Why California May Go Nuclear
forbes.com
Why California May Go Nuclear
1–10 of 102 posts
Re: Why California May Go Nuclear
#2That plant definately shouldn't be closed. The Bay Area people, who keep on advocating nuclear should have skin in the game, a few plants among themselves.
Ideally a couple of new nuclear plants would be build close to San Francisco, YIMBY style.
Re: Why California May Go Nuclear
#3I hope they dont put it in a seismically active area, Fukushima used to be in one.
Re: Why California May Go Nuclear
#4I hope they dont put it in a seismically active area, Fukushima used to be in one.
Can just pay for land near Reno to do it, next to Tesla.
Re: Why California May Go Nuclear
#5> Diablo generates 9% of California’s electricity and 20% of its clean, carbon-free electricity.
It's remarkable that one nuclear plant generates 9% of the electricity for the entire state of California, and that they would have ever considered closing it (unless absolutely necessary).
Build a few more of those over time and California has no power concerns for the next 50-60 years combined with the expansion of other renewables. Even being conservative with their current budget they could safely put a few billion dollars per year into building new nuclear power plants.
Even better, build to surplus and begin exporting that green nuclear energy to other states.
Re: Why California May Go Nuclear
#6I hear solar is pretty good. But you need lots of sun. Does California have that?
Re: Why California May Go Nuclear
#7Nuclear is renewable? Not great, not terrible.
Re: Why California May Go Nuclear
#8> Diablo generates 9% of California’s electricity and 20% of its clean, carbon-free electricity. It's remarkable that one nuclear plant generates 9% of the electricity for the entire state of California, and that they would have ever considered closing it (unless absolutely necessary). Build a few more of those over time and California has no power concerns for the next 50-60 years combined with the expansion of othe…
California also buys something like half of the output of the Palo Verde plant outside of Phoenix.
Re: Why California May Go Nuclear
#9I don't think I'll ever forgive the environmental movement for turning their back on nuclear technology.
Yes, there are safety concerns but the price of inaction was the climate. I would take an accident or two over climate change any day.
Re: Why California May Go Nuclear
#10Conservationists need to really make peace with the fact that the only way out of climate change involves building a very, very strong nuclear energy portfolio. This is difficult for people because it requires engaging in politics because these things are only as safe as they are well maintained. But actually, we do a surprisingly good job in America at keeping our nuclear plants running rather well, and we should be investing in many, many more.