Luis Obispo County coast.

On Aug. 11, Newsom proposed, through draft legislation distributed to lawmakers, a $1.4 billion forgivable loan to Pacific Gas & Electric, the owner of the power plant, which could keep it operational until 2035, 10 years beyond its currently schedule closure.


I left your incoherent comment as it was, unedited, so you could see what you left out and made no attempt to proofread. Pretty typical of your ready, shoot, aim approach.

After wading through a number of different takes on this, I've reached the conclusion that there are better ways to spend the $1.4 billion that it would take to keep Diablo Canyon open. California will have to develop new sources to generate the necessary power, and paying this much would make less available for such measures. But I don't put it past politicians, including Newsom, spinning what is going on for political benefit. After all, Newsom would benefit from the political contributions associated with a subsidy of $1.4 million. I've based that opinion on informed sources with expertise, including this citation, from someone who served on nuclear commissions, and unlike Techno, did his homework.

In stark contrast, Techno's source is an attorney, Todd A. Snitchler is an American politician, attorney, and energy industry lobbyist who served as a member of the Ohio House of Representatives for the 50th district from 2009 to 2011. He serves as a lobbyist for the Electric Power Supply Association, representing the companies who are at the trough for $6 billion in subsidies for uneconomical power plants. Would he lie to you? Would Techno believe him?

What a fool.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
isobars



Joined: 12 Dec 1999
Posts: 20935

PostPosted: Thu Sep 01, 2022 11:30 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Does the rest of the nation have this straight:
No new gasoline-powered cars in CA after 2035.
CA is shutting down a nuclear power plant (and probably not building a dozen new ones in the foreseeable future).
CA residents are being asked to shut off their AC, stoves, etc. and avoid charging their EVs every evening AND face rolling black- or brown-outs.

You made your dumbass bed. Lie in it, shut yer mouths, look at what green BS is doing to Europe, and stop giving Inslee insane ideas.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
coachg



Joined: 10 Sep 2000
Posts: 3549

PostPosted: Thu Sep 01, 2022 3:19 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

isobars wrote:
CA residents are being asked to shut off their AC, stoves, etc. and avoid charging their EVs every evening AND face rolling black- or brown-outs.


And the lies keep coming; so Trumponian of him.

Coachg
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
mac



Joined: 07 Mar 1999
Posts: 17744
Location: Berkeley, California

PostPosted: Thu Sep 01, 2022 3:30 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Self censorship keeps him stupid. I think there must be other things that account for the rage.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
coachg



Joined: 10 Sep 2000
Posts: 3549

PostPosted: Thu Sep 01, 2022 3:43 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Well Mac,
That is the $1 million question. Is he that far gone that he really doesn’t know his stupidity can be easily debunked, or is he just such a pathological liar that he just can’t help himself? The world will never know, nor care.

Coachg
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
mac



Joined: 07 Mar 1999
Posts: 17744
Location: Berkeley, California

PostPosted: Thu Sep 01, 2022 8:02 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Many years ago when I first found this forum, one of my friends told me that Isobars was just crazy. He wasn't wrong. There is a rage in Isobars that is not rational, and it warps his thinking. Combined with the narcissistic behavior (look for his rant about his sandwich!), and his habit of avoiding anything that makes him uncomfortable, it is not the picture of mental health. But I don't think that makes him a pathological liar. Instead, a victim of confirmation bias. He reads his sources with such a closed mind it is hard to understand how he reached the conclusions he spouts, or why he posts a source that doesn't really support his view.

But of course, some of this is just entertainment.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
swchandler



Joined: 08 Nov 1993
Posts: 10588

PostPosted: Thu Sep 01, 2022 10:01 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

isobars is incorrigible.

He's beyond reason, and lost in an ugly land of no return. He's not going to see the light and change his views. He's an unhappy old man facing his doom.

Needless to say, he will remain angry and hateful into the future. Believe me, a happy result for him isn't in the cards. Sadly, history validates that.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
techno900



Joined: 28 Mar 2001
Posts: 4161

PostPosted: Fri Sep 02, 2022 8:01 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Iso,

They know what is going down, and if it suits them to go down with the ship, so be it. But the good news is that it looks like Calif. will foot the bill to keep Diablo Canyon open.


Quote:
SACRAMENTO — California lawmakers voted to keep the Diablo Canyon nuclear plant open for five more years, ultimately siding with Gov. Gavin Newsom’s controversial call to lend PG&E up to $1.4 billion and reverse plans to shutter the facility.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Display posts from previous:   
Post new topic   Reply to topic    iWindsurf Community Forum Index -> Politics, Off-Topic, Opinions All times are GMT - 5 Hours
Goto page 1, 2  Next
Page 1 of 2

 
Jump to:  
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum
You cannot attach files in this forum
You cannot download files in this forum

myiW | Weather | Community | Membership | Support | Log in
like us on facebook
© Copyright 1999-2007 WeatherFlow, Inc Contact Us Ad Marketplace

Powered by phpBB © 2001, 2005 phpBB Group