california legislature will decide on the future of diablo canyon. it’s obvious that keeping it open is the right thing to do to keep the lights on, reduce emissions and ensure california remains a climate leader. #SB846
one objection to keeping it open was what people called a “solar tax”. the issue was fully cleared yesterday and the rooftop solar industry has removed its opposition to it. win win 🏆
BUT WHAT ABOUT THE EARTHQUAKES?
don’t listen to me, listen to this expert of 50 (!) years in earthquake engineering and earthquake risk management:
since we don’t have a permanent disposal site, the waste at diablo canyon will stay there even if the plant shuts down in 2025. it sits 300 feet above sea level.
two years ago i called big pro-nuclear organizations to ask what they were doing to save diablo canyon. the responses were the same: “don’t waste your time, it’s a done deal.”
guess i’m a terrible listener, because i kept digging…
it is the biggest nuclear power plant in europe (6 reactors)
3 reactors were offline already
2 more were recently shut down
there seems to be 1 reactor still operating
a couple of hours ago, russian military attacked the plant and caused a fire in an administration building. the reactor buildings were not on fire and seem to be safe.
contrary to what some people are claiming, even in the worst case scenario, this would NOT be an event 10x worse than chernobyl. or even just as bad as chernobyl.
the webinar started with former secretary of energy steven chu saying “what are you doing you silly bunch? keep diablo canyon open!”
just kidding! he actually said that countries that turned off their nuclear *cough cough germany* have built more fossil fuel plants and increased their carbon emissions.
just so we’re all on the same page: burning more fossil fuels = bad
steve then urged @PGE4Me to reconsider their decision to close down diablo canyon… like a true king 👑
this presentation by energy twitter’s fav @JesseJenkins is worth a watch! but here is a little TLDW 🧵
to get to 100% clean electricity by 2050 we’re gonna have to:
- double the current *clean* energy capacity in the US by 2030
- double the current *total* energy capacity by 2040 (but all has to be clean)
- do all of it again by 2050
so, adding on average 35GW/yr for 19 years 😳
ok. kind of depressing, but not impossible! has any country ever done that?
France got the closest, deploying on average 30GW/year of nuclear power for 9 years.
Sweden, right behind France, deploying on average 26GW/year of nuclear power also for 9 years.