The organization Strategic Stability reported July 20, 2022:
The authorities of city of Energodar reported four attacks by Ukrainian UAVs on the Zaporozhye NPP in a day on July 20th. This was reported to RIA Novosti by the press service of the city Administration. Energodar is located very close to this NPP. It is reported that the last attack was recorded at 16:01 (Moscow time). The building located nearby was damaged. The Administration of the Zaporozhye Region also reported that the reactor part of the NPP was not damaged as a result of the attack, the radiation level is normal.
What will be the reaction of the IAEA?
– – – –
The last IAEA bulletin on Ukraine was July 14. No IAEA response so far.
Ukrainian attack drones attacked the Zaporozhye nuclear power plant
Zaporizhia authorities said that Ukrainian strike drones attacked the nuclear power plant
ENERGODAR (Zaporozhye region), July 20 – RIA Novosti. Ukrainian drones hit the Zaporozhye nuclear power plant, the press service of the Energodar administration told RIA Novosti.
“Today, Kyiv carried out an attack on the Zaporozhye nuclear power plant with the help of strike UAVs,” the official said.
“According to preliminary information, the UAVs were equipped with warheads with an explosive mass calculated in kilograms in TNT equivalent,” Vladimir Rogov, a representative of the CAA , wrote on his Telegram channel .
At the same time, the reactor part of the nuclear power plant was not damaged.In a commentary to RIA Novosti, Rogov added that strikes on the station were carried out to intimidate workers. He expressed confidence that this goal would not be achieved.Earlier , the
Armed Forces of Ukraine already tried to damage the object. On July 12, Ukrainian UAVs dropped several 120mm caliber mines on a building located next to the nuclear power plant. The roof and windows were damaged. In addition, an attempt to attack the power plant using drones was recorded on Monday, when 11 employees were injured, four of them in serious condition.
Russia has been conducting a military operation in Ukraine since February 24. President
Vladimir Putin called its goal “the protection of people who have been subjected to genocide by the Kiev regime for eight years.” The Russian Ministry of Defense called the liberation of Donbass the main task .
In particular, in the DPR , the military occupies Volnovakha, a strategically important regional center south of Donetsk, Mariupol, the largest city on the coast of the Sea of Azov, and Svyatogorsk. In addition, in early July, with the capture of Lisichansk and the surrounding settlements, the allied forces controlled the entire territory of the LPR. During the special operation, the Russian military took control of the Kherson region and the Azov part of the Zaporozhye region in southern Ukraine, including the largest power plant in Europe. Civil-military administrations were formed in the regions, the ruble was put into circulation, and Russian TV channels and radio stations began broadcasting. The regions have announced plans to become Russian subjects.
I am sure that certain Democratic senators such as Cory Booker and Sheldon Whitehouse, who are reasonably progressive on a host of social issues, would not considers themselves racist, sexist or ageist.
Nuclear power is all three of these things, yet Booker, Whitehouse and a number of others on the Democratic left, support nuclear power with almost fervent evangelism.
Let’s start with racism. The fuel for nuclear power plants comes from uranium, which must be mined. The majority of those who have mined it in this country — and would again under new bills such as the ‘International Nuclear Energy Act of 2022’ forwarded by not-so-progressive “Democrat”, Senator Joe Manchin (D-WV) — are Native Americans.
As such, they have taken the brunt of the negative health impacts as well as the environmental degradation both created and then left behind by uranium mines when they cease to operate, as most in the U.S. now have.
Studies conducted among members of the Navajo Nation have shown increases in a number of diseases and lingering internal contamination from uranium mine waste among newborns and children. Chronic ailments including kidney disease and hypertension found in these populations are medically linked with living near –and contact with — uranium mine waste.
Navajo children are especially vulnerable to uranium exposure and among the least protected. (Photo: Phil Darnell/Wikimedia Commons)
At the other end of the nuclear power chain comes the lethal, long-lived and highly radioactive waste as well as the so-called low-level radioactive waste stream of detritus, including from decommissioned nuclear power plants. Again, Indigenous peoples and poor communities of color are routinely the target.
