Save Diablo Canyon!
California state Assemblyman Jordan Cunningham plans to introduce a bill aimed at keeping the state’s last nuclear power plant, Diablo Canyon, running past 2025. The primary component of the bill is to include Diablo Canyon in the state’s renewable energy mandate, which requires that 60% of the state’s overall electricity generation come from renewable sources by 2030.
If Diablo Canyon closes, it will be much more expensive and difficult to reduce fossil fuel use in the power sector and reduce CO2 emissions.
Much of the reason why Diablo Canyon is being closed is that current renewable energy mandates, which exclude nuclear and force large amounts of intermittent generation on to the grid, have the effect of forcing nuclear plants to close and be replaced by “flexible” gas generation that is better suited to backing up those intermittent sources. As a result, you end up replacing one non-emitting source with another, and making little progress at reducing fossil generation and CO2 emissions. California is an example of this. Despite the state’s renewable mandates, and the enormous amount of money they’ve spent on solar and wind, the fraction of in-state power generation from fossil fuels (gas) has remained fairly constant (at ~50%) since 2003.
In addition to the effects of the state’s large renewables mandate, the state has taken other actions to essentially politically force the close of both the San Onofre and Diablo Canyon plants. As a result, the loss of nuclear will neutralize most of the climate benefits of all the solar and wind generation that the state has spent so much time and money building. The planet’s climate does not have the time for us to screw around replacing one non-emitting source with another.
Under current policies and plans, California is basically choosing to use renewables to replace nuclear instead of fossil fuels. This is inconsistent with genuine concern about global warming. Given the seriousness of global warming, it is imperative that nuclear be retained and that renewables be used to replace fossil fuels. Also, there is no justification for treating different non-emitting sources (nuclear or renewable) any differently under policy.
This is where you come in:
Email, Tweet, and/or Call your California state legislators, to voice your support for this soon-to-be-introduced bill. If you're not a California resident, don't worry, we'll send your message right to the Governor's office. This issue affects us all.
Save Diablo Canyon!
California state Assemblyman Jordan Cunningham plans to introduce a bill aimed at keeping the state’s last nuclear power plant, Diablo Canyon, running past 2025. The primary component of the bill is to include Diablo Canyon in the state’s renewable energy mandate, which requires that 60% of the state’s overall electricity generation come from renewable sources by 2030.
If Diablo Canyon closes, it will be much more expensive and difficult to reduce fossil fuel use in the power sector and reduce CO2 emissions.
Much of the reason why Diablo Canyon is being closed is that current renewable energy mandates, which exclude nuclear and force large amounts of intermittent generation on to the grid, have the effect of forcing nuclear plants to close and be replaced by “flexible” gas generation that is better suited to backing up those intermittent sources. As a result, you end up replacing one non-emitting source with another, and making little progress at reducing fossil generation and CO2 emissions. California is an example of this. Despite the state’s renewable mandates, and the enormous amount of money they’ve spent on solar and wind, the fraction of in-state power generation from fossil fuels (gas) has remained fairly constant (at ~50%) since 2003.
In addition to the effects of the state’s large renewables mandate, the state has taken other actions to essentially politically force the close of both the San Onofre and Diablo Canyon plants. As a result, the loss of nuclear will neutralize most of the climate benefits of all the solar and wind generation that the state has spent so much time and money building. The planet’s climate does not have the time for us to screw around replacing one non-emitting source with another.
Under current policies and plans, California is basically choosing to use renewables to replace nuclear instead of fossil fuels. This is inconsistent with genuine concern about global warming. Given the seriousness of global warming, it is imperative that nuclear be retained and that renewables be used to replace fossil fuels. Also, there is no justification for treating different non-emitting sources (nuclear or renewable) any differently under policy.
This is where you come in:
Email, Tweet, and/or Call your California state legislators, to voice your support for this soon-to-be-introduced bill. If you're not a California resident, don't worry, we'll send your message right to the Governor's office. This issue affects us all.