The first and only high-level radioactive waste repository identified for the U.S. was to have been at Yucca Mountain, Nevada, against the strong wishes of the Western Shoshone Nation of Indians, on whose land the now canceled site is located. The Western Shoshone had already suffered the worst of the atomic testing program, with the Nevada atomic test site also on their land, making them “the most bombed nation on Earth,” as Western Shoshone Principal Man, Ian Zabarte, describes it.
An attempt to site a “low-level” radioactive waste dump in the largely Hispanic community of Sierra Blanca, TX was defeated, as was an allegedly temporary high-level radioactive waste site targeted for the Skull Valley Goshute Indian reservation in Utah.
Currently, efforts are underway to secure what are euphemistically known as “Consolidated Interim Storage Sites” in two communities in New Mexico and Texas, again with large Hispanic populations and considerable opposition.
Needless to say, these waste projects come with notable incentives — sometimes more accurately characterized as bribes — for the host community, in an effort to describe the deal as “voluntary.” But this preys upon the desperate economic needs of the most vulnerable communities, which are usually those of color.
The only two new U.S. nuclear reactors still under construction sit close to the African American community of Shell Bluff, Georgia, a population riddled with cancers and other diseases and who bitterly opposed the addition of more reactors to an already radioactively contaminated region.
Nuclear power is sexist because exposure to the ionizing radiation released at every stage of the nuclear fuel chain harms women more easily than men. Women are more radiosensitive than men — the science is not fully in on this but it is likely connected to greater hormone production — but women are not protected for.
Instead, the standard guidelines on which allowable radiation exposure levels are based (and “allowable” does not mean “safe”), consider a healthy, White male, in his mid-twenties to thirties and typically weighing around 154 pounds. He is known as “Reference Man”.
Women’s more vulnerable health concerns, and especially those of pregnant women, the fetus, babies and small children — and in particular female children — are thus overlooked in favor of the higher doses a healthy young male could potentially withstand.
As my colleagues Cindy Folkers and Ian Fairlie wrote:” “Women, especially pregnant women and children are especially susceptible to damage from radiation exposure. This means that they suffer effects at lower doses. Resulting diseases include childhood cancers, impaired neural development, lower IQ rates, respiratory difficulties, cardiovascular diseases, perinatal mortality and birth defects — some appearing for the first time within a family in the population studied.”
Even around nuclear power plants, the very young are at greater risk. Numerous studies in Europe have demonstrated that children age five or younger living close to nuclear power plants show higher rates of leukemia than those living further away. The closer they lived to the nuclear plant, the higher the incidences.
Similarly, the elderly are more vulnerable to the harmful effects of radiation exposure than adults in the prime of life. They, too, are overlooked in favor of protecting a robust man. Elders exposed to radiation are mainly to be found in the uranium mining and milling communities, or where waste dumps are located, and are therefore more likely to be low-income with poorer access to health care and fewer finances to pay for it.
The urgency of the climate crisis is a valid reason to revisit all electricity sources and make some important choices about lowering — and ideally eliminating — carbon emissions. Ruling out fossil fuel use is a must. But turning to nuclear power — rather than the faster, cheaper and safer options of renewable energy and efficiency — is not a humane choice.
If health is the concern, along with climate change, as it most certainly is for someone like Cory Booker, then choosing nuclear power as a substitute for fossil fuels is simply trading asthma for leukemia and asking frontline and Indigenous communities to, once again, suffer the greatest harm for the least return.
A truly progressive energy policy looks forward, not back. Nuclear power is an energy of the past — borne of a public relations exercise to create something positive out of splitting the atom. It was a mistake then. And it is a mistake now. If we are to address our climate crisis in time, and to do so with justice and equality, then we must ensure a Just Transition that considers the most vulnerable and discriminated among us, not what is best for that healthy, White Reference Man.
Governor Newsom has been carrying PG&E’s water for too long. When will it end? July 8, 2022
Governor Newsom’s cozy relationship with PG&E has been ongoing since his run for San Francisco Supervisor in 1998. By now, contributions from PG&E add up to well over $10 million in support of his campaigns and ballot measures. The company has also contributed hundreds of thousands to Newsom’s wife’s foundation. In return, Newsom has helped PG&E get away with murder, literally. And now, Newsom is proving his loyalty to the company by providing a runway for PG&E to keep Diablo Canyon nuclear plant open past its agreed-upon closure date of 2025.
On June 30, the Department of Energy (DOE) bowed to Newsom’s plea to change the rules so Diablo could qualify for a portion of the $6 million of Civil Nuclear Tax Credits. The DOE also extended the application deadline until September 6, 2022, allowing PG&E ample time to apply. Newsom is no stranger to manipulating circumstances to help PG&E. After the Camp Fire, which killed 85 people in 2018, Newsom had his lawyers craft a bill, AB 1054. This 2019 bill essentially protected PG&E by creating a $21 billion fund to help utilities cover the cost of major wildfires started by their equipment and forcing customers to pay for half of the cost of the fund. The bill also enabled PG&E to obtain official state safety certificates for two fire seasons since the Camp Fire. Yet, three years later, a state report on the 2021 Dixie Fire indicated that the utility was negligent in its tree-removal program, which helped spark the fire, and that their response the day of the fire was “excessively delayed.”
In response to the Supreme Court’s ruling weakening the EPA, Governor Newsom claimed that “California is taking bold action to further advance California’s progress toward an oil-free future and bolster the state’s clean energy economy.” Yet, at the same time, he convinced members of the State Legislature to pass a very climate-unfriendly Trailer Budget Bill. This legislation provides a $75 million allocation for the Department of Water Resources to purchase electricity from Diablo Canyon and hundreds of millions more for fossil fuel power plants.
Keeping Diablo open past 2025 breaks a hard-fought agreement between environmental organizations, labor, and PG&E. It puts the availability of renewable energy at risk, undercutting the state’s ability to reduce carbon dioxide and other climate-warming emissions 40% below 1990 levels by 2030 and achieve carbon neutrality by 2045. California does not need Diablo to ensure sufficient energy to prevent power outages or meet climate goals. To be clear, Diablo Canyon is closing because PG&E determined in 2016 that doing so would enable it to meet California’s renewable energy standard (RES) and emissions standards more rapidly and more cost-effectively.
Newsom’s coddling of PG&E and his maneuverings at the state and federal levels to keep Diablo running is all the more disturbing in that his motivations are based on the false narrative that these fossil and nuclear-fueled plants will prevent power outages. They will not. Energy consultant Robert Freehling explains it succinctly: “These plants were operating during the early 2000s energy crisis and in 2020. They did not prevent outages.”
Timeline: PG&E’s disasters since 2010 ABC10 examined the disasters and wildfires caused by PG&E, starting with the San Bruno Gas Explosion in 2010 then jumping ahead 8 years to the Camp Fire.Here’s a look at the timeline of PG&E’s disasters by ABC10:2010… PG&E was convicted of six federal felonies, including obstruction of the investigation, stemming from the 2010 San Bruno Gas Explosion. The blast killed eight people. Due to this conviction, the company was placed on probation until 2022, paid a $3 million fine, and was sentenced to 10,000 hours of community service.
2018... Newsom wins the governor’s race in November of 2018. Three days later, the Camp Fire started, destroying the town of Paradise and nearby communities. The fire resulted in the deaths of 85 people. It was determined the company left a hook hanging for nearly a hundred years until it broke, dropped a power line and sparked the fire.
2019… Problems with similar parts on a high tension power line are blamed for sparking the Kincade Fire. It burned more than a hundred homes in wine country. No one died, but it was close. Firefighters were injured while saving people. PG&E is fighting multiple felony and misdemeanor charges filed by Sonoma County in connection to the Kincade Fire.
2020…PG&E pleaded guilty to 84 felony counts of manslaughter, and one felony for sparking the Camp Fire through criminally reckless behavior. Three months after the court proceedings for the Camp Fire, the Zogg Fire broke out when a tree hit a PG&E power line in Shasta County. Four people died, including eight-year-old Feyla McLeod and her mother, both of whom burned to death running for their lives in a pickup truck. It’s an active homicide investigation and prosecutors recently announced they will be filing charges against PG&E and possibly officials who work there. The judge managing PG&E’s probation already found PG&E committed safety “violations” when PG&E’s contractors marked an unsafe tree leaning over the power line, but no one ever followed up to cut it down.
2021… PG&E’s legal obligation to find and cut trees threatening power lines is again under investigation for the Dixie Fire, which is still raging through communities ever since igniting on July 13. The fire started where a tree fell on a PG&E power line just a short distance up the Feather River Canyon from where PG&E sparked the Camp Fire. The question for investigators isn’t whether PG&E sparked the Dixie Fire, but whether PG&E is criminally responsible. That question hinges on whether PG&E should have found the tree and cut it before it fell.
ABC10 series: Fire Power Money For over three years, ABC10’s Fire – Power – Money team has been at the forefront covering California’s wildfire crisis, the danger of PG&E’s power lines, and how the company avoids accountability. Governor Newsom, PG&E, the CPUC, and the California fires https://www.abc10.com/firepowermoney
The nuclear fuel chain encompasses the various activities associated with the production of electricity from nuclear reactors. All steps in the chain generate radioactive waste.
#1 Mining and Milling
Uranium mining scars the landscape and devastates the environment. It is commonly done on indigenous and tribal peoples’ lands, destroying their communities.
The byproduct of uranium mining is dangerous dirt called “tailings”, a sandy waste containing heavy metals and radium, which is radioactive. Often the tailings are simply dumped on the land near the mine and left to the elements. A tailings pile may be a large trench or a former mine pit. Wind carries radon gas and radioactive dust from these tailings for many miles. Contaminated rainwater enters the soil, the watershed, and eventually the food chain, endangering health.
The uranium ore is delivered to the mill where it is crushed into smaller particles before being extracted with strong acids or bases. The uranium ore is concentrated into a solid substance called “yellowcake.”
#2 Enrichment
A nuclear reactor requires a higher concentration of the U235 isotope than that which exists in natural uranium ore. So the yellowcake must be “enriched” at large industrial chemical conversion plants. The uranium in yellowcake is converted to uranium hexafluoride (UF6 ), a compound that can be made into nuclear fuel. This conversion process is carbon intensive. It involves large amounts of water and electricity as well as a number of volatile chemicals, creating risks associated with inhalation if a release occurred. In addition, the conversion process uses hydrogen gas which is flammable and could create an explosion hazard.
#3 Fabrication of Fuel
Fuel fabrication is the last step in the process of turning uranium into nuclear fuel rods. The enriched uranium is converted into fuel “pellets” and placed into thin metal rods. Each rod joins hundreds of others in a bundle called a fuel “assembly” to be loaded into the reactor core of the nuclear power plant.
#4 Storage of Used or “Spent” Nuclear Fuel: High Level Radioactive Waste
Nuclear fuel is typically used in the reactor for 3-6 years and then must be removed. The rods are highly radioactive and must be stored under water for cooling and radiation shielding. After years in the over-crowded pools, the spent fuel assemblies are moved into dry storage casks which will deteriorate over time.
There is no permanent solution for its disposal or storage which makes this issue particularly dangerous. Short-term solutions do not address the grave health and environmental effects of nuclear waste that last for a million years.
No Nukes Action – Fukushima, Workers & The Environment
July 11 @ 6:00 pm – 8:00 pm PDT FREE
The Fukushima nuclear disaster is still with us more than 11 years after the radioactive explosions at the plants. The melted nuclear radioactive fuel rods still have not been removed and the Japanese government with the support the US wants to dump over 1.3 million tons of radioactive water in the Pacific Ocean. There are also thousands of residents and clean-up workers who have been contaminated by radiation. These contract clean-up workers have been recruited by the Yakuza from the day laborers and from migrants from overseas and have not received proper health and safety training on dealing with this dangerous nuclear disaster sight . This panel will look at the continuing crisis, the workers, residents and Environment with a panel.
“In the early morning hours of July 16, 1979, less than 4 months after the highly publicized release at Three Mile Island,32 the earthen dam at Church Rock Mill failed (Table 1▶). The amount of radiation released at United Nuclear Corporation was larger than the release at Three Mile Island. The 6-m-wide dam breach sent approximately 1100 tons of radioactive mill waste and 95 million gallons of mine process effluent down Pipeline Arroyo and into the North Fork of the Puerco River.33 This tremendous flow of water backed up sewers, affected 2 nearby aquifers, left pools along the river, and transported contaminants 130 km downstream to a point near Navajo, Arizona.34
…
With the exception of the 6-person human exposure assessment carried out by the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention,33 the various exposure pathways and related human health outcomes associated with this spill have yet to be characterized. The Centers for Disease Control study addressed only inhalation of suspended tailings and ingestion of livestock, ruling out other exposure pathways such as consumption of vegetables, ingestion of river water or groundwater, and inadvertent ingestion of contaminated sediment. This assessment failed to incorporate not only all potential exposures but also radiation types.34 A number of subsequent studies carried out in the Puerco River basin have identified contaminated groundwater from the spill as well as downstream transport and deposition of radionuclides from the Pipeline Arroyo areas, suggesting that exposure will continue to occur through these pathways in the future.35–37
Like Sequoyah Fuels Corporation, the Church Rock spill occurred in a low-income, rural, American Indian area, albeit closer to a substantial secondary city, Gallup, NM, which has large Hispanic and White populations. Because the spill happened in the immediate aftermath of nationwide coverage of the Three Mile Island release, the muted coverage and response is particularly striking. It is not clear that there was acute harm from the Church Rock spill, so like Three Mile Island, the main concern is the development of disease over time after exposure. Compared with Sequoyah Fuels Corporation, the Church Rock spill contained more radioactivity because the tailings included radium, thorium, and other uranium decay products that have relatively high specific activities. In contrast to Three Mile Island, the population near Church Rock was already chronically exposed to uranium mine and mill waste through both occupational and environmental routes and continues to be exposed today.38
A series of local struggles and public health studies have refocused local attention on the Church Rock area as well as the entire Eastern Navajo area. The struggles revolve around proposals to restart uranium mining with in situ leach methods. In response, the Navajo Nation voted to ban all uranium mining, a resolution that is currently being challenged by mining companies.39 The studies are community based and involve a collaboration among Eastern Navajo communities, the Southwest Research and Information Center, the University of New Mexico, and others. The focus of research is the health impact of environmental uranium exposure (oral communication, J. Lewis, PhD, University of New Mexico, and C. Shuey, MPH, Southwest Research and Information Center, March–June 2006)…”
Brugge, D., deLemos, J. L., & Bui, C. (2007). The Sequoyah corporation fuels release and the Church Rock spill: unpublicized nuclear releases in American Indian communities. American journal of public health, 97(9), 1595–1600. https://doi.org/10.2105/AJPH.2006.103044
Former Prime Minister of Japan Sounds the Alarm on Diablo Canyon Naoto Kan Advises Governor Newsom to Close Diablo Canyon Nuclear Plant ASAP
May 2022 – Naoto Kan was Prime Minister of Japan when the March 2011 Fukushima nuclear disaster began. Hearing that California Governor Gavin Newsom is considering extending the operation of the Diablo Canyon Nuclear Plant beyond its current license period, Kan felt compelled to contact the Governor, advising him to shut down the nuclear plant as soon as possible.
As a result of Naoto Kan’s experiences managing the triple meltdown catastrophe, he has become vocally anti-nuclear. As he explains in his memoir, My Nuclear Nightmare, “I came to understand that a nuclear accident carried with it a risk so large that it could lead to the collapse of a country.
“Eleven years on, the nuclear disaster in Japan is on-going. The government is set to release millions of gallons of irradiated water into the Pacific Ocean as early as next spring – angering citizens and governments worldwide.
Both Japan and California are seismically active and share coastlines with the Pacific Ocean. Fukushima Prefecture and San Luis Obispo County have many similarities, both communities relying heavily on agriculture, fishing, and tourism. Naoto Kan has a deep understanding of these shared risks and vulnerabilities. Thus, he is sounding the alarm on Diablo Canyon.
Carole Hisasue, Spokesperson for San Luis Obispo Mothers for Peace, states, “As history has clearly illustrated, nuclear accidents affect the entire world. We will all be safer when Diablo Canyon nuclear plant ceases operation.”
Full text of Naoto Kan’s letter to Governor Newsom:
May 12, 2022
Dear Governor Newsom, I have heard that you have been considering extension of operations at the Diablo Canyon Nuclear Power Plant which is set to decommission in a few years. I was the Prime Minister of Japan at the time of the Fukushima Nuclear Accident and based on my experiences dealing with that disaster, I advise you to shut down the nuclear plant as soon as possible.
As you know, three nuclear reactors built along the Pacific Coast in Fukushima melted down after the Great Northeastern Earthquake and Tsunami of March 11, 2011 and released an enormous amount of radiation.
Until this accident occurred, I never thought a nuclear event in which there would be a meltdown such as this could happen. And yet, in reality, the earthquake cut off external power, the emergency diesel generators were damaged by the tsunami and stopped. All power to control the nuclear plant was lost, three reactors could no longer be cooled and that led to the unthinkable meltdown. An incredible amount of radiation was released and even now, 11 years since then, many of the former residents of the areas around the nuclear plant are still in evacuation.
From my perspective, as someone who has personally experienced this accident, I believe that all nuclear power plants should be decommissioned as soon as possible and that we should move toward renewable energy, such as solar and wind, for all our power needs. This is why I am writing to you today.
I have enclosed the English version of a book I wrote about the Fukushima accident. I hope you can find the time to read it.
“Naoto Kan, who was prime minister of Japan when the March 2011 Fukushima nuclear disaster began, has become a ubiquitous and compelling voice for the global antinuclear movement. Kan compared the potential worst-case devastation that could be caused by a nuclear power plant meltdown as tantamount only to ‘a great world war. Nothing else has the same impact.’ Japan escaped such a dire fate during the Fukushima disaster, said Kan, only due to luck. Even so, Kan had to make some steely-nerved decisions that necessitated putting all emotion aside. In a now famous phone call from Tepco, when the company asked to pull all their personnel from the out-of-control Fukushima site for their own safety, Kan told them no. The workforce must stay. The few would need to make the sacrifice to save the many. Kan knew that abandoning the Fukushima Daiichi site would cause radiation levels in the surrounding environment to soar. His insistence that the Tepco workforce remain at Fukushima was perhaps one of the most unsung moments of heroism in the whole sorry saga.” The Ecologist
On March 11, 2011, a massive undersea earthquake off Japan s coast triggered devastating tsunami waves that in turn caused meltdowns at three reactors in the Fukushima Daiichi Nuclear Power Plant. Ranked with Chernobyl as the worst nuclear disaster in history, Fukushima will have lasting consequences for generations. Until 3.11, Japan s Prime Minister, Naoto Kan, had supported the use of nuclear power. His position would undergo a radical change, however, as Kan watched the nuclear disaster at the Fukushima No. 1 Power Plant unfold and came to understand the potential for the physical, economic, and political destruction of Japan.
In My Nuclear Nightmare, Kan offers a fascinating day-by-day account of his actions in the harrowing week after the earthquake struck. He records the anguished decisions he had to make as the scale of destruction became clear and the threat of nuclear catastrophe loomed ever larger decisions made on the basis of information that was often unreliable. For example, frustrated by the lack of clarity from the executives at Tepco, the company that owned the power plant, Kan decided to visit Fukushima himself, despite the risks, so he could talk to the plant s manager and find out what was really happening on the ground. As he details, a combination of extremely good fortune and hard work just barely prevented a total meltdown of all of Fukushima s reactor units, which would have necessitated the evacuation of the thirty million residents of the greater Tokyo metropolitan area.
In the book, first published in Japan in 2012, Kan also explains his opposition to nuclear power: I came to understand that a nuclear accident carried with it a risk so large that it could lead to the collapse of a country. When Kan was pressured by the opposition to step down as prime minister in August 2011, he agreed to do so only after legislation had been passed to encourage investments in alternative energy. As both a document of crisis management during an almost unimaginable disaster and a cogent argument about the dangers of nuclear power, My Nuclear Nightmare is essential reading.
There’s a misguided effort being pushed forward by some well-intentioned people who have joined the Nuclear Power Fan Club. These people truly believe that nuclear power will save the planet from climate disaster, and there’s a lot of money to be made.
The newly released Stanford/MIT study recommends exploring the extension of Diablo Canyon’s license to operate in order to combat climate change, but it completely ignores important conditions at Diablo Canyon:
1. Diablo Canyon is situated at the nexus of at least 13 earthquake faults. Two of these, the Hosgri Fault and the Shoreline Fault, are classified by the U.S. Geological Survey (USGS) as “major” and “active.” Keeping Diablo Canyon operating beyond its planned closure is playing Russian roulette.
2. The Unit 1 reactor vessel was manufactured in 1967. The Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) reported it as “embrittled” several years ago. This reactor vessel has not had a mandated ultrasonic examination in more than twenty years. If Unit 1’s reactor had to be shut down in an emergency, there’s a chance that it could shatter like a glass of boiling water suddenly plunged into ice, resulting in unimaginable consequences.
3. Seasoned, highly skilled workers are retiring and moving on, resulting in loss of institutional knowledge about the unique idiosyncrasies of Diablo Canyon. The effect is already being felt, according to information provided to Mothers for Peace by an unnamed employee.
4. Underground pipes were installed at Diablo Canyon in the 1970s. These pipes are subject to high pressure and cannot be inspected. A severe earthquake is all it would take to interrupt the vital cooling water to the plant. Much maintenance at Diablo Canyon has been deferred because closure is imminent. This facility is OLD. These and other components are ready to retire.
5. The spent fuel pools are overcrowded to at least three times their original capacity. A “beyond design” earthquake (think Fukushima) could crack the pools, cause water to leak out, and the spent fuel could spontaneously ignite – the most unimaginable catastrophe possible. This is a “low probability, high risk” scenario, and it’s not considered by the NRC in spent fuel pool safety analysis because “it won’t happen.” We hope not.
6. There is exactly enough space on the dry cask storage pad to accommodate 138 spent fuel casks containing highly radioactive fuel rods that will be stored after closure in 2025. If the lifetime of the nuclear plant were extended, a whole new dry cask facility would have to be permitted and constructed to accommodate the additional toxic waste. With no federal repository for high level nuclear waste, it’s going to be stored on our fragile coastline into the foreseeable future.
7. There is no guarantee of “steady baseload power” from a 40-year-old nuclear power plant. Unit 2’s failed main generator was replaced for nearly $100 million in 2019, but failed again in 2020, working only 30% of that year and narrowly squeaking by during the peak load energy crunches. The complex and costly repairs of aging systems are likely to multiply in the ensuing years.
One must also consider Climate Impacts and Habitat Loss from Diablo Canyon’s Operation:
1. Diablo Canyon circulates 2.5 BILLION gallons of seawater through its piping every 24 hours in a once-through-cooling (OTC) system. Diablo Canyon’s cooling system is responsible for 80% of the loss of marine life on the California Coast. OTC is no longer allowed in California, but the State Lands Commission extended the land leases to 2024 and 2025 to coincide with Diablo Canyon’s operating licenses. With rapid worldwide depletion of fisheries and aquatic biodiversity, it is unacceptable to allow decimation of marine life in order to produce approximately 8% of California’s energy. Would the Lands Commission allow another exemption and sacrifice ocean life for Diablo Canyon’s operation?
2. The seawater intake structure is vulnerable to rising levels of ocean water brought on by global climate change. This is the water that cools the plant. During seawater’s circulation through the facility, it warms by 19°F before being discharged back into the ocean, contributing to ocean warming. Think about it: 2.5 billion gallons every single day for 40 or more years. The math and the impacts are almost incalculable.
3. Nuclear plants emit huge amounts of heat from nuclear reactions into the atmosphere 24/7. Where does the heat go? Global warming.
4. When uranium is mined, milled, enriched, and transported to nuclear plants, there is a spike in CO2 emissions.
5. Uranium mining has decimated some 27,000 square miles of Navajo (Diné) land spread across Utah, New Mexico and Arizona which is home to more than 250,000 people. Many Navajo people have died from kidney failure and cancer, conditions linked to uranium contamination. And new research from the CDC shows uranium in the bodies of babies born now.
6. When a nuclear plant is built, hundreds of millions of tons of concrete are also manufactured. And when the plant is dismantled, this same concrete, plus steel, electrical wiring, plumbing, and radiologically contaminated material must be hauled away. All of it contributes to climate change.
We can do better. People of the Central Coast have put up with living in a nuclear evacuation zone for the past 40 years. Nuclear power is dirty. It’s dangerous. Don’t buy the hype.
Heal Fukushima 